UC Davis has prevailed in a civil lawsuit brought by activists under the California Public Records Act. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, or PETA, had filed the suit in January 2019, seeking access to unpublished research data, in the form of video recordings, from work by two researchers at the California National Primate Research Center. The Superior Court of California, County of Yolo, ruled that releasing the material did not serve the public interest and would undermine academic freedom and the scientific process while increasing the risk that researchers could face physical harm and harassment from activists.The court's ruling was seemingly celebrated by the University of California's National Center for Free Speech and Civic Engagement which tweeted the news and pointed to the university's press release. The most interesting passsage to me and the one that raises questions about the Center for Free Speech and Civic Engagement's implicit bias was this:
the court ruled that the public was better served by not disclosing the videos because there was minimal value to the public in seeing the videos, and to the contrary, great risk that the videos could cause the public to misunderstand the purpose and methodology of the research at the California National Primate Research Center.This begs the question of whether or not ignorance is an impediment to civic engagement. I suspect that those involved with the University of California's National Center for Free Speech and Civic Engagement would generally agree that an informed citizenry is a key element in civic engagement. Ignorance imposed by government undermines and curtails free speech. You simply can't talk about or practice civic engagement regarding things that are hidden from you.
In 1997, I spent a few days in the Yolo County jail for protesting the terrible things being done to monkeys at the California National Primate Research Center which is part of the University of California-Davis's campus. I was simply sitting on public property across the street from the entrance to this hell-hole with a couple signs. Seemingly, vivisectors have the academic freedom to hurt and kill monkeys but the public risks going to jail if they criticize them for doing so or to share details about their hideousness with other citizens.
It seems clear that the university and a judge believe that "academic freedom" allows those who are being paid by the public to keep what they are doing a secret from the public. This notion is apparently shared by the University of California's National Center for Free Speech and Civic Engagement There is no claim of national security or potential intellectual property theft, it's all about the potential (and unlikely) repercussions of the public learning about a tiny few of the terrible things being done to animals in their name.
Democracy is severely weakened, threatened even, when government keeps secrets from the citizens when those with the power to do so believe those secrets might cause some concern about what the government is doing or paying to have done. And that potential concern is the only reason that UC-Davis fought to keep video recordings of monkeys taken from their mothers by two researchers at the California National Primate Research Center hidden from the public.
Oddly, or maybe not, they don't care if the public reads about what they are doing -- details are generally spelled out in published papers; they are simply freaked out by the potential blow-back if the public sees what they are doing.
This isn't something unique to the University of California, they all operate in the same way when it comes to trying to keep the unsettling details secret. Keeping the darkest details secret is woven into the fabric of government-sponsored vivisection.
