by The Federalist

“In reality, the actions of the International Broadcasting Bureau (IBB) executives represent US national insecurity: leaving the United States with no broadcast presence in key strategic regions that are known hotbeds of jihadist activities, organizations or operations.  These officials lack the requisite intellectual acumen to understand how vulnerabilities are created in relation to their failed ‘strategic plan.’”

LAST MINUTE UPDATE

Kazakhstan – Chechnya – RFE/RL – IBB

Sexually suggestive videos like this one are a result of the IBB's misguided strategic plan and lack of management control. Targeting largely Muslim Kazakhstan they reinforced anti-American stereotypes and may have encouraged extremism. (These videos were later removed.)

New management at Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty (RFE/RL), appointed by reformist Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) members is now trying to clean up the mess created in large part due to the distorted strategic plan and lack of any prompt management response from the top executives of the International Broadcasting Bureau (IBB) to the crisis in U.S. news outreach to Kazakhstan, Chechnya and Russia.

Kazakhstan: Students Charged with Obstructing Marathon Bombing Probe, EURASIANET.org, RFE/RL

What did International Broadcasting Bureau top executives do?

1. IBB did nothing when last June former Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) management fired experienced Kazakh journalists and eliminated live radio broadcasts to Kazakhstan. They did not alert BBG members that this could become, as it did, a major problem.

2. IBB did nothing when former RFE/RL management produced and posted sexually suggestive videos for audiences in Kazakhstan, a largely conservative and Muslim nation, which produced an outrage and may have encouraged some extremists in their anti-American views. (Offensive videos were later removed.)

3. IBB did nothing as pro-democracy opposition leaders in Kazakhstan began to complain that the Radio Liberty Kazakh website became a tabloid devoid of any significant human rights content.

Interview: North Caucasus Insurgency Was Possible Influence On Boston Suspects, RFE/RL

What did International Broadcasting Bureau top executives do?

1. In the FY 2013 budget request to Congress, IBB proposed to end RFE/RL radio broadcasts to Chechnya, the ancestral homeland of the Boston bombings suspects and to lay off a number of experienced RFE/RL journalists specializing in covering Islamist extremism in the region and countering anti-American propaganda.

2. IBB did nothing as the former RFE/RL management fired dozens of experienced Radio Liberty Russian journalists.

3. IBB failed to alert BBG members to the developing news and information delivery and public diplomacy crisis in Russia, Chechnya, Kazakhstan and in other nations and regions where jihadists operate.

END OF UPDATE

We have temporarily put our FY2014 budget commentaries on hold in order to address a subject of immediate importance:

Boston

April 15, 2013

The Boston Marathon bombing is now part of the story line of the American Experience and will remain so for the rest of our national existence, lest we forget.

By The Numbers:

The human cost: two individuals detonated two explosive devices (pressure cookers loaded with nails and pellets – an Improvised Explosive Device (IED) much like canister rounds used in artillery munitions or as in an antipersonnel Claymore mine).  These homemade explosive devices had the same effect of anti-personnel munitions: to inflict maximum casualties when detonated at close range.  These devices achieved the intended results: three deaths (plus that of a security officer during the manhunt that followed), over one hundred wounded including those who suffered serious traumatic injuries to arms and legs.

The financial cost: public funds spent mobilizing the Boston area emergency medical facilities and response personnel, the mobilization of local, state and federal law enforcement and last, the lockdown of the Boston area – in its effect, walking very close to the imposition of martial law.

Thus, the city of Boston already well-established in American history will add this incident to its historical record: the first successful terrorist attack on the American homeland since September 11, 2001.

The repercussions of this incident and its aftermath will represent many millions of dollars, the lingering trauma to the families of those killed and wounded and another level of wariness for a weary American citizenry (weary and not really fully understanding the nature or depth of the threat).

And there is more.

Federal, state and local authorities must now revise their plans for dealing with international terrorism directed against US citizens and others (the Boston Marathon includes international participants), expand the scenarios of domestic target vulnerabilities and settle on new countermeasures and surveillance techniques.

Approaching the twelfth anniversary of September 11, 2001 we find that we are not as secure as we hoped and a successful prosecution of and/or conclusion to the war against international jihadists remains elusive.

IBB Response and Aftermath

[We are making a distinction here between the remaining presidentially-appointed active Broadcasting Board of Governors members who have started the process of reforming Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty and International Broadcasting Bureau executives who nominally work for BBG members and American taxpayers but in reality behave as if they are in charge of the agency. It is these IBB executives who are resisting reforms initiated by current active BBG members. They are defiant and ungovernable. In addition to resistance from IBB officials, actions undertaken recently by BBG Governors are being hampered by the prolonged and unexplained absence from Board meetings of Interim Presiding Governor Michael Lynton. Without him, the BBG Board has no quorum and can't force reforms at IBB. ]

Along with major news outlets, the Voice of America got burned by an erroneous report, attributed to a sole source, that arrests were imminent on the day of the bombings.  Those arrests never materialized.  Sources indicate that some of the VOA news personnel were skeptical of relying on a “sole source.”  Nonetheless, VOA ran with the report, following the herd.

