Conde Nast isn't the only media nazi when it comes to its email system; the Associated Press keeps its @ap.org under closer guard than Tom Cruise does Katie Holmes, especially when it comes to staffers sending out Jerry Maguire-style memos — about AP ethics policy. When Darius Hudson, an AP tech, sent out a late-night missive yesterday, top brass had some of his tech peers remove it from everyone's inbox. But like Kenneth Lay knows all too well, email isn't easily deleted, which is how forward-friendly tipster got us this.

This is the text of an email, criticizing the newly implemented Associated Press employee ethics policy, which was sent to the entire staff of the Associated Press on the graveyard shift early tuesday, March 28, 2006. It was sent by a technician, one among a group, who has recently agreed to a severance package. Many people were able to read it in the morning when most staff arrived to work. Unfortunately, all were not allowed to even see it because it was removed from everyone's email account - sometime before 10 a.m. the same morning. This silent and unexplained deletion has incensed many of the people who try to report fairly and openly on the news of the world - removed by the management of a company who purports to cherish freedom of information and strives to present both sides of every issue. It is a real shame that the management of The Associated Press cannot trust its own people to weigh information presented to them and decide for themselves. — a concerned journalist

In addition, i have heard a rumour that AP HR has rescinded the severance package to the employee who sent this email.

All this in the wake of "Sunshine Week"…

You see, Darius Hudson is pissed over the AP's requirements of him as an employee — which means gem after gem of blockquote sizzle.

I think the demands in this document to be bordering on the ludicrous! I have to now be wary of the organizations that my FRIENDS AND FAMILY are associated with too? And I should report to AP if they violate any of these gestapo-like rules? What organization did I join: The Associated Press or Hitler Youth? …

As a technical unit employee, does this mean that since I work on equipment that may support operating systems such as the Macintosh, Vax VMS, Unix or Linux that I cannot be part of an online Microsoft support or user group due to conflict of interest? Should I give up my Microsoft-owned Hotmail E-mail account if I’m doing a story on Microsoft?

As a member of a union, isn’t much of my activity & relationship with The AP “in support of a cause or movement” that is a “contentious public issue?” Am I allowed to go to our Internet-hosted union website which is about as public a forum as you can get?

I’m a vegetarian. Can I march on “Fur-Free Friday” on my day off?

The full diatribe, after the jump. (It's good, read it all.)

#####

I must write to you concerning some shocking and grave issues discussed in an E-mail I received Feb. 16 (attached). As it encourages speaking directly with my supervisor, I am following those suggestions. The document referred to in this E-mail was brought to my attention by the concerns of a fellow employee. Indeed, had this person not brought it to my attention, then I never would have even read the document as I had already removed it from my Inbox
without reading the attachment.

As a former CWA Local 1314 Union Member now encompassed by The News Guild, I am unclear how much of this document refers to me under the guise of the term “editorial employee.” If those sections describing editorial employees’ behavior do not apply to me, then I apologize sincerely (& lament those whom it does apply to). If they do apply to me, then I fear I cannot comply. This is of special interest to me since a little over a year ago an AP employee who works in a technical capacity was penalized for similar issues.

Though page 1 reasonably suggests that “…we insist on the highest standards of integrity and ethical behavior…,” it goes on to further state that this policy will be in effect “…when we gather and deliver the news.” Seems to me like this would mean the hours in the day while we are actively working for The AP. Later in this document however, the time and place of how these standards will be implemented is changed to include our personal lives & time BEYOND what we’ve contracted for to the AP.

To begin, while most of the document I find agreeable and makes reasonable sense, there are several pages included toward the end which I believe stretches the limits of credibility (& my own personal “possibility”). For instance:

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

Page 9: EXPRESSIONS OF OPINION:

…Anyone who works for the AP…must refrain from declaring their views on contentious public issues in any public forum, whether in Web logs, chat rooms, letters to the editor, petitions, bumper stickers or lapel buttons, and must not take part in demonstrations in support of causes or movements.

Page 10: FINANCIAL INTERESTS:

…Employees should avoid any conflict of interest or the appearance of a conflict of interest in the investments and business interests of their spouses or other members of their household with whom they share finances.

Page 12: POLITICAL ACTIVITIES:

Editorial employees are expected to be scrupulous in avoiding any political activity, whether they cover politics regularly or not. They may not run for political office or accept political appointment… Under no circumstances should they donate money to political organizations or political campaigns. They should use great discretion in joining or making contributions to other organizations that may take political stands. Non-editorial employees must refrain from political activity unless they obtain approval from a manager. …And a supervisor must be informed when a spouse – or other members of an employee’s household – has any ongoing involvement in political causes, either professionally or personally. [emphasis added throughout]

I think the demands in this document to be bordering on the ludicrous! I have to now be wary of the organizations that my FRIENDS AND FAMILY are associated with too? And I should report to AP if they violate any of these gestapo-like rules? What organization did I join: The Associated Press or Hitler Youth? I’m really not sure if this E-mail was serious or if perhaps one of our April 1st editorials got sent out early by mistake. I really was under the impression that this was a practical joke – that someone had taken a legitimate document and “doctored it up.”

I fear this document will castrate US Citizen’s rights who happen to be in the employ of The Associated Press in an attempt to gain a modicum of impartial perspective while reporting. However, these severe restrictions are not needed to guarantee fair & balanced reporting. Even further, these limitations will undermine the pillars of AP’s reporting body: a free thinking editorial employee, fully engaged in life in all of its varied manifestations – a great many of them, if not all, somewhat biasing in their effect.

