Perhaps not a major point, but I'd sure like to know why news outlet number 10 needed to be blacked out, as if it's a matter of national security or something, on one of the Message Event Proposals linked to in the Toronto Star today. Here's how the last page of one Message Event Proposal document, in connection with prospective media interviews by Canada's Ambassador to Afghanistan, appears:
What might that be about?
The fun with blacked out documentation, it never ends with these folks.
Update (9:15 p.m.): From email:
A quick thought--for the same reason that no. 10 is blacked out so is the name of the "Editorial Page Editor" of the Calgary Herald... As if S. 19 (1) was supposed to offer protection, when someone's full title and place of work is cited. Shoddy redaction techniques, if you ask me.It is interesting the way that individual names are blacked out throughout the rest of the document but in paragraph number 10, the entire paragraph had to go.
Here's the reasoning from the ATI Act s. 19 (1)
19. (1) Subject to subsection (2), the head of a government institution shall refuse to disclose any record requested under this Act that contains personal information as defined in section 3 of the Privacy Act.
One final point: the redaction quality is shoddy, as if the agency that released them didn't have the current update of ATIP software. Odd.