It is bad enough that the commercial media blew it.  It is worse when the agency follows suit.  One must remember that the Voice of America is supposed to represent the United States to the world.  In short: reporting has to be right the first time and hopefully every time.

Unfortunately, this is a standard that is falling by the wayside, according to dispirited agency broadcasters who, for example, confront on an all-too-often occurrence mistakenly reworked headlines to their stories appearing on the agency’s websites beginning with its English language website.

These lapses belie a more serious problem: the effort by the International Broadcasting Bureau (IBB) to substantially reduce the presence of the Voice of America (VOA) broadcast programs and eliminate the Central Newsroom.  The Newsroom which represents a core agency operation has been repeatedly and specifically targeted for cuts to staff, along with cuts to broadcast time for Worldwide English programs.  The staff is under-resourced.  Staff members have used the word “schizophrenic” to describe how news stories are processed.  An under-resourced core operation means an increased likelihood that formerly solid news practices are being diluted and standards lowered de facto – the perfect incubator for more, not fewer, errors.

As to the events of April 15, 2013 and beyond:

According to our sources, the agency responded to the Boston Marathon bombings by producing reports from the scene and elsewhere, assembling broadcasters and production personnel for the assignment.

In addition, the agency sent out one of its press releases touting a number of employees described as “experts” on Chechnya, the birthplace and homeland of the suspects Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev.

The death of Tamerlan Tsarnaev and capture of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev wrapped up the main portion of the national public focus on the event.

Afterward, VOA Executive Editor sent out an email to agency employees.  Starting with the salutation “Friends,” he proceeded to praise the agency’s coverage of events in and around Boston.

[Please note the “Friends” salutation.  Perhaps this was a suggestion from the Partnership for Public Service, along the same lines as another Third Floor favorite, “Colleagues.”  The people on the Third Floor of the Cohen Building are neither.  Review the IBB FY2014 budget request: asking for less money and doing less as the IBB careerists continue to hack away at the agency’s core mission and broadcast operations.  Many employees recognize the hypocrisy; with “friends” like these...]

While perhaps intended to salvage some measure of the agency’s collapsed employee morale, the email appeared to have had the opposite effect.

The email set off a firestorm involving the author, one of the declared “experts” on Chechnya and the service chief of the language service where the expert is assigned, with everyone who was copied on the original email provided a front row seat.

In essence, the staffer complained of being under-utilized during the event, feeling it would have been better to be on site during the Boston attacks and police dragnet, rather than sitting it out in Washington, fielding a few phone calls from press contacts looking for people on the ground in the Boston area to interview.

And that is not the end of it.

Since the emails got wide circulation, other employees chimed in with their own opinions among themselves.  From what we’ve seen, none were positive and many not at all flattering.  Conditions inside Voice of America have devolved to the point that employee angst is now making its way into widely circulated emails, a service chief stepping up to do “CYA” and top VOA executive having to issue an additional email in an attempt to dampen the uproar created with his original email.

Even in the dysfunctional, defunct and generally hostile work environment created by the senior agency management, this is an extraordinary demonstration of finger-pointing.

[By the way, the offended agency employee was sent on a detail to Boston with a production crew to do “follow-up.”]

Our sources also offer the view that one of the things sorely lacking in the current rendition of the VOA Central Newsroom is one or more staffers covering national security affairs, someone with a well-rounded portfolio of contacts and experts to call upon for events such as the one in Boston.

By comparison:

We have said it before and will say it again: Washington, DC radio station WTOP has one of the top national security correspondents in US broadcasting: JJ Green.  His sources are high value and his reports are insightful, penetrative and understandable.  They are archived as both print and audio files on the WTOP website.

In short, what a local Washington, DC area radio station can do, seemingly the international broadcasting agency of the US Government cannot.

Alienation/Disaffection: Causes and Effects

The older of the two Boston Marathon bombing suspects, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, is said to have once remarked that he had no American friends and that he didn’t understand Americans.

If you want a sterling example of the failure of the agency and its strategic misdirection, this is it.

The agency has done several things to set itself on this course:

First, it has continued to further erode its broadcast coverage to many parts of the world.  This is a critical failure: creating a vacuum to be filled by others with messages and ideologies hostile to the United States. In China, Tibet, Russia, Chechnya, Kazakhstan, Tatarstan, Turkmenistan and so on.

Second, it has allowed itself to be outplayed by the Chinese, Russians, Iranians and others who are blocking agency broadcasts and websites outright, controlling access to its programs through cyber countermeasures, on some occasions being targeted by specific organizations (the Iranian Cyber Army) for cyber attacks and in other cases having its ability to reach audiences with substantive news programming curtailed in the intended target area through the establishment of laws prohibiting the dissemination of news by international broadcasters.

Third, it has fallen into a trap of its own making, perhaps influenced by a disturbing trend in Western media.  In short, the agency no longer adheres to the provisions of the VOA Charter.  Instead, the agency now embraces naive advocacy.  This isn’t journalism or the war of ideas.  What the agency advocates, “support of freedom and democracy,” should be an intended outcome of its programming choices, not a marketing strategy.  And therein lays the great weakness, the trap and the ultimate strategic failure.

