Culture Of Secrecy Research Articles

Model City USA: The Environmental Cost of Victory in World War II and the Cold War

AbstractLong shrouded in a cocoon of national-security secrecy, the history of the Lake Ontario Ordnance Works site in western New York sheds light on the enduring environmental, political, and social costs of victory in World War II and the Cold War. A micro-study of a nuclear waste site, this article analyzes connections among U.S. nuclear weapons waste management and the environment, local politics, grassroots activism, and international diplomacy. Ultimately, it argues that a spirit of patriotic sacrifice, combined with a culture of secrecy, overrode concerns about safety. The end result of that sacrifice is today a legacy of environmental contamination and the progressive decline of local democratic controls over natural resources.

Reproductive medicine -- an African perspective [editorial

No Abstract. South African Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Vol. 13 (2) 2007: pp. 36-37

Secrets Revealed, Revelations Concealed: A Secret City Confronts its Environmental Legacy of Weapons Production

Oak Ridge, Tennessee was born as a planned and secret community established during World War II to contribute to the development of the first atomic bomb. Sacrificing their own civil liberties toward the goals of democracy and freedom, residents lived behind guarded fences and learned not to discuss their work with family, neighbors or co-workers. Their clandestine work became public following the bombing of Hiroshima, but the environmental legacies of weapons production increased and remained secret throughout the Cold War. In this paper, I discuss the cultural and environmental legacy of Oak Ridge and then draw on ethnographic interviews with residents, former workers, and participation in public hearings to show how the culture of secrecy has shaped the community of today, while efforts to confront the environmental legacy of the city continues to both unite and divide the community. I conclude that the history of secrecy has limited organized efforts to confront the ongoing environmental problems facing the community, while individuals act independently to investigate past and potential exposures. Paradoxically, however, the history of secrecy contributed to the development of a proud community with a commitment to environmental stewardship, democratic principles, and concern for peace and stability that many outsiders have failed to recognize in condemning the community as a showcase of military toxic waste.

CULTURAL STUDIES CONFIDENTIAL1

The current climate of secrecy, this essay contends, demands scrutiny. In order to do this, however, I suggest that cultural studies must think through its own secrets. I try to follow through one such secret here: namely the secret of cultural studies’ possible ‘illegitimacy’ as a discipline, a possibility that haunts us at every turn. While this might sound contentious, I argue that the possibility of illegitimacy is the condition of all knowledge. Rather than the universality of this condition absolving cultural studies of the responsibility of owning up to it, however, I argue that cultural studies is well-placed to think through questions of illegitimacy and accountability. If we can address these problems, we will be better equipped to approach the culture of secrecy currently characterising US and British foreign policy.

Transparency and Public Administration in Mexico: How the Enactment of a Law Is Changing Culture

Recent elections in Mexico, despite their tumultuous appearance, have been more participatory and have reflected progress in Mexico’s culture of openness and transparency as opposed to its traditional culture of secrecy and corruption. This article begins by arguing that corruption has long been, by default, a principal element in the administration and management of public services in Mexico and that this moral and ethical situation facilitated the groundwork for the law of transparency to emerge. Transparency, freedom of information laws, and the right-to-know movement are discussed in the context of the Mexican state, and the key elements of the freedom of information law in Mexico and the role of the Federal Institute on Access to Public Information are explored. It is argued that Mexico’s efforts are creating a new culture of openness and transparency that will eventually provide a more participatory democracy for all citizens. Finally, the article presents the results of a survey of master of public administration professors on the current state of transparency in Mexico and how the law is changing political and bureaucratic culture there.

Security, Sovereignty and Continental Interoperability

In an era of digital government, citizen-centric governance is a central aim—one that is often predicated on more efficient and responsive service owed through digital connectivity. Antiterrorism efforts accentuate this focus, albeit with a very different set of aims. Governments have been quick to establish new antiterrorism and homeland security measures that create new and expanded capacities for gathering, analyzing, and sharing information. In doing so, tensions have arisen with respect to the appropriate scope of governmental action, and the proper mix of secrecy and transparency. Such tensions also extend beyond borders, as North American governance faces new and rising pressures to adapt to a post–September 11, 2001, nexus of security, technology, and democracy. This article argues that the culture of secrecy already prevalent within security authorities is being extended to continentally under the guise of interoperability without sufficient effort to ensure openness and public accountability within and between countries.

When things go wrong: how health care organizations deal with major failures.

Concern about patient safety, caused in part by high-profile major failures in which many patients have been harmed, is rising worldwide. This paper draws on examples of such failures from several countries to analyze how these events are dealt with and to identify lessons and recommendations for policy. Better systems are needed for reporting and investigating failures and for implementing the lessons learned. The culture of secrecy, professional protectionism, defensiveness, and deference to authority is central to such major failures, and preventing future failures depends on cultural as much as structural change in health care systems and organizations.

