A big change to U.S. broadcasting is coming and its one Putin might admire

[BigBearJohn]

FOR YEARS, members of Congress have fumed about what they regard as ineffective U.S. public diplomacy, including the failure of broadcasting operations such as the Voice of America and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty to match the reach and apparent influence of networks such as Russia’s RT and Qatar’s al Jazeera. A frequent and arguably fair focus of criticism has been the Broadcasting Board of Governors, the body created to supervise government-funded media outlets while serving as a firewall between them and the political administration of the day.

A radical change to that system is now coming — and it looks like one that Vladi­mir Putin and Qatar’s emir might well admire. An amendment quietly inserted into the annual National Defense Authorization Act by Republican House leaders would abolish the broadcasting board and place VOA, RFE/RL and other international news and information operations under the direct control of a chief executive appointed by the president. The new executive would hire and fire senior media personnel and manage their budgets.

With a confirming vote by the GOP-controlled Senate, President-elect Donald Trump will be able to install the editor of Breitbart News or another propagandist of his choice to direct how the United States is presented to the world by VOA, or how Russia is covered by RL. If Congress’s intention was for U.S. broadcasting to rival the Kremlin’s, it may well get its wish.

The damage to U.S. interests could be considerable. The unique attraction for global audiences of RFE/RL, Radio Free Asia and other outlets is not their skill at presenting the U.S. government line, but their journalistic independence. They were created to be “surrogate media,” news organizations that offered accurate and independent coverage of events in countries where citizens could not depend on their own, state-run media. RFE’s coverage of Communist Europe was vital to the growth of the independent political movements that eventually brought down the system. Radio Free Asia strives to serve the same purpose in China, as does Radio y Televisión Martí in Cuba.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/a-big-change-to-us-broadcasting-is-coming--and-its-one-putin-might-admire/2016/12/09/6c6d5786-bcb7-11e6-91ee-1adddfe36cbe_story.html?utm_term=.ced3f3bf7b5e

[tecelote]

1. Last paragraph...

"The Obama administration — perhaps anticipating a Hillary Clinton presidency — supported these changes. Now its outgoing public-diplomacy officials will have to hope that Mr. Trump chooses an executive committed to the U.S. broadcasting tradition of independent and reputable journalism rather than a political loyalist or alt-right ideologue. Either way, there is likely to be an exodus of seasoned professionals from the surrogate broadcasters as well as VOA — meaning that U.S. international broadcasting, whatever its current deficiencies, is likely to get worse."

[mahatmakanejeeves]

2. Thank you for posting that.

Last edited Mon Dec 12, 2016, 11:19 AM - Edit history (1)

I saw the editorial, and I thought it should get wider attention.

There was this comment:

voaguy

12/10/2016 2:40 PM EST

As a former VOA senior correspondent (retired in 2012), I can attest that this is a serious situation, and no amount of happy talk emanating from the 3rd floor of the Cohen Building can ameliorate it or hide it. BBG is and long has been a mismanaged entity. Every year, it scores near the bottom of federal employee workplace ratings.

As a whole, the organization and the entities under it have never been able to resolve the inherent institutional schizophrenia of the venture. The journalists want to do their job as journalists, as required by law, while policymakers want to them do what one official once called "journalism with a purpose." But that is not journalism; it something else - advocacy, propaganda, "messaging" (how I abhor that term!), whatever. However, even in the face of BBG lapses, VOA journalists themselves have struggled to maintain journalistic independence, which is the cornerstone to credibility. Unfortunately, the product has been getting watered down to be click-bait.
Contrary to assertions of its proponents, the legislation is not a true reform effort; it is a bid to mandate propaganda that will be flying a false flag of journalism. The bill mandates closer ties with the NSC, DOD, State, and, presumably, the intelligence community. Such legally mandated contacts cannot help but taint any journalistic product. That issue is what VOA journalists have been repeatedly trying to raise about certain provisions in the legislation, but their principled opposition of journalistic credibility has been derided and scorned by some proponents of the bill.

I fear the Trump News Network will come into being - but in a very different way than had been envisioned had he lost the election. If the new administration has its way - as it most surely will - political vampires will suck the lifeblood out of VOA and the surrogates, leaving dry, empty shells devoid of journalistic substance, standards, and professional respect.

[Ilsa]

3. Republicans hate free speech, only

want propaganda.

[BumRushDaShow]

4. Oddly enough

outlets like VOA actually had better news than the M$M. I.e., the propagandist features were toned down. Now the M$M are the pure domestic-targeted propaganda outlets and the only thing left is the print media, which I expect will be "brought into line" soon via financial blackmail and threats to the owners.

[FarCenter]

5. The Board

https://www.bbg.gov/who-we-are/our-leadership/board/

[Ilsa]

6. kick & rec. nt