There is nothing wrong with effective “support of freedom and democracy.” It comes naturally if there is outstanding journalism. But IBB strategic planners have made sexually suggestive videos and pop Western music the centerpiece of “support of freedom and democracy” to the Muslim world. They confused Western marketing to a Western audience like themselves with what should be the strategy of using objective, skeptical journalism to help strengthen freedom and democracy instead of preaching about it through music and videos.

Senior agency officials – most notoriously those who shill for the agency’s “flim flam, Soviet-style, dysfunctional and defunct strategic plan” – treat “supporting freedom and democracy” like a commodity – a one-size-fits-all, do-it-yourself kit with universal application.  Ultimately, with this skewed world view, these hucksters have set the United States up to fail with global publics.

In an op-ed piece appearing in the Outlook section of The Washington Post on Sunday, April 28, 2013 (“The second American century?  It’s already here”), Council on Foreign Relations president Richard Haass notes that in order to solidify this position for the United States in the 21^st century, one of the things we have to come to grips with is: “…accepting that we cannot remake other societies in our image.”

The people on the Third Floor of the Cohen Building who like to utter their “supporting freedom and democracy” mantra leave a great deal out of the equation.  Uttering this mantra ad nausea does not make it real.  While “freedom and democracy” are high value political, social and economic concepts, they also require eternal vigilance and high maintenance.  Absent those beliefs or an historical record of those beliefs, “freedom and democracy” are alien concepts or are interpreted – often negatively – on the strength of other actions – including military operations which produce collateral damage among non-combatants. Playing music and showing funny videos is not going to fix the problem. Accurate, objective news and information, hard hitting journalism, and intellectual commentary might do it in the long run.

Fourth, along with a naive advocacy bent to its unsophisticated editorial content, the agency has also embraced what we call a “kumbaya” posture toward global publics.  The worst example of this is with Radio Sawa – where a programming philosophy was adopted to play pop music to Arab youth and use that “hook” as the basis to get Arab and Muslim youth to like us, identify with us and be like us. Music can be an element of good programming focused on personalities rather than music alone, but it cannot be a strategic element.

Another example of this “kumbaya” programming is a program called “Middle East Voices” in which the apparent intent is to identify with the Arab and Muslim world, seemingly lumping Sunni, Shiite and other sects into some kind of agency self-willed potpourri of peoples without regard to issues specific to each.

[Let’s all join hands and sing, “We Are The World”]

In both cases, it isn’t working and is likely never going to work because it trivializes hundreds of years of history often filled with bloody conflict.

The IBB is into denial on a fundamental, basic level:

Many of these people simply do not want to be like us, do not identify with us or do not want to embrace our lifestyle and cultural choices.  These same people will go to extraordinary lengths to defend their beliefs and reject ours.  These people have closed their minds to us and no amount of hectoring from the IBB ideologues is going to change that.  In fact, it makes things worse (offensive videos with sexually suggestive content).

The two alleged suspects in the Boston Marathon bombing fit that mold, including the older brother, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, who appears to have traveled back to the Caucasus region in the Russian Federation then returning to the US seemingly with his apparent jihadist views validated.  He was prepared to act.

More IBB Nonsense

The hucksters of the IBB like to lay the claim that they are part of the national security apparatus of the United States.

They are not.

In reality, the actions of the International Broadcasting Bureau (IBB) executives represent US national insecurity: leaving the United States with no broadcast presence in key strategic regions that are known hotbeds of jihadist activities, organizations or operations.  These officials lack the requisite intellectual acumen to understand how vulnerabilities are created in relation to their failed “strategic plan.”

Another point:

An IBB urban myth – in support of its effort to push through the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act, the IBB made the argument that with the changes in the law, the agency would now be able to reach ethnic audiences within the United States.

First, these audiences have been reachable via the Internet and agency websites for many years and any US radio or TV station could have already legally taken and legally rebroadcast any Voice of America program found on the Internet.

Second, and more importantly, the IBB has lost sight of an important point of Americana:

These ethnic communities have come to the United States for one common reason: to remove themselves from adverse conditions in their homelands — the vast majority of members of these communities.

These homelands have names: Syria, Darfur, Chechnya among others.

Reaching these people with news about their homelands is one thing.  But for the purposes of our American society, the top priority for these communities is participation in the American Experience: inclusion and not exclusion.  Anyone remotely familiar with these communities knows – and the historical record validates – that the top priority is moving forward.  With each new generation, what we should work toward and hope for is that these communities become better educated, more successful, more inclusive into the American mainstream.

These American communities are not the problem. The problem is abroad: countries on which IBB strategic planners should concentrate but instead are cutting programs and eliminating journalistic positions while expanding their own bureaucracy in the United States.

The agency’s mission is abroad, not in the United States.

And this is in our national interest.

It is not in our national interest to have communities or individuals within those communities who feel isolated, alienated, who cannot make serious cultural adjustments to balance ethnic or religious identity with the broader American culture.  This is not always an easy fit.  At times, what we consider to be “freedom and democracy” appear to those from more traditional societies to be an excuse for licentiousness and excess (again, offensive and sexually suggested videos for Kazakhstan).

