I would have concluded the exact opposite. Making a full recording available allows any attempt to quote part the meeting out of context discoverable and provable. Without a recording, anyone that attends the meeting could jot down a quote that serves their purpose and report it without anyone being able to dispute the context (aside from relying on the memories of other attendees).
Especially when the narrative people want to spin is "Gee golly whiz look at those Silicon Valley folks saving the day!".
Anything else is CYOA, and it'd be nice if people could actually rise to the occasion and be honest and precise.
(Besides, if you are honest on everything, and somebody just hits you out of context, you can defend yourself by providing additional context. None of this is going to matter in 5 years anyways, so might as well set a good example.)
I don't think so. The people fixing the obamacare website most likely want obamacare to succeed, and are aware that there's a hungry media out there ready and waiting for the next story revealing just how awful the original website (and, they'll insinuate, hence obamacare itself) is.
I can write down an out-of-context statement and report it with or without a recording. If anything, a recording is positive because you can contest what I claim you said with a hard-to-fake, in-context version of things.
Yeah, keep telling yourself that. The hacker community as a whole "values openness" when it suits them. 90% of the time, it's tribal Homo sapiens pattern matching the markers of their own tribe while imitating the outward appearance of the 10% that truly matters.
Valuing truth over your own ego is a majority stance and a minority capability around here.
(As one of the other comments alluded to, we're engineers, not politicians, and we're certainly not equipped to deal with the media parsing our every sentence for soundbites.)
Check's already cashed, right?
Technologically "hard" or Politically "hard"
?
[1] http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/TransparencyandOp...