AAP WARNS REVIEW DECREE COULD PUNISH PUBLISHERS

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP90-00806R000100160001-2
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 1
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: August 5, 2010
• Sequence Number: 1
• Publication Date: May 27, 1983
• Content Type: OPEN SOURCE

Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/05: CIA-RDP90-00806R000100160001-2
PUBLISHERS WEEKLY
27 May 1983
NEWS OF THE WEEK
STAT
Editor: Mladalynne Reuter/Assistant Editor: John Mutter
A-Atswb Warns Review Decree
Ccu d Punish Publishers
At least 49 books published in the past
12 years-including those by Henry
Kissinger and former presidents-
wou;d have to have been cleared or
censored by various government agen-
cies before publication if President
Reagan's recent directive on prepubli-
cation review had been in force. ac-
cording to the Association of American
Publishers. The AAP also warned that
the directive could be used to take pu-
nitive action against publishers who
failed to make sure an author was living
up to his perceived obligations to the
government.
The AAP's contentions were includ-
ed in written testimony to two House
subcommittees that held a joint hear-
ing April 28 on Reagan's directive to
expand the CIA's prepublication re-
view process to cover all government
officials or contractors with access
to "sensitive compartmented informa-
tion." Although the administration
won't release the number of govern-
ment officials who would be covered by
the expansion. one estimate placed it in
excess of 100.000.
At the April 28 hearing, Rep. Don
Edwards (D., Calif.). chairman of one
of the subcommittees. questioned CIA
officials closely about whether they
treat authors such as E. Howard Hunt
and Frank Snepp equally.
(The Supreme Court decision three
years ago upheld the CIA process,
which resulted in Snepp's paying the
federal government all the royalties
from his book, Decent Interval [Ran-
dom House). and submitting two nov-
els for clearance.) -
Edwards asked Charles E. Wilson,
chairman of the CIA Publication Re-
view Board, whether all of Hunt's nov-
els had been reviewed by the CIA.
"No. not all of them," Wilson replied.
but added. "Mr. Hunt has been fairly
faithful" in making the submissions.
"There is a specific reason for re-
viewing a work of fiction . . . when a
work of fiction gets too close to fact,"
Wilson said. "Mr. Hunt has voluntarily
submitted several of his novels for our
review, and I assume because he want-
ed to be absolutely certain that his ficti-
tious account was no: getting too close
to fact..,
\\ :icon added that Huni's failure to
agreement unless the material that he
wrote about fit the guidelines under
which the Publications Review Board
operates," meaning the author had
been exposed to classified materials.
Snepp, who sat in the audience tak-
ing notes on the hearing for an upcom-
ing book for Random House on the inci-
dents surrounding his landmark case,
told PW that the CIA had misrepresent-
ed the situation.
He noted that Wilson and Ernest
Mayerfield. CIA deputy general coun-
sel who handles the prepublication re-
view process, made it appear that only
certain writings by agents and former
agents had to be cleared. The agency
signalled his lawyers that he would be
immediately subjected to prosecution if
he failed to get prepublication review
on anything he wrote or said in a
speech. Snepp said. "I have to submit
just so they can see if I should have
submitted." he said. and suggested the
same treatment is given all authors who
publish works unfriendly to the CIA.
His next hook for Random House, he
said. promises to create another stir
because during his successful lawsuit
against the government, several bits
of classified information were divulged.
He plans to put them in this book.
which will have to he cleared by the
CIA. he said. but noted that recent ad-
ministration directives allow the gov-
ernment to reclassify material aiready_
made public.
One of the authors caught in a similar
snare was Ralph W. McGehee. whose
Deadly Deceits (Sheridan Square) was
ers. McGehee also made his submis-
sions a chapter at a time. causing the
review process to take longer than nor-
mal, Wilson said. "We are not talking
about one review, we are talking about
numerous reviews."
The AAP's testimony attacked the
review process as a violation of the
First Amendment that "cannot help but
have a pronounced chilling effect on the
publishing process and a devastating
impact on informed public discussion
which is at the heart of our system of
democratic government."
The AAP list of books that would
have been reviewed had the directive
been in force. compiled after a random
sampling, includes works by John
Dear.. John Kenneth Galbraith, W.
Avereli Harriman. Hubert Humphrey
and Arthur Schlesinger.
Besides slowing down the writing
process. the review directive will
"cripple" the ability of an author to
deal with a publisher "until after the
writing has been approved for publica-
tion." according to the AAP. This will
lead to "dulling, frustrating or de-
stroying the incentive of present or for-
mer government officials to write and
seek to be published. Further, as a
practical matter, the inability of author
and publisher to collaborate throughout
the process of development of a manu-
script also will result in the publication
of fewer works."
Another threat lies in having
members of one administration empow-
ered to pass judgment upon the writings
of those they replace. "The latitude af-
forded under the directive will inevita-
bly invite both delay in publishing and
politically motivated excisions which
will have the effect of harassing those
who would criticize their political suc-
cessors." the AAP commented.
The association also told the panels
that it was concerned that breaches of
nondisclosure agreements might be en-
forced "against third parties such as
book publishers. The destructive im-
pact of the directive on the public's
right to be informed on matters of deep
concern can only be exacerbated by the
serious chance that a publisher who
publishes a hook not cleared by the
government will be subject to onerous
penalties .... The effect of the direc-
published earlier this year with a sec-
tion outlining his two-year experience
in getting the CIA to clear his manu-
script. When McGehee's case was
mentioned to NVilson. he said the au-
thor's assertions were incorrect.
"Over the course of two years, Mr.
McGehee made several submissions to
the CIA for clearance." Wilson said.
He said the submissions involved
"three lengthy manuscripts. each of
which was yet another attempt to end
up with a successfully reviewed and au-
thorized" manuscript for the publish-
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/05: CIA-RDP90-00806R000100160001-2