And that is what leads to incidents like –

Boston

April 15, 2013

We do not need more people who believe that they have no American friends and who don’t understand Americans, as in the case of Tamerlan Tsarnaev.

And one of the reasons publics abroad feel this way is because US Government international broadcasting has fallen off the rails at the hands of venal, self-interested opportunists within the IBB making decisions that have diminished impact with global audiences. Despite getting larger and larger budgets from Congress almost every year, these IBB executives have not expanded BBG’s global audience since at least 2008. Having failed to grow audiences abroad, this may explain great eagerness of IBB executives to force their ineffective programs on Americans.

They have to go.  No matter how hard they resist, stonewall and engage in acts of gross insubordination to direction from the reformist members of the Broadcasting Board of Governors, this IBB cabal has to go.

Their track record has made US Government international broadcasting:

Dysfunctional, defunct and ungovernable.

[This is deviant administrative behavior by a group of government bureaucrats at its worst.  For the Obama administration, the name of the game is this: if you don’t fix it, you tolerate and condone it.  And that is unacceptable.  The IBB is not a group of poster boys and girls for the best of American Federal governance.]

In closing his op-ed piece in The Washington Post, Richard Haass offers the following:

“The alternative to a U.S.- led 21^st century is not an era dominated by China or anyone else, but rather a chaotic time in which regional and global problems overwhelm the world’s collective will and ability to meet them.

Americans would not be safe or prosperous in such a world.  One Dark Ages was one too many; the last thing we need is another.”

Indeed.

The IBB strategic plan serves to facilitate and enable a New Dark Ages.  This plan has created strategic vacuums eagerly filled by others with a very different message for global publics. China – Tibet – Russia – Chechnya – Kazakhstan are nations to which IBB strategic planners cut or proposed to cut programs and programming positions while making their bureaucratic operation the largest single segment of the Broadcasting Board of Governors’ budget (35%).

The Federalist

May 2013

Broadcasting Board of Governors - Information War Lost - Dysfunctional and Defunct  - The FY2014 Budget

by The Federalist

On Wednesday, April 10, 2013 the White House released its FY2014 budget request.

For US Government international broadcasting and the employees who engage in the effort, it is more bad news.  It is yet another sterling example that the International Broadcasting Bureau (IBB) is taking the US Government out of the business of international broadcasting to global publics.

Before we get into the intended bloodletting, it is important to note that this is the White House’s budget “proposal.”  What actually comes out of the budget via the appropriations and authorization processes in Congress remains to be seen.  Most certainly, the budget will be discussed and debated, with numbers kicked around by the House and Senate and in conference work between the two.  The agency’s principal employee union, AFGE Local 1812, should also weigh in with its position on the budget proposal.  In addition, interested parties outside the government, including BBG Watch, will lend additional commentary.  In short, much work remains to be done.

That said, we note a comment made by Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) member Michael Meehan as quoted in a BBG press release dated April 10, 2013:

“Some of these changes, if enacted, will be very difficult on the men and women involved,” Meehan said.  “We will do everything possible to minimize the impact on our employees through agency buyouts, early-out authority and reducing positions via attrition.”

Governor Meehan is right on target with the first part of his statement.  It will be a traumatizing experience for the employees and contractors who work in the agency, should the budget be enacted to the letter of the White House proposal.  If this happens, in an agency known for being “the worst organization in the Federal Government,” the likely effect is that it will compound the agency’s problems and make the agency even more insufferable in its shortcomings, internally and externally.

With the second part of the statement, Governor Meehan notes intended actions to minimize the impact of the budget proposal.  This will require action on the part of the Federal government’s Office of Personnel Management (OPM) through an agency request to offer buyouts and early retirements.

Even so, while the early retirement and buyout authorizations are positives, they still reflect that the agency’s actions are having an adverse impact on its workforce and its operations.  And the buyout and early retirement authority only applies to the agency’s Federal workers, not its contractors – a group of employees that the agency relies heavily upon to carry out its operations.

Nonetheless, we acknowledge Governor Meehan for his candor – much needed from an agency noted for the lack thereof, particularly at the hands of the IBB.

The agency’s budget request totals 144 pages.  That’s a lot to digest.  For the present, we will offer an overview of some things that jump off the pages of the document.

By The Numbers

The agency’s FY2014 budget request is for $731-million dollars.  By comparison, the agency’s enacted FY2013 budget was for $756-million dollars.  Comparing the two, the FY2014 budget is for $25-million dollars less than its FY2013 budget.

Asking for less fiscal resources is the kind of thing that raises eyebrows.  To those of us who follow the agency’s “flim flam Soviet-style dysfunctional and defunct strategic plan,” the outward appearance is that this is yet further indication that the IBB is getting out of the business of US Government international broadcasting.

Presently, the agency’s estimated worldwide audience on all media platforms (including radio, television, the Internet) is hovering around 175-million – out of a global population of 7-BILLION.  In our view, less money equates with less audience and less effectiveness in reaching that audience, particularly when coupled with other agency actions detailed below.

