A non-attributable, on-the-record background briefing

Posted by Martin Stabe on 9 March 2006 at 17:16
Tags: Freedom of Information, Journalism, Times

In the Times City Diary, Martin Waller recounts being invited to an “on-the-record, off-camera briefing” by Hazel Blears, followed by “a non-attributable on-the-record background briefing” by Home Office officials:

I’m lost. You can talk to her, but not take pictures? You can quote them, but not say who they are? Then you can’t talk to anybody? Which bits are we allowed to mention? And what has this to do with open government?

I’m lost too. Can the man from the ministry enlighten us confused hacks?

A Home Office spokesman confesses that the word “background” — which is more or less synonymous with “off-the-record” to Sir Humphrey  — slipped into Waller’s invitation in error.

So what’s a “a non-attributable on-the-record briefing”?

Apparently, it’s when Home Office civil servants explain “something of a highly technical nature” — about police pensions, in this case — to a gaggle of puzzled hacks. The Home Office was happy for these technical details to be quoted verbatim, but not to have them attributed to the civil servants by name.

As for Blears’ “on-the-record, off-camera briefing”, it was a fully attributable meeting with the minister. No problem with tape recorders or notepads — just the snappers and TV crews were out of lock. Maybe Ms Blears was afraid they would steal her soul.

Tags: Freedom of Information, Journalism, Times