Why does this page look this way?
It appears that you are using either an older, classic Web browser or a hand-held device that allows you to view our content but may not work with every feature of our site. If you are using an older browser, please upgrade for the best experience.
Navigation
home > by publication type > backgrounders > The Changing Scope of U.S. International Broadcasts
| Author: | Robert McMahon, Editor |
|---|
March 23, 2007
U.S. funding for non-military international broadcasting has surged since 9/11, with a special emphasis on reaching audiences in the Muslim world. The board that oversees such broadcasting is seeking about $670 million for the next fiscal year, part of which would go to expanding broadcasts to such crisis-prone states as North Korea, Iran, and Pakistan. Critics say the traditional U.S. broadcasting structure has become unwieldy and that some of the new ventures, including the use of pop-music formats in the main Farsi- and Arabic-language broadcasts, are lessening the impact of what should be news and information services. Analysts continue to raise questions about the goals of U.S. international broadcasting.
U.S. policymakers consider broadcasting a pillar of U.S. public diplomacy, stressing its role in promoting freedom and democracy. The Board of Broadcasting Governors (BBG), an independent agency charged with administering U.S. broadcasting, lists its priorities as providing objective news and information to “priority areas in support of the war against terrorism” as well as regions “where freedom of information is suppressed or denied.” The BBG says it fulfills its mission of promoting freedom and democracy by disseminating “factual and balanced news and information” to “enable our audiences to make informed choices on the vital issues that affect their lives.” But it is careful (PDF) not to give the impression of actively promoting regime change.
Its oldest surrogate broadcast service, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, suggests a more transformative mission. It says its goal is to provide “objective news, analysis, and discussion of domestic and regional issues crucial to successful democratic and free-market transformations.”
In contrast, the mission of the largest service, the Voice of America, is to explain America to the world and provide reliable international affairs programming.
The Board of Broadcasting Governors was created by Congress in 1994. Under the 1998 Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act (PDF) it assumed responsibility for overseeing all non-military U.S. international broadcasting. Among many changes, the Voice of America and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty were brought under the same organizational heading for the first time. The board is intended to be a firewall between the broadcast services and the government to avoid tampering. The BBG does not oversee day-to-day operations of the various broadcast services, but it was given more authority to micromanage the broadcast entities, such as its move in 2002 to create a new joint Farsi-language service composed of RFE/RL and VOA broadcasters. The bipartisan board consists of eight members from the fields of mass communications and foreign affairs, appointed by the president but reporting to Congress.U.S.public diplomacy chief Karen P. Hughes usually sits as the ninth, non-voting member. Some critics say the board has failed to adopt a strategy for gauging the impact of U.S. broadcasts, while others point to government neglect of its membership. The board currently has two openings and the terms of all other members have expired, leaving current members, including Chairman Kenneth Y. Tomlinson, to serve until replacements are appointed.
After dipping to a post-Cold War low of about $420 million in 2000, spending on international broadcasting has risen to $650 million. U.S. broadcasters disseminate reports on satellite television, the Internet, and shortwave, FM, and middle wave radio in nearly sixty languages through the following agencies:
Some VOA supporters this year are protesting plans to eliminate broadcasts of the English-language “News Now” program. BBG officials say it is better to use existing resources to expand programming in Pashto to the border region between Pakistan and Afghanistan as well as develop new broadcasts in other strategically important areas. Former VOA deputy director Alan L. Heil, Jr. says if the cuts are approved, VOA English-language radio broadcasts will be essentially reduced to a few hours a day of programming tailored to Africa. “This, as al-Jazeera and Radio Russia launch around-the-clock TV services in English, China Radio International in Beijing plans to create a 24/7 English Internet service, and Iran expands its English broadcasts,” Heil wrote recently in Transnational Broadcasting Studies.
“Information is not today’s scarce resource, attention is,” says Bruce Gregory.
Surveys commissioned by the BBG show Radio Farda is the most widely listened to international broadcaster in Iran. But critics say its music format has undermined its effectiveness. They also say split editorial control by RFE and VOA has muddled its message. BBG officials say it has improved outreach to Iran’s large under-thirty population and the station’s jamming by the Iranian regime shows it is having an impact. Hudson Institute Senior Fellow S. Enders Wimbush, a former director of Radio Liberty, told the House Foreign Affairs Committee in January 2007 the changes at Radio Farda were a result of government neglect. “Iran is easily as resonant a milieu for idea-induced change as, say, Poland or Russia,” Wimbush said, “but unfortunately both the war of ideas and the instruments that gave them life have been largely ignored by this administration.” But U.S. Undersecretary of State R. Nicholas Burns told the same committee in March 2007 that the Farsi-language broadcasts were part of a comprehensive administration strategy aimed at fostering greater understanding between Iranians and Americans.
In a 2006 audit, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) called for more regular reviews (PDF) of programming by both Radio Sawa and Alhurra TV, the U.S.-funded Arabic-language network. The GAO said it was not clear whether Radio Sawa and Alhurra met their targets of audience size because of “weakness” in survey methodology. It faulted the BBG for failing to take steps to clarify its audience estimates. The Board agreed that research could be improved but expressed concern that the GAO “displays a lack of understanding of field conditions and practical considerations that often require departures from ‘textbook’ survey methods.”
