More on the WAMU guy who got treated badly by the VA
I can't find my original post but I am damn pissed off on how David Schultz was treated. The Va employee needs firing and that foolishness about how Schultz was being loud nad annoying is typical of what they government says when they don't want you around. Was this even reported on WAMU?
Here is the post story
VA Returns WAMU Reporter's Equipment Three Days After Confiscation
By Ed O'Keefe
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, April 11, 2009; C04
Officials at WAMU radio and the Department of Veterans Affairs settled a dispute last night over the confiscation of a reporter's recording equipment during a public forum this week at the VA hospital in the District.
Jim Asendio, news director at the station, said the sound card from the reporter's digital recorder was due to be turned over to him late last night, with no conditions. VA officials initially said they would return the card only if the reporter, David Schultz, signed a consent form that should have been signed before he conducted any interviews.
The station contended that confiscating the device violated Schultz's First Amendment right to gather news. The department claimed that Schultz did not identify himself or follow proper procedures for interviewing VA patients while at the event.
In a statement released last night, VA spokeswoman Katie Roberts said the department "regrets the incident" and "appreciates the press's interest in covering the VA" but also must "make every effort to protect the privacy of our patients."
Schultz said he attended the meeting Tuesday night in the hospital's auditorium after learning about the event from a VA press release. The VA's Advisory Committee on Minority Veterans organized the meeting to hear comments about the medical care received by minority veterans. After Army veteran Tommie Canady told the committee that he had received poor treatment at Washington's VA hospital, Schultz invited him into the hallway for a recorded interview.
Moments later, according to Schultz, hospital public affairs officer Gloria Hairston approached them, telling Schultz that he could not interview Canady until they both signed consent forms. She summoned hospital security guards and demanded that Schultz hand over all his equipment. After consulting with Asendio by phone, Schultz gave Hairston the recorder's flash card and left the hospital.
Roberts said yesterday that Schultz did not properly identify himself or obtain consent forms before speaking with Canady.
"We have procedures and policies in place so that our patients can make informed decisions about what information they feel comfortable releasing or discussing with the public. That is why, before we permit one-on-one interviews to be filmed or videotaped on our premises, we request written consent."
A reporter with American Urban Radio and a photographer with Vaughn Enterprises also attended the forum, signed consent forms and were able to interview patients, Roberts said.
Anyone entering the hospital was required to show personal identification and sign in with their name and phone number, Schultz said. He said he did not have a formal press badge or business cards because he is a part-time employee of the public radio station, which is owned and operated by American University. But he said the WAMU logo on his bag, his headphones and his recording equipment should have made his intent clear.
In a letter sent to the VA on Friday afternoon, WAMU General Manager Caryn G. Mathes called the VA's actions "clearly unconstitutional," stating that "Mr. Schultz's newsgathering activities and the product of his work not only are protected by the First Amendment, but he was attending a public meeting at which the VA had encouraged public discussion on the treatment it gives to minority veterans."
Barbara Cochran, president of the Radio-Television News Directors Association, agreed with Mathes. "The seizure by the government of newsgathering equipment is the kind of thing we sometimes see in dictatorships, not in the United States," she wrote in a letter to VA Secretary Eric Shinseki. "For a government official to take a reporter's equipment away while he is conducting an interview amounts to the kind of prior restraint that has been repeatedly found unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court."
The VA had said Schultz could get the flash card back if he signed the consent forms. But Asendio, on the advice of American University lawyers, refused to do so and did not authorize Schultz to sign. Asendio wanted to focus on the story Schultz was reporting: medical treatment for minority veterans. Schultz has filed three reports on the incident and Canady's experiences with the VA.
"The story really is about [Canady] and about why the VA doesn't want him to talk and why the VA is trying to suppress his story," Schultz said.
Here is the post story
VA Returns WAMU Reporter's Equipment Three Days After Confiscation
By Ed O'Keefe
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, April 11, 2009; C04
Officials at WAMU radio and the Department of Veterans Affairs settled a dispute last night over the confiscation of a reporter's recording equipment during a public forum this week at the VA hospital in the District.