The budget request includes the statement,

“Freedom House notes that 2013 is the seventh consecutive year that declines in worldwide freedom have outpaced advances.”

The budget request states that the agency’s mission is in support of freedom and democracy.  That is not the agency’s primary mission; delivering uncensored news, information and commentary that would result enhancing freedom is the agency’s primary mission.  Mentioning freedom and democracy while failing to increase audiences since at least 2008 is the sales pitch coming from the cartoon strategists of the IBB.  It sounds great, like many sales pitches.  But the proof is in the product delivered.

[Note: The agency’s mission is codified in the VOA Charter.  Read it and you will understand what the agency’s mission is.  “Supporting freedom and democracy” is a subjective outcome.  But it is also an outcome that can be measured and is being measured by others.  Measurements that we provide herein demonstrate that the IBB’s intended outcome has failed.]

Juxtaposing the agency’s statement with the data supplied by Freedom House, one can reach the conclusion that the agency isn’t delivering the goods.  Indeed, it appears to be losing ground.  Add to that the agency’s budget request – something of a form of fiscal self-flagellation – you wonder about the frame of reasoning applied to the request.  Indeed, “reason” may be an oxymoron in this case.

On its face, it appears to be yet another example of agency dysfunction that former Secretary of State Clinton referred to at the time she left office.

Moving on:

Here’s another statement from the budget proposal:

“For 2012-2016, the BBG’s core strategic goal is to become the world’s leading international news agency focused on mission and impact – i.e., to reach key audiences in support of free, open democratic societies.  The agency’s principal performance goal is to reach 216 million in global weekly audience by 2016.”

Wowser!

The long and the short of this statement is that present realities make this statement delusional.

Let’s return to the numbers: an audience target of 216-million in 2016 out of a global population of 7-BILLION.  Also consider that the agency’s audience numbers with its present broadcast operations are tanking; NO INCREASE OF AUDIENCE SINCE 2008 despite larger budgets almost every year since 2008 until now.  Let’s also keep in mind that this agency has been around for 70 years.  Its current dismal showing may indicate the agency and its message are either worn out or (more likely) subverted by IBB decisions.

Who are the “key audiences?”  Certainly, we would include China, Iran and Russia.  But those audiences are approaching extinction through a combination of blocked BBG broadcasts, domestic Chinese, Russian and Iranian controls over the Internet or internal IBB acts of self-destruction as in the case of the Russian Service of Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty (RFE/RL).

What this statement amounts to is sloganeering – seemingly picking a number out of thin air to correlate to a calendar year – something one suspects as coming out of the IBB marketing apparatus or its Office of Digital Design and Innovation. We would not be surprised if they plan to start measuring and reporting their audience in the United States, marketing programs to Americans instead to audiences abroad, spending U.S. taxpayers’ money on domestic marketing of news and information. They were pushing hard for a repeal of the Smith-Mundt Act restrictions on domestic marketing of programs and they got it.

As a practical matter, this kind of “growth” amounts to zero growth.  It doesn’t take into consideration that the agency is being tossed around like a rag doll by the Chinese, Iranians, Russians and others.  Right from the start, three key audiences can be factored out of the equation.  IBB decisions have both facilitated and accelerated the process.

Let’s add to that the diminished impact of US Government broadcasts to the Arab and Muslim world.  That part of the equation has taken what appears to be a hard turn toward fundamentalism.  Freedom and democracy are hard sell concepts in a part of the world with no history of the Western practice of both.  This is a world which can speak to an alternative world view: monarchies, dictatorships and theocracies – and well over a millennium in the practice of all.

[Note: Want another example of  failure in the Arab and Muslim world?

Preliminary reports indicate the suspects in the recent bombings at the Boston Marathon were originally from Chechnya, a region in the Russian republic with an active, global jihadist insurrection.

Proposed Chechnya Program Cuts in BBG's FY 2013 Budget Request

But that is not all. International Broadcasting Bureau executives and former Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty managers proposed last year to ELIMINATE RFE/RL RADIO PROGRAMS TO CHECHNYA and to cut the number of journalists reporting on terrorism and other issues in the North Caucasus region. They did not succeed on Chechnya due to strong opposition in Congress and elsewhere, but they DID SUCCEED in firing dozens of experienced Russian journalists who reported on the same issues in Russian, a language widely spoken in the region. Firing journalists in Putin’s Russia and proposing to cut programs to Chechnya shows how utterly clueless these executives are.]

And consider this:

The Chinese have a budget in the range of $8-BILLION dollars for its global media initiative.  Actions speak louder than words and the Chinese are making themselves heard.  When one wants to use the phrase “world’s leading international news agency focused on mission and impact,” put the Chinese at the top of the list, not the also-rans on the Third Floor of the Cohen Building.

As we call it, this is “motion without movement.”  We already know this:

If the budget request reflects the IBB strategic valuation, the agency is already bankrupt.