Short and simple: we win as reporters, editors, members & employees of this particular news organization reporting truthfully & unbiased but lose BIG with regard to our personal freedoms under these proposed directives. I fear this pyrrhic victory would ultimately sap the creative spirit & goodwill of any employee attempting to follow these rules. This cannot possibly bolster a happy or productive editorial employee community. In my case, I simply couldn’t do it.

We are to report on this world, yet not be of this world, and not engage in any part of it for fear it might affect us in some way. This policy attempts to generate theoretical infinites & unachievable absolutes among mere mortals. Who among us could live this way?

If I were to relate this policy to physics, it could be likened to observing matter on an extremely small scale: the harder we try to observe matter under perfect laboratory conditions, the less we are able to accurately gather a truthful representation because the very conditions of observation bias the experiment. Simply put, our matter & that of our observation equipment affects other matter, including that observed.

Similarly, we are employees and editorial employees, not robots. We have opinions, pre-conceived ideas & biases. Though, try as we might, these will always interfere & interact with our editorial & reporting duties and our AP & non-AP lives. To remove that completely from the reporting & editorial experience seems impossible (though, I grant you, a noble & worthwhile effort to temper to some degree).

But to attempt to completely remove it from our personal lives outside of The AP is extreme & worse: it’s unjust. Unjust in the sense that that is not what I bargained for when I signed on to The AP. This Statement of News Values and Principles seems a higher standard than even what Judge Alito recently was subjected to. (At least for all his hassle the whole country knows his name & he gets a fireside seat on the highest court in the land. Perhaps he’ll even cast the deciding vote when this court case reaches the Supreme Court for violation of civil rights in five to seven years: The Editorial Employees of The Associated Press vs. The Associated Press, 2012.)

It just seems sad that the premier organization of “The Fourth Estate,” traditionally used as a method of last resort to keep the other three branches of government in check, seems itself to now be faced with a challenge of ethics which threaten the very freedom of its employees that the government is sworn to protect. Too bad AP hasn’t taken that very same oath and is surely not evidencing it in earnest with this document.

Our outside lives do not necessarily “create a conflict of interest and compromise our ability to gather & report the news fairly and accurately.” [page 1] Some of us can still be objective. Even if not, our rights to pursue such activities and/or associations on our own time are not within AP’s purview to curtail in such a radical manner. At best, like a court judge, we should simply recuse ourselves from such editorial & reporting duties that pertain to any involved groups or activities.

As a technical unit employee, does this mean that since I work on equipment that may support operating systems such as the Macintosh, Vax VMS, Unix or Linux that I cannot be part of an online Microsoft support or user group due to conflict of interest? Should I give up my Microsoft-owned Hotmail E-mail account if I’m doing a story on Microsoft?

As a member of a union, isn’t much of my activity & relationship with The AP “in support of a cause or movement” that is a “contentious public issue?” Am I allowed to go to our Internet-hosted union website which is about as public a forum as you can get?

I’m a vegetarian. Can I march on “Fur-Free Friday” on my day off?

If, as a Christian, I believe John 8:47 when it says, “He who belongs to God hears what God says. The reason you do not hear is that you do not belong to God.” Does that mean I should abandon my beliefs & become an Atheist in my personal life should I be assigned to report on issues of faith? Must I stop going to Church on Sunday to report on Muslim Fundamentalism or conflicts in Israel’s Gaza Strip? Must I renounce my religious beliefs to do an editorial on the Dalai Lama? All of these beliefs might bias my reporting.

My wife’s brother works for the Democratic National Convention Committee. Should I get divorced or resign my AP commission?

Shall I give up my Nissan Ultima for public transportation when reporting on GM layoffs? And what footgear am I to wear while researching Nike’s last quarter profits? Slippers? Oh, and as an employee of The Associated Press, am I allowed to read Newsday or The New York Times? I see most of our TV stations parked on CNN. We actually feed them OUR news while we watch THEIRS! Isn’t that a news loop? I’m confused on that one. After work, am I allowed to watch CNN or not?

Also, we reported so much on Hurricane Katrina last year. My sister lives in Louisiana but stays “within my household” frequently. Must I require her to move to remain unbiased? And lastly, as a food critic, should I stop eating reviewed food outside of work so as not to bias my opinion while on the job?

Some of these may seem silly. Perhaps so. I thought some of the items in AP’s “Statement of News Values and Principles” seemed silly. I guess I no longer know where to draw the line.

In the end, I fear we may indeed achieve our goal of a perfectly unbiased & completely truthful reporting of the news. I intend not to be there on that day. Those mindless automatons will have lost more than their free will; they will have lost their souls.

I see the relationship between AP & I to be like that described in a rental arrangement. AP rents the use of my services for a time in exchange for remuneration. My activities outside of that rental agreement are not up for bargain.

The most blatantly disturbing & obviously contradictory part is introduced by the statement’s opening paragraph no less:

The AP respects and encourages the rights of its employees to participate actively in civic, charitable, religious, public, social or residential organizations.

That’s like saying, “Excuse me. I don’t mean to offend you, but you’re a stupid idiot!” Of course I’ve offended you, even if I’ve prefaced offensive comments or actions with a statement to the contrary or I genuinely believe that I haven’t offended you.

Someone should definitely be the gatekeeper of truthfulness, integrity & accuracy regarding any AP product or service, however the problem arises when the gatekeeper becomes a taskmaster in control of the personal lives of its workers.

In conclusion, I just have one more question:

If we truly are proud of the draconian edicts in this document, then may I forward this E-mail & its contents & attachments to other news & media organizations for their review & comment?

Sincerely,

Darius Hudson

Senior Technician NYC

& concerned employee of The Associated Press