My day was spent sequestered in an end-of-semester workshop billed as a “retreat” (I guess to make us feel better about it?), so it was just as well that despite her busy day, the Secretary of State was all “closed press coverage” today. At least I did not have the anxiety of thinking she was out there doing visible things that I could not take the time to post.
That said, there IS news out there, but I refuse to post it here on principle. I said this in October, and I will say it again now: I wish foreign governments would not leak and the press would not circulate information on changes to our Secretary of State’s travel itinerary before the State Department has released the plans.
This is the last public statement on Secretary Clinton’s forthcoming trip to Asia. It was made by P.J. Crowley at Friday’s press briefing.
Philip J. CrowleyAssistant Secretary
Daily Press BriefingWashington, DCMay 14, 2010QUESTION: Do you have any update on Secretary’s trip to Asia? Is she going to South Korea and Japan after China?
MR. CROWLEY: The Secretary actually had a meeting – a trip meeting this afternoon. I think we’ll be making some final decisions, and we’ll be announcing the schedule early next week prior to her departure. So we’re pretty close to setting the trip, but we’re not prepared to announce the schedule yet.
The emphasis is mine, and the subject did not come up in today’s press briefing. Neither has the schedule been released. So why does every single news feed have specifics up there about this trip?
In October, an Indian news outlet released specifics, dates and so forth, about the Secretary’s forthcoming trip to Pakistan, specifics that the State Department had taken pains to keep hushed. You will remember, I cannot forget, that upon her arrival a market was bombed in Peshawar. She left for Pakistan on her birthday, and I saw Bill Clinton at a rally the following evening when he told my Congressional Rep, onstage, what had happened.
When the State Department has not released the information, both foreign governments and news outlets (and you AP and FOX are both guilty in this latest campaign) should respect the silence. Does the term “State secret” have any meaning at all?
Forgive me if I am a little touchy on this issue, but there are bad people who would like noting better than to target our SOS (to whom I am a tad attached and devoted and like to see safe) or others just because of her visit. The State Department provides press releases. I suggest that when it is one of OUR officials traveling, the press await the official word rather than adding to a whisper campaign from unnamed sources.
I completely agree with you! It steams me too and I think it is beyond despicable that news outlets would do this sort of thing. I believe completely in Freedom of the Press but releasing classified information that could compromise Secretary Clinton’s security should not be tolerated. I hope they can make some changes without publicizing them so as to help keep her safe.
LikeLike
If someone wants to give Secretary Clinton a hard time, fine, but don’t play with her safety. If memory serves, there was already one plan to do her harm and that’s more than enough. I don’t think a person needs to like her to agree we me on this – they only need to be a human being with a scrap of sentient activity.
LikeLike
And it’s so easy. It does not consist of DOING anything. It only entails NOT doing!
LikeLike
The media is being very irresponsible by releasing her travel info before the state department.
LikeLike
Shockingly, when I think about it. Gossiping about celebrities is one thing. Leaking covert information is another. Hillary did not seek this position and even resisted it. She accepted it out of patriotism – to serve. She should have the best protection on every side.
LikeLike
Being the big nerd that I am, I did a little research – OK, it was more like a basic Google search, but whatever. When Angelina Jolie visited Afghanistan in 2008 as part of her duties as a UNHCR Goodwill Ambassador, the media didn’t report the date ahead of time and didn’t report on the event until she was back in the US. I’m not upset by this. There is no reason to put someone in danger needlessly whether they are Angelina Jolie, or Hillary Clinton, or anyone else.
LikeLike
Great work! And good point! But especially the person 4th in the line of succession should be protected. Not that Angelina should not be, but the SOS is high in the line of succession. She should not be endangered.
LikeLike
Hillary’s safety and the safety of those around her should come first– period.
LikeLike
Makes you wonder where common sense has gone! And it is not just our culture, it’s global!
LikeLike
I am surprised the Secret Service isn’t all over this. Hillary’s safety come first. The Secretary doesn’t need the extra potential threats to her safety.
LikeLike
I’m sure they are. Since they are in fact secret, we would not know. And that, as Martha says, is a GOOD thing!
LikeLike