Jim Asendio, news director at the station, said the sound card from the reporter's digital recorder was due to be turned over to him late last night, with no conditions. VA officials initially said they would return the card only if the reporter, David Schultz, signed a consent form that should have been signed before he conducted any interviews.
The station contended that confiscating the device violated Schultz's First Amendment right to gather news. The department claimed that Schultz did not identify himself or follow proper procedures for interviewing VA patients while at the event.
In a statement released last night, VA spokeswoman Katie Roberts said the department "regrets the incident" and "appreciates the press's interest in covering the VA" but also must "make every effort to protect the privacy of our patients."
Schultz said he attended the meeting Tuesday night in the hospital's auditorium after learning about the event from a VA press release. The VA's Advisory Committee on Minority Veterans organized the meeting to hear comments about the medical care received by minority veterans. After Army veteran Tommie Canady told the committee that he had received poor treatment at Washington's VA hospital, Schultz invited him into the hallway for a recorded interview.
Moments later, according to Schultz, hospital public affairs officer Gloria Hairston approached them, telling Schultz that he could not interview Canady until they both signed consent forms. She summoned hospital security guards and demanded that Schultz hand over all his equipment. After consulting with Asendio by phone, Schultz gave Hairston the recorder's flash card and left the hospital.
Roberts said yesterday that Schultz did not properly identify himself or obtain consent forms before speaking with Canady.
"We have procedures and policies in place so that our patients can make informed decisions about what information they feel comfortable releasing or discussing with the public. That is why, before we permit one-on-one interviews to be filmed or videotaped on our premises, we request written consent."
A reporter with American Urban Radio and a photographer with Vaughn Enterprises also attended the forum, signed consent forms and were able to interview patients, Roberts said.
Anyone entering the hospital was required to show personal identification and sign in with their name and phone number, Schultz said. He said he did not have a formal press badge or business cards because he is a part-time employee of the public radio station, which is owned and operated by American University. But he said the WAMU logo on his bag, his headphones and his recording equipment should have made his intent clear.
In a letter sent to the VA on Friday afternoon, WAMU General Manager Caryn G. Mathes called the VA's actions "clearly unconstitutional," stating that "Mr. Schultz's newsgathering activities and the product of his work not only are protected by the First Amendment, but he was attending a public meeting at which the VA had encouraged public discussion on the treatment it gives to minority veterans."
Barbara Cochran, president of the Radio-Television News Directors Association, agreed with Mathes. "The seizure by the government of newsgathering equipment is the kind of thing we sometimes see in dictatorships, not in the United States," she wrote in a letter to VA Secretary Eric Shinseki. "For a government official to take a reporter's equipment away while he is conducting an interview amounts to the kind of prior restraint that has been repeatedly found unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court."
The VA had said Schultz could get the flash card back if he signed the consent forms. But Asendio, on the advice of American University lawyers, refused to do so and did not authorize Schultz to sign. Asendio wanted to focus on the story Schultz was reporting: medical treatment for minority veterans. Schultz has filed three reports on the incident and Canady's experiences with the VA.
"The story really is about [Canady] and about why the VA doesn't want him to talk and why the VA is trying to suppress his story," Schultz said.
Replies are closed for this discussion.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by wonkguy on -
by John Antonelli: "Was this even reported on WAMU?
Yes, I heard this reported at least twice last week on WAMU. I kind of get the VA's argument (they made some vague reference to privacy concerns ala HIPAA) although their unwillingness to vigourously defend their stance raises red flags as to their true motives. Taking the flash card I believe is clearly unconstitutional. Question, can you have private conversations on public property?
-
Permalink Reply by John Antonelli on -
Yes, happens all the time in court.
econ622 said:by John Antonelli: "Was this even reported on WAMU?
Yes, I heard this reported at least twice last week on WAMU. I kind of get the VA's argument (they made some vague reference to privacy concerns ala HIPAA) although their unwillingness to vigourously defend their stance raises red flags as to their true motives. Taking the flash card I believe is clearly unconstitutional. Question, can you have private conversations on public property?
