World Cup Credentialing Complaints p. 17

By: Debra Gersh Hernandez

U.S. news organizations protest requirement that journalists undergo background checks before they can be credentialed to cover the upcoming soccer tournament sp.

WHAT DO THE White House and World Cup soccer have in common? Both require reporters seeking credentials to agree to background checks.
While few balk at screening those with access to the White House, some news organizations are complaining that using similar procedures for the World Cup is overly broad.
The World Cup security department sent a form to media applicants telling them that to "become a member of the World Cup Family" and receive credentials they must sign the waiver.
The waiver states, "I hearby request/authorize the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), all state and local law enforcement agencies, consistent with applicable laws, to release criminal investigative records pertaining to me to World Cup USA 1994 Inc., its officials and/or agents to establish security and accreditation eligibility."
A number of media organizations have said they are withholding their waivers, pending further discussions with World Cup officials. Some, however, are going along with the request.
No one from the World Cup press office returned calls seeking comment on this issue, and it was not known whether this policy would be revoked.
"To impose such a condition is unprecedented in the world of American sports journalism," wrote Associated Press sports editor Terry Taylor in a letter to Alan Rothenberg, chairman of World Cup USA 1994 Inc.
"The Associated Press and its reporters and photographers regard such a requirement as a grossly impermissible intrusion into the private lives of Associated Press journalists. Our counsel has advised us, moreover, that imposing such a condition under these circumstances constitutes a violation of law in this country," Taylor added.
State human rights and anti-discrimination laws typically contain prohibitions against such inquiries unless under special circumstances, such as gun licensing. Owners or lessees of public accommodations also are barred from imposing such conditions as a requirement of entrance.
"We have, accordingly, instructed Associated Press journalists to decline to sign the security waiver statement indicating their unwillingness and that of the Associated Press to be bound by this unacceptable condition," Taylor continued, noting that the AP position was communicated to all its member newspapers and radio and television stations.
"We are aghast at the inappropriateness of your request," New York Times assistant general counsel George Freeman wrote to Rothenberg a day before the AP sent its letter.
"It strikes us as the grossest invasion of the personal privacy of the journalists," Freeman wrote. "Certainly, to carry on their livelihood, members of the media should not be required to yield their civil rights, including such unwarranted intrusion into their sensitive personal histories as you require here."
Freeman also called the requested information "entirely unnecessary and irrelevant. Reporters for the New York Times, as well as for newspapers through-out the country . . . are not hooligans and need not be the subject of such outrageous investigations by your organization."
The letter also took issue with the suggestion that reporters become members of the "World Cup Family."
"Journalists of the New York Times are prepared to cover the World Cup games ? as well as the activities of the Organizing Committee ? objectively and not as part of a familial relationship," he wrote. "Presumably since you do not seek FBI data on your family members, you would agree that the notion that we are all part of the same family is misplaced for that reason if no other."
Times sports editor Neil Amdur, who brought the form to the attention of the paper's attorneys, said not even the Olympics required that sort of accreditation.
He guessed that this is a "security phobia" that is "an outgrowth" of some of the violence at soccer matches in Europe.
Further, he noted, "To ask journalists to be part of the World Cup family . . . is kind of like asking you to crawl into bed with them."
Amdur said he is not unaware of security concerns at sporting events, especially after attending the 1972 Olympic Games in Munich, Germany, and in light of more recent events, such as the courtside stabbing of tennis player Monica Seles.
"We live in that kind of fear of death threats, potential disruption and opportunists who use [sporting events] as a vehicle for political exhibitionism," Amdur said.
While he can see the reasoning for trying to weed out "potential trouble- makers or those who may not be legitimate . . . journalists," Amdur said, this still is a "slap in the face," especially because other major events, such as the Super Bowl, make no such requests.
Amdur said the Times, which has asked that the policy be rescinded, will wait to make a judgment on the forms. "Hopefully, this will work itself out," he said.
In the past, when unreasonable requests have been made, the situation "usually has been resolved amicably and reasonably. I imagine and hope this will be the same way," he said.
"I think this is one of those areas that perhaps in their attempt at being diligent and touching every base, they created an unnecessary minefield of concern that certainly can be rectified when logic and reason are applied," Amdur said.
He was concerned, however, that journalists may have signed the forms without reading them carefully.
Such was the case with one or two USA Today reporters, said Gannett News Service sports editor and USA Today soccer assignment editor Jerry Langdon.
They already had sent in their signed forms, probably without realizing what was involved, and before Langdon distributed a letter telling them not to send it in, he said.
"This thing is ridiculous," he said. "It violates a whole bunch of rights. I don't see what they're trying to achieve here."
Langdon also pointed out that various European nations have refused to release lists of hooligans known to have caused trouble at matches there, citing privacy concerns.
"That's far more serious," he said, adding that getting those lists would be far more helpful than running checks on reporters.
USA Today sports editor Gene Policinski said he is troubled by the depth of records requested.
"It seems overly broad to me," he said. "I understand there are legitimate security concerns. This level of inquiry would seem to be excessive.
"I want to know their rationale. Is this just a form they use every time? Was it prompted by some specific concern?
Their record, by and large, has been good. They want to assist us in coverage of the cup. This seems to be one of those . . . bumps along the way," Policinski said.
The Boston Globe also planned to send a letter of protest.
To help credential U.S. reporters, an Associated Press Sports Editors committee met with World Cup officials last month and winnowed the list of U.S. and Canadian reporters and photographers from about 1,300 requests to about 750, said Bill Dwyre, a member of the committee and sports editor of the Los Angeles Times.
Dwyre said that after discussion with the paper's attorneys, he will not contest the request and told his people to sign it and return it to the committee.
"It's probably similar to what the Olympic people do without telling us," he said. "You need some amount of security . . . . For us to make a big stink about it, and slow down the process, is probably counterproductive to what we have perceived as normal, honorable intentions."
Dwyre said he believes that all the Times reporters are clean and that the checks will reveal nothing.
After a meeting with Rothenberg, during which he brought up the issue, Dwyre said the World Cup did not want to offend anyone but at the same time had to be careful to weed out dangerous elements.
Dwyre is concerned about setting a precedent with this move.
"I don't want to give in to any challenge to access of the free press but, quite frankly, I think this is sensible."
He said it "bothers me somewhat. I don't have an alternative. I suppose we could boycott, but that's not much of an alternative."
Jane Kirtley, executive director of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, said she was "outraged" by the form.
"I have always been troubled by the idea that journalists have to submit to security clearances, but I reluctantly conceded there is a need in some cases, like the White House," she said. "But a sporting event? This is patently absurd."
Kirtley said she sometimes wonders if part of the reason that sports reporters are more willing to give in is because they are used to operating under more regulations ? access to the press box and locker rooms, game blackouts and the like.
"I'm hard pressed to see why ordinary credentialing procedures are insufficient," she said.
Forcing journalists to cooperate or be shut out, she said, is "the exact kind of thing that people in position to do this count on, that you will have to capitulate because of the competitive nature of the media.
"There are times when it may be appropriate to compromise," she added, "but I've got to say, as important as World Cup soccer is, we're not talking about endangering national security. If we're going to give in, do it for something more important than soccer."
Kirtley also warned of the dangerous precedent that agreeing to this could present beyond the sports world.
"We are setting ourselves up so we have to do this for any large sporting event or covering the pope in Denver," she said, adding that local law enforcement officials could copy this and require checks for all credentials.