Reconsideration of B-303495--Office of National Drug Control Policy Prepackaged News Stories

B-303495.2 Feb 15, 2005 Jump To VIEW DECISION DOWNLOADS RELATED PAGES GAO CONTACTS Highlights GAO was asked to withdraw opinion in B-303495, Jan. 5, 2005, and reconsider the analysis upon which the opinion was based. The opinion found that the Office of National Drug Control Policy's (ONDCP) use of appropriated funds to produce and distribute prepackaged news stories violated the publicity or propaganda prohibition. View Decision B-303495.2, Reconsideration of B-303495 Office of National Drug Control Policy, February 15, 2005 B-303495.2 February 15, 2005 The Honorable Tom Davis Chairman, Committee on Government Reform House of Representatives The Honorable Mark Souder Chairman, Subcommittee on Criminal Justice, Drug Policy, and Human Resources Committee on Government Reform House of Representatives Subject: Reconsideration of B-303495Office of National Drug Control Policy Prepackaged News Stories This responds to your January 19, 2005, letter in which you expressed your concerns and disagreement with our recent opinion, B-303495, Jan. 4, 2005. In B-303495, we concluded that the Office of National Drug Control Policys (ONDCP) use of appropriated funds to produce and distribute prepackaged news stories that were part of video news releases (VNRs) violated the prohibition on the use of appropriated funds for publicity or propaganda purposes. [1] You asked that we withdraw our opinion and reconsider its analysis because it (1) is inconsistent with ONDCPs express authorization to conduct a media campaign, (2) ignores the independent intervening decisions of news organizations to disseminate that information as their own, and (3) does not distinguish between deliberate concealment of source by the government from the news media and the subsequent concealment of the source from the public by the news media. We carefully considered the points you raise in your letter but, for the reasons stated below, we do not believe it is appropriate to withdraw B-303495 and stand by that legal opinion. At the same time, it is important to clarify the focus of the analysis in B-303495. First, since the publicity or propaganda prohibition applies to ONDCP, our opinion addresses ONDCPs use of appropriations, not activities of the news organizations. In determining the propriety of any use of appropriated funds, we focus on the entity that is obligating and expending the funds subject to the prohibition, not on any subsequent actions of private entities. Any ethical or regulatory obligations that television broadcasters may have committed by airing the prepackaged news stories without attribution, therefore, are not relevant to our determination of ONDCPs responsibilities in obligating appropriations within the parameters that Congress enacted. Furthermore, based on our work, it was evident that ONDCP did not encourage nor did it intend for the broadcasters to note the source of the news stories. Importantly, only the prepackaged news story segments of the VNRs violated the publicity or propaganda prohibition. Other segments of the VNRs, including B-roll film, public service announcements, and television advertisements, did not violate the prohibition. ONDCP targeted the B-roll to the news organization and identified itself as the source. The ONDCP television advertisement segments and public service announcements, which were targeted to the television viewing audience, were clearly labeled as messages from ONDCP to that target audience. If ONDCP had included a similar source disclosure within the prepackaged news story segments, either through the reporters own statements or on the face of the segments, they would not have violated the prohibition. In your January 19 letter, you contend that our opinion fails to consider the express authority Congress granted to ONDCP to conduct news media outreach under 21U.S.C. 18011804. See January 19 letter at 23. In this regard, you point out that section 1802(a)(1) authorizes ONDCP to use appropriated funds for a media campaign for, among other things: entertainment industry collaborations to fashion anti-drug messages in motion pictures, television programming, popular music, interactive (Internet and new) media projects and activities, public information, news media outreach , and corporate sponsorship and participation. 21 U.S.C. 1802(a)(1)(H) (emphasis added). ONDCP raised this argument to us, and we addressed it in our opinion. ONDCP asserted that the authority to conduct news media outreach included the authority to create news stories without revealing the government as the source of the story. Applying commonly accepted canons of statutory construction, we concluded that while this authority permits more than the traditional authority granted to agencies to conduct information dissemination, the language of the statute did not grant the authority to create news stories without attribution.