Blood on the Floor – By the Numbers

According to sources inside the Cohen Building, the following is what the IBB proposes not to be doing in FY2014 regarding Voice of America (VOA) operations:

Greek Service: eliminated (4 positions)

Georgian Service: 4 positions cut (including 1 unfilled vacancy)

Cuts to broadcasts to Afghanistan (10 positions cut, 5 are vacant)

Albanian Service (3 positions cut, 1 is vacant)

Eliminate front office personnel for Near East and Central Asia divisions (6 positions)

Cuts to Spanish to Latin America and Creole to Haiti (8 positions cut, between 6 and 9 vacancies

Urdu radio broadcasts: eliminated (4 positions)

Persian News Network (PNN): radio to Iran eliminated (4 positions)

And the main targets:

Worldwide English: 11 positions cut including 7 vacancies

VOA Central Newsroom: 24 positions cut, 20 which are vacant

Sources also report that $2-million dollars will be cut from funds designated for contractors.  Some estimates put this as equivalent to 30 contractor positions.

[Please note that even though positions are vacant, in budgetary calculations, those positions are funded in order to be filled.  Cut the vacant positions and the funding for filling those positions also evaporates.]

Even though the agency may seek buy-out and early retirement authority – as alluded to by Governor Meehan in his remarks in the agency press release – these must be approved by the Office of Personnel Management [OPM]).  It is somewhat unclear whether or not the agency will get approval because of government sequestration.

On its face:

These proposed adverse actions are inconsistent with an organization that claims its intention:

“…is to become the world’s leading international news agency focused on mission and impact – i.e., to reach key audiences in support of free, open democratic societies…”

This is a specious claim – like so much that comes from the IBB.  Based on the IBB’s intended actions, these claims appear to divert attention away from its true goal: to take the United States Government out of the business of international broadcasting.

It is bad enough that these IBB types are hypocrites.  Even more, they are something far worse, as evidenced by their scurrilous public attacks against agency employees and members of the BBG.

Add to the list of specious claims the one about creating a “global news network.”  This IBB budget proposal for VOA specifically attacks core radio operations including Worldwide English and the VOA Central Newsroom.

As it is now, in the ongoing effort to destroy Newsroom effectiveness, the daily process of reporting news is being described among employees as “schizophrenic:” not being able to cover breaking news and events in a timely fashion.  One should not expect things to improve for the better in the Central Newsroom.

And worse: the agency appears to be abandoning a core journalistic principle of obtaining double sources on news stories.  As recently as the Boston Marathon bombings, the agency got burned – as did other news organizations – by relying on a single “source” who claimed that arrests were imminent in the immediate aftermath of the bombings.

The FY2014 budget request clearly intends to continue the assault on agency radio operations.  Over half of whatever meager audience the agency has remaining for its programs exists on radio.  Kill off the radio and the only thing the agency is doing is spending an exorbitant amount of taxpayer money on an exercise in futility.

And we are getting closer by the day to that moment.

Last but definitely not least:

Remember what we’ve said about the IBB – how they obsess over something they want.  In addition to killing off the agency’s radio broadcasts, their budget proposal includes a request for the establishment of a CEO – a chief executive officer, which they would mold to be a “chief execution officer,” the person to carry out the IBB agenda.

We’ve made this plain before:

At this juncture – and given the nature of the IBB – no CEO is going to save the place and in the wrong hands would likely hasten its demise.

Period.

Particularly when the top priority of the IBB is their venal self-interest and not the national and public interest.

Even if the BBG were to appoint a CEO, there is no guarantee that the individual in that position would survive the conspiratorial and vicious behavior of the IBB after the BBG members who appointed the CEO leave the board and are replaced.

But if you want it to work:

The first order of business is to remove the entire top tier of the IBB, systematically working down through the incompetence and corruption.  It can be done.  It will require an iron constitution but it can be done.

Short message to the BBG: you want a CEO to be your enforcer, not a lackey of the IBB.

Do that and the agency might have a chance to reconstitute its reputation and mission effectiveness.  Don’t do this and the only thing left to do is close the agency and stop wasting taxpayer by keeping the place on life support for the IBB.

Not surprisingly, however, we hear now that IBB’s top leaders are actively preventing BBG members from hiring their own executive officer or a chief of staff.

See: Top IBB officials are preventing hiring of an interim executive officer for BBG, undermine national security.

We’re not exactly holding our breath for a positive.

Remember: this is the worst organization in the Federal Government and one of the worst places to work in the Federal Government.

(Next: Blood On The Floor – David Ensor Speaks – Again)

The Federalist

April 2013

by The Federalist

Snapshot of Voice of America website under cyber attack by Iranian hackers in 2011.

Anyone who has held a position in the stock market may be familiar with a term brokers use called “stupid news.”

“Stupid news” generally refers to talk on the floor of the market or elsewhere that creates swings in investor moods.  It can trigger both euphoria and hysteria depending on the “news,” with stock prices reacting accordingly.  And with almost all market transactions now in the hands of computer programs, it can result in wild fluctuations that virtually feed on themselves, both in the buying and selling of stock positions.  Oftentimes, the “news” bears no relation to reality.

