Missouri Press Association
Serving Missouri Newspapers Since 1867
KRAKOW, Poland — My son and I spent two weeks in this wonderful city, hosted by an editor of one of Poland’s leading papers. One weekend, we hiked with him through a hailstorm to a chalet high in the Tatra mountains, where we were to spend the night before hiking down the other side of the mountain.
Given the weather, there was nothing to do but drink some beers tea and talk. At some point in our conversations, he told me that Poland had just passed a national Anti-SLAPP law. Then he asked me: Does Missouri have an Anti-SLAPP statute?
Indeed, we do, I was able to reply with a dash of state pride. Effective this month, Missouri’s new and approved Anti-SLAPP statute is in effect, providing a mechanism for early dismissal and attorneys fees for prevailing parties. Both provisions will serve as significant deterrents to baseless lawsuits targeting the free press.
Of course, this Anti-SLAPP statute is yet another salubrious development for Missouri newspapers long championed by my illustrious predecessor, Jean Maneke, the Missouri Press Association’s long-time hotline attorney. Congratulations to Jean and everyone else who labored to make this statute become a reality in this state.
***
We continue to work to fix the Missouri State Highway Patrol’s (MSHP) unlawful policy of redacting names from crash reports, and there will be news on that front very soon.
I had entertained hope that the MSHP would honor a law already on the books that permits Missouri newspapers to report information protected by the Drivers Privacy Protection Act (DPPA). The federal DPPA law is the reason the Patrol cites in refusing to provide names in its incident reports, despite the Missouri Sunshine Law’s mandate that such names be provided.
The Missouri Department of Revenue’s Form 4678, “Request for DPPA Security Access Code,” contains a category access specifically for “News Media” who would use the information to “disseminate to the public in a newspaper, book, magazine, broadcast, or similar form of public communication, when such dissemination is related to the operation of a motor vehicle or to public safety.”
The Springfield Daily Citizen this summer was able to test my theory out. The paper submitted an online request to the MSHP for an incident report concerning a drowning at a low-water crossing. The story was an important one – not only had someone lost his life, but the crossing itself was the site of numerous, repeated water rescues. People were getting swept away.
The newspaper had obtained the Security Access Code from the Missouri Department of Revenue, and it sent the code along with its request to the MSHP. But when the paper got the records, names remained redacted. The paper contacted the records custodian who stated that names would not be provided, even with the paper’s access code.
As disappointing as that outcome is, I do want to recognize the efforts by the Springfield Daily Citizen and all of our members that push the state agencies to do the right thing. Efforts like these will help show the extent of the problem and the importance of fixing it.
***
Last month the Missouri Press Association submitted an amicus brief in support of Cathi Utley, the Hermann reporter threatened with jail time for taking photos of a criminal trial after first receiving permission to serve as the pool photographer.
In it, we argued that the Missouri constitution protects Utley’s conduct. We further argued that when a court uses its contempt power, the court stands in the shoes of the public. But here, the public’s interest is two-fold – both to have an orderly and fair trial, AND to have open courts and information concerning important criminal cases. The balancing of these interests should have prevented any punishment of a reporter trying to do her job.
At the present moment, the appeal is awaiting the brief from the Missouri Attorney General in defense of the judge’s action. We will be monitoring the case.
