Smithsonian battles back against critics of contract

The Smithsonian Institution continues to defend itself against lawmakers and filmmakers who have criticized a contract the organization signed limiting access to its resources for independent projects.

The contract announced in March with Showtime Networks Inc. creates Smithsonian Networks, which will produce programs for cable television and other outlets starting in December. The agreement imposes heightened restrictions on commercial filmmakers interested in relying on Smithsonian materials for their own projects.

Smithsonian officials say the restrictions will affect only a small percentage of users and that such limits were necessary to form the partnership with Showtime. In return, they expect the contract to be lucrative for the institution.

"The agreement affects only use of Smithsonian resources in films, not access," a May 9 letter from the Smithsonian's Board of Regents, which includes Chief Justice of the United States John Roberts and Vice President Dick Cheney, to members of Congress. The Smithsonian has repeatedly emphasized that scholars, reporters, researches and filmmakers who want to use its resources as a small part of their assignments will not be affected.

Board members also argued that the deal will make Smithsonian materials more accessible to Americans and estimated that about 25 million people currently have access to digital cable.

But those with access are part of an elite, affluent group, said Carl Malamud, senior fellow at the Washington-based research institute Center for American Progress. "There's no indication these things will be available on the [Internet], or available for free," he said.

Smithsonian spokeswoman Linda St. Thomas said while it's true that only people with digital cable will have access to the programming, she does not think wealthier people are more likely to have cable. Most Americans, she pointed out, have cable. For those who do have digital cable, the Smithsonian programming will be available free of charge, she said.

Rep. Norman Dicks, D-Wash., and Rep. Charles Taylor, R-N.C., ranking member and chairman respectively of the House appropriations subcommittee responsible for Smithsonian's federal funding, wrote in an April 27 letter to the Smithsonian: "We believe that such an exclusive arrangement may be incompatible with the trust placed in the Smithsonian as an educational institution," and they asked for an immediate review to determine if the contract with Showtime violates "the spirit if not the letter of the Smithsonian Trust."

Also troubling to Malamud, lawmakers and filmmakers was the apparent secrecy surrounding the Smithsonian's contract negotiations with Showtime. In a Wednesday letter to Roberts, Malamud said the Smithsonian has yet to reveal the length of the contract, the minimum yearly fee to be paid to Smithsonian, and the criteria in determining whether commercial users will be granted permission to use its resources. While certain contract details are often redacted before public release, federal agencies usually reveal the total value and length of contracts.

In a response to Malamud, Smithsonian Secretary Lawrence Small said controversy surrounding the contract was based on deep misunderstanding and the contract's confidentiality provisions were not unusual. The Smithsonian also pointed out that it is not a typical federal agency and it relies on commercial enterprises in addition to appropriations for funding.

The Smithsonian also is under fire for paying salaries of more than $500,000 to Small and other executives at the institution, as well as for the accounting practices of Smithsonian Business Ventures, its retail and publishing arm. The Smithsonian's inspector general, Debra S. Ritt, in April announced that she was auditing executive compensation and revenue recognition practices at Smithsonian Business Ventures.