Another example might be found in a book published many years ago titled, “Dow 36,000.”  Here, it was postulated that the market would reach this stratospheric high seemingly in the lifetime of the reader.  Theoretically, that may be a possibility.  However, as a probability maybe not – and hasn’t happened yet since the book was published.  As we know all too well many factors influence the US stock market, oftentimes conditions beyond our borders.  It’s a nice thought to have the US markets reach such giddy heights, but it is also a good example of how a positive – like a negative – can play on human emotions and impair reasoned decisions.

On March 18, 2013 the Broadcasting Board of Governors/International Broadcasting Bureau (BBG/IBB) issued a press release (“Website Showcasing News From Around the World Debuts Today”).

In essence, the agency has created a website that links to all other websites managed by entities under the control of the BBG/IBB.  The press release refers to this website as a “GNN dashboard” for all BBG/IBB websites, the “GNN” being “global news network.”

Maybe we missed something, but the question we have is: why is this needed?

If someone is already familiar with BBG/IBB websites, why do they need to go through this additional step in search of news and information?

It doesn’t seem necessary or sensible to us.

Let’s delve deeper:

The Not-So-Hidden Agenda

We need to remember that one of the central goals of the IBB’s “flim flam, Soviet-style, dysfunctional and defunct strategic plan” is to create a grandiose “global news network.”  Let’s say it again in the style of the carnival pitch artists on the Third Floor of the Cohen Building:

Global News Network!!!

Like, BIG, baby.  Big, grand and well –

B-A-L-O-N-E-Y.

If you look at the “GNN dashboard” in this manner, the tactic at play here is to sell the concept.  The selling is not so much to the agency’s Internet audience – its smallest and like the rest of the agency’s audience’s, heading south for the fiscal year if not beyond.

More than likely, the intended audience for the pitch would be the folks on Capitol Hill.

We know these IBB folks very, very well.  Once they latch onto something, they don’t let go.  They obsess over it.  Even when the agency is tanking, they continue to come up with a snake oil salesman’s pitch with the latest cure-all for the agency’s ills – much of which they are responsible for inflicting in the first place.

The “GNN dashboard” is a far cry from the Third Floor hype of a couple years ago concerning a “global news network.”  But it keeps the “global news network” goal alive.

Selling the grand scheme of “global news network” has proven to be problematic – as well it should when one considers the track record of the IBB plan and its enduring legacy: being dysfunctional and almost certainly defunct.

The Congress doesn’t have the time and the American taxpayer doesn’t have the money to keep the IBB on life support.  The underlying issues surrounding the sequestration or the “fiscal cliff” are not some overnight passing phenomenon.  They will be around for the foreseeable future.  The Congress would correctly be hesitant to endorse any scheme concocted inside the Cohen Building that seemingly has only one known outcome – perpetuating and expanding the self-aggrandizing IBB bureaucracy at the expense of mission effectiveness.  And it will cost many more millions of American taxpayer dollars doing little to accomplish the agency’s mission.

These IBB people are dangerous – and one of the ways they are dangerous is they have no sense of accountability for how they spend American taxpayer money – yours and mine.

Right out of the gate, the press release talks about “breaking international news gathered by one of the world’s most extensive networks of journalists can now be found in one place thanks to a new online initiative of the Broadcasting Board of Governors.”

That amused those of us familiar with the travails of the Voice of America (VOA) Central Newsroom where “breaking news” seems to fall to the bottom of the priority list.  When members of the Newsroom staff use the word “schizophrenic” to describe how news flow is “managed,” there are some serious problems afoot.  That is what the Newsroom has become, where people are overworked, lack proper resources and get poor or no effective direction to the overall effort.  And let us not forget the machinations of the Third Floor and its Office of Program Review acolytes who seemingly want their names attached to dissolving the Newsroom, a so-called “action plan.”

Feel the dysfunction, the schizophrenia.

Don’t Worry, It Gets Worse

Snap quiz from the discussion above: When we are talking about the Internet – what do you think is the weakest medium among radio, television and the Internet for BBG broadcasts?

We’ll give you three guesses:

Internet.

Internet.

Internet.

Why is that?

There are a variety of reasons.  We’ll settle on a couple:

One would be that it is the most diluted of the three.  You don’t need a license to have a website – and someone can call themselves their own “global news network.”  At the very least, there are millions more websites worldwide, many purporting to be news sites.  The agency is clearly not making a substantive impact on the basis of its websites because of the explosion of alternative sites for “news.”

But perhaps more importantly, the agency’s “geniuses” have maneuvered US Government international broadcasting out of the strategic arena.  Places where the voice of the American government needs to be heard –

Isn’t.

Certainly not very well.

You guessed it: the BBG/IBB is comatose and just about dead in China and Iran – on all mediums, but particularly the Internet.  Why?  Because these governments have control on the “input” switch.  If they don’t want your website to be accessible they can block you and do it very well. The same in Russia with radio and TV. Mr. Putin can also block the Internet if he wants to.

And if it is necessary to make the point clearer, they can and will engage in cyber warfare operations just to let you know who has the better game in town.