The number of listeners to Radio Marti has reportedly dropped in recent years and TV Marti’s audience is negligible. In both cases, BBG officials cite heavy jamming by Cuban authorities. Critics say the broadcasts are not credible for Cubans but others say the jamming efforts prove the Cuban regime fears their impact. “Castro would not take the hugely expensive and intensive efforts to block the Martis’ broadcast signals from reaching Havana if they were not doing their job,” writes Alvin Snyder, a senior fellow at the University of Southern California’s Center on Public Diplomacy.
BBG officials initially focused their retooling of the Middle Eastern broadcast services on raising listenership but have faced continuing questions from auditors like the GAO about measuring their impact. Unlike the days of broadcasting to the closed-off Soviet Bloc, experts say, today’s U.S. broadcasters face competition from a wide-open global media marketplace. “What is different today for the broadcasters as well as everyone else in public diplomacy is that information is not today’s scarce resource, attention is,” says Bruce Gregory, director of the Public Diplomacy Institute at the George Washington University.
“It’s hard enough to fund foreign assistance. Can you see Congress trying to fund an NPR for the world?” asks Mark Helmke.
One traditional goal of U.S. broadcasting, helping other cultures gain an understanding of the United States, seems to have become muddled, says Mark Helmke, a public diplomacy expert and senior Republican staffer on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. “If the goal here is to make them understand the full complexity of America and America’s role in the world and American foreign policy, I don’t think they have the sophistication needed to do that,” says Helmke. Gregory says the BBG needs to go beyond market research and invest in research that tries to determine whether the broadcasts are making a difference.
Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK), the ranking Republican on the Senate Homeland Security Subcommittee on Government Information, recently cited examples of what he said were biased reports from Radio Farda and VOA Persian services that undermined U.S. foreign policy in Iran. He has asked the BBG to provide English-language transcripts of the stations’ programming.
Senator Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-DE), chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, remains a major supporter of U.S. international broadcasting. The appointment process for board governors this year will likely be an indicator of how much support, or attention, broadcasting receives from other senators. According to Helmke, most members of Congress think the broadcast services promote American interests. But a full-fledged debate on the broadcasters’ purpose could result in new scrutiny on their role as information providers, he said, with repercussions for the mission of the BBG. “Congress never intended the broadcasting services to be America’s BBC,” Helmke said. “If the debate in Congress got focused on that, they would lose big time. It’s hard enough to fund foreign assistance. Can you see Congress trying to fund an NPR for the world?”
Weigh in on this issue by emailing CFR.org.
To order Task Force reports, Council Special Reports, and Critical Policy Choices, please call, fax, or order online from our distributor, the Brookings Institution Press: phone +1.800.537.5487, fax +1.410.516.6998.
For information on other reports that are not for sale, or for general publications information, please call +1.212.434.9516 or email publications@cfr.org.
Start-Up Nation addresses the trillion-dollar question: How is it that Israel—a country of 7.1 million, only sixty years old, surrounded by enemies— produces more start-up companies than large, peaceful, and stable nations like Japan, China, India, Korea, Canada, and the UK? With the insights of geopolitical experts and investors, the authors examine this nation’s adversity-driven culture to answer this question and offer prescriptions for a global economy on the rebound.
In Forces of Fortune, Vali Nasr presents a paradigm-changing revelation that will transform the understanding of the Muslim world at large. He reveals that there is a vital but unseen rising force in the Islamic world—a new business-minded middle class—that is building a vibrant new Muslim world economy and that holds the key to winning the cold war against Iran and extremists.
In Cuba: What Everyone Needs to Know, Julia E. Sweig presents a remarkably accessible portrait of Cuba's unique place on the world stage over the past fifty years, including its internal politics, its often fraught relationship with the United States, and its shifting relationship with the global community.
Complete list of CFR Books
The report of this bipartisan Task Force of distinguished leaders and experts represents a strong consensus on the importance of repairing America's immigration policy. It makes the case that maintaining America's political and economic leadership depends on attracting talented and hard-working immigrants, and on securing the country's borders in a smart, effective, and humane way.
This report finds that nuclear weapons will remain a fundamental element of U.S. national security in the near term, and makes recommendations on how to ensure the safety, security, and reliability of the U.S. deterrent nuclear force, prevent nuclear terrorism, and strengthen the nuclear nonproliferation regime.
About Independent Task Forces at CFR
Complete list of Task Force reports
Identifying international threats and acting on them may be the most difficult job for U.S. policymakers. This report
provides an actionable road map for managing international threats before they erupt into crises and makes a strong case that preventive action is not a luxury but a necessity.
For more than a decade, the United States has mostly watched from the sidelines as Asian countries organize themselves into an alphabet soup of new multilateral groups. In this report, the authors review the relationship between pan-Asian and trans-Pacific institutions and suggest policy guidelines for a new U.S. approach to this new Asian landscape.
Complete list of Council Special Reports
To request permission to reprint or reuse CFR material, please fill out this permissions request form (PDF), referring to the instructions on page 1.
Browse Content By Region IssuePublication TypeThe Think TankFor The MediaFor Educators About CFR
Copyright 2009 by the Council on Foreign Relations. All Rights Reserved.
