Note-taking during meetings is often construed as a sign of diligence and respect; a practice to be encouraged for those who want to get ahead in the workplace. But when it comes to classified meetings, those notes can create big problems if not handled correctly.
Some clearance-holders try to address this problem by taking notes in shorthand, hoping that “talking around” classified information or using abbreviations for classified terms or programs will serve its purpose of jogging their memory while not resulting in special handling requirements for the document itself. Unfortunately, that rarely turns out well. If the practice is discovered, it can create security ramifications like those that would occur if the note-taker recorded the meeting verbatim.
This phenomenon is a different spin on the problem of derivative classification I’ve written about previously. Derivative classification means that information derived from classified information is still classified. Most of the time, we think of this in the context of summarizing or simplifying information taken from a larger classified work product (e.g., an intelligence report) into something more abbreviated (e.g., bullet points on a PowerPoint). However, this is just note-taking by a different name. Notes are, by definition, an abbreviation or summation of something more comprehensive; it doesn’t matter whether the “more comprehensive” is a written product or a meeting.
To be clear, I’m not suggesting that clearance holders can never take notes during classified meetings. There may be very good reasons to do so. What I am suggesting is that any notes taken during classified meetings – regardless of whether you think you’ve sufficiently sanitized them to remove classified information – warrant handling as though they are still classified until and unless vetted with the cognizant government security office.
If you’re thinking that this sounds extreme or unnecessary, I don’t disagree with you on the former. The U.S. Government has a serious overclassification problem, and I’m a big fan of transparency with taxpayers. I must, however, disagree with any assertion of the latter. I’ve seen plenty of good people over the course of my career who thought it wasn’t necessary and lived to regret that decision.
Precisely because the government has an overclassification problem – and because paranoia and subjectivity sometimes overshadow reasonableness and objectivity in government security offices – treating notes taken during classified meetings as classified until verified otherwise by security officials is necessary for self-preservation.
It is unfortunate that it has to be that way, but when it comes to your career, I’d submit that arguing over the validity of classification isn’t a hill worth dying on.
This article is intended as general information only and should not be construed as legal advice. Although the information is believed to be accurate as of the publication date, no guarantee or warranty is offered or implied. Laws and government policies are subject to change, and the information provided herein may not provide a complete or current analysis of the topic or other pertinent considerations. Consult an attorney regarding your specific situation.
