Reply to Memorandum on GR Editing

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP60-00346R000200050002-3
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 3
• Document Creation Date: December 9, 2016
• Document Release Date: July 13, 1998
• Sequence Number: 2
• Publication Date: January 25, 1957
• Content Type: MEMO

STANAppr ved For Release 2000/0 tDP60-003468000200050002-3
Office Memorandum *UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT
TO Chief, Geographic Area' DATE: 25 January 1957
FROM . Chief, Geography Division
SUBJECT: Reply to Memorandum on GR Editing
Your memorandum of 15 January 1957 has been carefully con-
sidered and discussed with the Chief of the Editing and Review
Staff. On the basis of our consideration we are answering the
questions you raise point by point. Our reactions to the memo-
randum as a whole are included in the last two paragraphs.
1. The first paragraph of the memorandum seems completely
unjustified, unnecessary, and unkind, as well as indiscreet.
Furthermore the paragraph is weak in the first three elements of
editing named -- grammar, organization, and clarity.
25X1A2g 2. GE-141 is a sensitive report and should be mentioned
only by its code name,
a. The mention of - material is no "indiscretion" 25X1 A29
since the report is classified SECRET and bears the control
REQUESTER ONLY.
b. Page 1 -- GR-141 was a requested job. The introduction
was therefore designed to explain to the requester what was being
presented and why all of the information asked for could not be
provided. In other words, it is supposed to tell the requester
what he should know before he starts reading the report. Possibly
it might better have been called a "foreword" than an "introduction."
c. Page 1, par. 3 -- This paragraph is substantively signifi-
cant to the paper and should not be relegated to a footnote.
d. Page 2, pars. 1-3 -- In general long summaries have
been officially discouraged by CIA. Possibly the "introduction"
should have been divided into a "foreword" and a "summary." A
summary is designed for the casual reader who will decide on the
basis of the summary whether or not he wants to read the report.
GR-141 goes only to the requester, who has asked for all the infor-
mation that could be provided. Under such circumstances only the
briefest of summaries is in order.
Approved For Release 2000/08/22-:CIA-"PDP60-00346R000200050002-3
 Approved For Release 2000/08/2 0-0034600200050002-3
V
SUBJECT: Reply to Memorandum on GR Editing
e. Page 3, par. 1 -- The statement referred to is an
"apologia" and was intended as such. (See comment on b. P. 1.)
f. Page 59, par. 3 -- This again is a reminder to the
requester that we have not ignored his request but were able to
find very little information.
g. Page 78, par. 2 -- The author will elaborate on this
point if comment is needed. The requester will understand why
the sentence was included, but the reason for its inclusion is of
a sensitive nature that should not be written out in full.
The memorandum suggests an unawareness of the conditions
under which geographic reports requested by DD/P are produced. The
material to be included in Geographic Research studies produced for
DD/P is in most cases specifically spelled out in the request. The
study is written to meet specific needs of the requester and can
seldom result in a balanced geographic study, since DD/P has a
tendency to request information on only selected elements or aspects
of an area. Some of the studies submitted to DD/P are utilized or
integrated into reports by the SR Support Staff, which is engaged
in similar research but not to the same depth. Frequently expla-
nations of sources and techniques are introduced at appropriate
points in studies for the guidance of the SR Support Staff. Problems
of security arise from different levels of clearance held by various
people, which again on occasion calls for some explanation.
The staff of the Geography Division in general has been unaware
that the Editing and Review Staff has failed so signally in the
attainment of its objectives. Editing and reviewing are commonly
regarded as an integral part of report preparation in which the
editor and author work together for a common goal. The policy is
and has always been not to release a report until both the editor
and author are satisfied with it and it has been approved by the
Branch and Division Chiefs. In view of the criticism directed
against editorial procedures, the Geography Division suggests that
an impartial investigation be made of editing in the Geography
Division and other Divisions of the Geographic Area and that its
procedures and results be compared with those of other parts of
ORR in order to secure a sound basis for improvement. It is further
suggested that the memorandum of 15 January from Chief, Geographic
Approved For Release 2000/08/ 60-00346R000200050002-3
 Approved For Release 2000/08460-00346R000200050002-3
SUBJECT: Reply to Memorandum on GR Editing
Area, and this memorandum be submitted to Mr. Guthe to acquaint him
with the problem and provide him with a background for initiating
the investigation.
25X1A9a
Approved For Release 2000/08/22 CIA-RDP60-00346R000200050002-3