A culture of secrecy: the public's right to know

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size Additional informationNotes on contributorsFrances D’souzaFrances D’Souza has a background in physical anthropology and has taught at the London School of Economics and at Oxford Brookes University. She was the Founding Director of an independent research group focusing on applying systematic evaluation methods to development and emergency aid and collaborated in original research on the economic origins and alleviation of famine. For over nine years, Frances was Executive Director of ARTICLE 19. Since 1999, she has been the recipient of an Open Society Fellowship (Soros) to research political campaigning for freedom of expression.

Review: A Culture of Secrecy: The Government versus the People's Right to Know, by Athan G. Theoharis and The Culture of Secrecy: Britain, 1832-1998, by David Vincent

Book Review| April 01 2000 Review: A Culture of Secrecy: The Government versus the People's Right to Know, by Athan G. Theoharis and The Culture of Secrecy: Britain, 1832-1998, by David Vincent A Culture of Secrecy: The Government versus the People's Right to KnowAthan G. TheoharisThe Culture of Secrecy: Britain, 1832-1998David Vincent Bruce Craig Bruce Craig Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar The Public Historian (2000) 22 (2): 100–103. https://doi.org/10.2307/3379618 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Twitter LinkedIn Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Bruce Craig; Review: A Culture of Secrecy: The Government versus the People's Right to Know, by Athan G. Theoharis and The Culture of Secrecy: Britain, 1832-1998, by David Vincent. The Public Historian 1 April 2000; 22 (2): 100–103. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/3379618 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentThe Public Historian Search This content is only available via PDF. Copyright 2000 Regents of the University of California and the National Council on Public History Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

A Culture of Secrecy: The Government Versus the People's Rights to Know. Edited by Athan G. Theoharis (Lawrence, University of Kansas Press, 1998) 245 pp. $29.98

<i>A Culture of Secrecy: The Government Versus the People's Rights to Know</i>. Edited by Athan G. Theoharis (Lawrence, University of Kansas Press, 1998) 245 pp. $29.98

Review: A Culture of Secrecy: The Government versus the People's Right to Know, by Athan G. Theoharis

Book Review| May 01 1999 Review: A Culture of Secrecy: The Government versus the People's Right to Know, by Athan G. Theoharis A Culture of Secrecy: The Government versus the People's Right to KnowAthan G. Theoharis Justus D. Doenecke Justus D. Doenecke Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Pacific Historical Review (1999) 68 (2): 353–355. https://doi.org/10.2307/3642010 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Justus D. Doenecke; Review: A Culture of Secrecy: The Government versus the People's Right to Know, by Athan G. Theoharis. Pacific Historical Review 1 May 1999; 68 (2): 353–355. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/3642010 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentPacific Historical Review Search This content is only available via PDF. Copyright 1999 The Pacific Coast Branch, American Historical Association Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.

:A Culture of Secrecy: The Government Versus the People's Rights to Know . Edited by Athan G. Theoharis ( Lawrence , University of Kansas Press , 1998 ) 245 pp. $29.98

:A Culture of Secrecy: The Government Versus the People's Rights to Know . Edited by Athan G. Theoharis ( Lawrence , University of Kansas Press , 1998 ) 245 pp. $29.98

EU Citizens’ Right to Know: The Improbable Adoption of a European Freedom of Information Act

There is without doubt a radical difference between the culture of open government in Sweden and the until recently prevailing culture of secrecy in Britain and within the European Union. From a classic British sceptic’s perspective, “public access to official documents is deemed unnecessary, since British democracy has functioned for so long without it”. The British “have always relied heavily, although not always successfully, on the concept of ‘ministerial responsibility’ to Parliament in order to secure public trust in government”. The mainstream of eighteenth-century British political thought held that the nation’s political well-being required the foundation of an informed gentleman citizenry. By the middle decades of the eighteenth-century, the movement away from the idea of a citizenry composed exclusively of gentlemen was firmly established on both sides of the Atlantic. It became increasingly acknowledged that men of the “meaner sort” should have the right to hold opinions on public affairs and ought to be allowed to protest against governments and laws they deemed improper.

A Culture of secrecy: the government versus the people's right to know

A Culture of secrecy: the government versus the people's right to know

The end of a heritage

The Republic of Ireland sheds Its culture of secrecy, but Journalists fear they will be left out In the cold

In search of the new republic

Lord Justice Scott's exposure of the secrecy and duplicity that characterised the UK government's arms deals with Iraq should have come as no surprise to a society in which, acording to a French journalist working in London, the 'culture of secrecy' is endemic and reaches out well beyond the confines of Parliament to operate as the most powerful form of censorship

Secrecy and medicines

The culture of secrecy in medicine runs deep and strong and is a serious obstacle to health. Secrecy means medicine cannot be honest with itself. It debases relationships in medicine, disfigures science, flaws decision-making and handicaps patients. Secrecy deprives people of the information and understanding they need, individually and collectively, to participate effectively in the planning and realisation of health.In the UK, a culture of openness in medicine seems a long way off, especially in drug regulation, though the new Code of Practice on Access to Government Information admits something of a foot in the government's door. Two case histories are outlined of attempts to use this voluntary code to secure aggregated statistical data relating to drug consumption and to suspected adverse drug reaction reports. The reasons given by the UK authorities for refusing to disclose seem to the author most revealing and at times almost surreal.