-
Permalink Reply by wonkguy on
-
You are refering to "priveledged conversations" for which there is a specific legal rule to protect conversations between a lawyer and his/her client. That wouldn't protect two regular Joes. In fact, courts compell people to testify all the time or put them in jail for contempt.
-
Permalink Reply by John Antonelli on
-
What about in a public park between boy friend and girl friend or on the Metro?
econ622 said:You are refering to "priveledged conversations" for which there is a specific legal rule to protect conversations between a lawyer and his/her client. That wouldn't protect two regular Joes. In fact, courts compell people to testify all the time or put them in jail for contempt.
-
Permalink Reply by Carrie Lovejoy on -
While the VA is certainly responsible for the actions of the person who threw the reporter out, it's important to remember that just one person actually did it. Since 9/11, organizations have come to think that they must keep everything out of the public eye. The perception of the role of the media has become so skewed that it's impossible for people to know what they're supposed to do and say. People were applauding when the White House shot down reporters' questions over and over again right after the attacks, and look where that got us.
Citing medical privacy in this case is ridiculous. The reporter was not speaking to a doctor -- he was speaking to a person. The person was speaking freely of his own treatment at the hospital. I've heard the recording and Canady was saying very negative things about the hospital. Are we really so surprised that the VA did not want those statements heard?
-
Permalink Reply by Keith N. Jones, Sr. on
-
" A victim of circumstances"
I am a service connected disabled american vets since 12/1992 and I can remember signs being poster every 15 feet about confidentiality. There was a serious problem in the late 1991's and early 2000's regarding patient confidentiality. Insurance companies were paying employees to get pre-existing condition data on Vets who had private insurance. The VA as far as I am concern did an excellent job in this incident. Sorry folks but procedures were not followed and the results should not be judged.
-
Permalink Reply by John Antonelli on
-
Ah but they were. You do not have to sign a consent decree or a privacy agreement to speak to a reporter about your own case.
Keith N. Jones, Sr. said:" A victim of circumstances"
I am a service connected disabled american vets since 12/1992 and I can remember signs being poster every 15 feet about confidentiality. There was a serious problem in the late 1991's and early 2000's regarding patient confidentiality. Insurance companies were paying employees to get pre-existing condition data on Vets who had private insurance. The VA as far as I am concern did an excellent job in this incident. Sorry folks but procedures were not followed and the results should not be judged.
-
Permalink Reply by Julia Kuhman on
-
If the reporter had been speaking to one of the employees at the VA hospital, then there would have been issues with breaking HIPAA Laws. A patient can talk about their medical condition to anyone they chose.
On a separate note, Mr. Canady is a very brave and strong person to be willing to speak to a reporter and to have his name listed. Having just lost my brother at the VA , Over the last 3 months, I witnessed the poor conditions and while talking to many of them I learned how afraid many of the Vets are to speak up about their care.
Keith N. Jones, Sr. said:" A victim of circumstances"
I am a service connected disabled american vets since 12/1992 and I can remember signs being poster every 15 feet about confidentiality. There was a serious problem in the late 1991's and early 2000's regarding patient confidentiality. Insurance companies were paying employees to get pre-existing condition data on Vets who had private insurance. The VA as far as I am concern did an excellent job in this incident. Sorry folks but procedures were not followed and the results should not be judged.
-
Permalink Reply by Mark McDonald WAMU 88.5 on -
Thanks to everyone who continues to contribute to this important debate. You can find links to David's reporting on this issue, and up-to-date information in my blog.
Mark McDonald
Program Director
Mark McDonald's Blog
Notes
Code of Conduct and Terms of Use
Created by WAMU 88.5 May 13, 2008 at 9:58am. Last updated by Jason Novak (WAMU 88.5) Sep. 22, 2008.
Welcome to the Conversation!
Created by Jason Novak (WAMU 88.5) May 13, 2008 at 9:55am. Last updated by Jason Novak (WAMU 88.5) Aug. 28, 2008.
About
Badge
© 2010 Created by WAMU 88.5