Don’t forget, it was the Iranian Cyber Army that knocked down all VOA websites a couple years ago for over FIVE HOURS, substituting them with a screenshot in Farsi and English telling then-Secretary of State Clinton to buzz off – with the Iranian flag wafting in the cyber breeze and an image of an AK-47 standing by.

And that AK-47 wasn’t there for artistic effect alone.  These guys are playing hardball.  They see what they are doing as waging war.  One wonders if anyone inside the Cohen Building gets it.  Our conclusion is: probably not.  And that makes them even more dangerous – in that special way the combination of arrogance, venality and stupidity have.

Then too, let us not forget the Chinese.  Their main cyber warfare operations based in Shanghai are part of the Peoples Liberation Army (PLA).  They are state of the art and they’re going 24/7.  And they’re good.

Very, very good.

In short, the agency is playing to its weaknesses, not its strengths.  The results are predictable.

[And if you are the intelligence analysts in China, Iran and Russia, you have to be feeling pretty darn good.  Those people on the Third Floor of the Cohen Building are doing exactly what you want them to be doing.  Indeed, IBB actions probably exceed the scenarios in the simulation exercises created by these analysts.  And when necessary, some well-played offensive cyber warfare adds a little insurance that the IBB continues to be stymied on the path it has chosen.]

Should the agency have an Internet presence?  Yes, it should.  But these Third Floor types take their characterization of that presence to an extreme that has no basis in reality.  When your overall audience is down to about 175 million (out of a global population of 7-BILLION) and your own Internet figures show that portion of the audience to be about 10-million – AND your overall numbers continue to slide off a cliff, you have a big-time problem.

With a precipitous loss of audience, what was once a solid US Government international broadcasting effort has been reduced to the margins, relegated to sloganeering and self-praise.  It is tawdry and pathetic.

Here’s an example:

“It’s such a simple tool, but it will have a resounding effect,” said Robert Bole, director of BBG’s Office of Digital and Design Innovation. “Bringing all these sources of information together makes a powerful statement about this agency and the way we do business.  We’re so much greater than just the sum of our parts.”

That’s right from the BBG/IBB press release.

You will have to pardon us while we smirk.

We already know how these guys do business: like Enron.

A statement like the one above is nothing more than stupid news – self-serving big talk for something that is nothing more than a pass-through website for the smoke and mirrors trickery of the IBB’s dysfunctional, defunct and just plain worthless strategic plan.

Finally,

We are firm believers in the agency’s mission.  It is valid today as it was over seventy years ago.

Unfortunately, that mission has been compromised, undermined and polluted by that IBB cabal on the Third Floor of the Cohen Building who has made it plain that their top priority is themselves.  As a result the mission has failed and is no longer recoverable in a manner or timeframe that is reasonable or fiscally responsible.

Any group of individuals who act assiduously to undermine corrective measures to reverse the negative consequences of their actions – as was clearly demonstrated by the unmistakable IBB imprint on the recent Office of Inspector General (OIG) report – are incapable of doing what needs to be done to put US Government international broadcasting on solid ground.

With this as our realization, we are now solidly of the same views articulated by former Secretary Clinton.  The agency is most definitely dysfunctional and defunct.

The agency has been failing and doing so for some time.  It is also evident that the Obama administration is not going to step in and take deep, serious remedial action.  It appears to be content to let it bungle along and continue to fail.

Rather than endure for the remainder of the Obama administration for this disaster to play out further, it is time to put this agency to rest, close it and do so now.

The Federalist

March 2013

BBG Press Release

Website Showcasing News From Around The World Debuts Today

Washington, DC – Breaking international news gathered by one of the world’s most extensive networks of journalists can now be found in one place thanks to a new online initiative by the Broadcasting Board of Governors.

Today marks the launch of the BBG’s Global News Dashboard, which pulls together the English-language news from the more than 50 bureaus, production centers and offices supported by the agency’s staff journalists and more than 1500 stringers around the globe.

“This site showcases the depth and reach of the high-quality journalism that the BBG produces,” said Richard M. Lobo, director of the BBG’s International Broadcasting Bureau.  “There are millions of English-speakers worldwide who get their news from the individual websites of our broadcasters.  It makes sense to pool our resources and put them to work to serve our audiences even better.”

The new site’s English-language content will come from Voice of America, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, and Radio Free Asia. Users who access stories will be directed to the original content on the sites of the three broadcasters. The Global News Dashboard also will include links to original content in Spanish of Radio/TV Martí and the Arabic-language online offerings of the Middle East Broadcasting Networks.

Before development of the Dashboard, people interested in the work of the BBG would have to visit the websites of five separate broadcasters. This tool, built on the Pangea content management system developed by RFE/RL and used by the majority of BBG’s broadcasters to power their websites, makes that search easier.

“It’s such a simple tool, but it will have a resounding effect,” said Robert Bole, director of BBG’s Office of Digital and Design Innovation. “Bringing all these sources of information together makes a powerful statement about this agency and the way we do business.  We’re so much greater than just the sum of our parts.”

The Global News Dashboard can be found at http://www.globalnewsdashboard.com.

BBG members with IBB Director Richard Lobo and Deputy Director Jeff Trimble

Broadcasting Board of Governors - Information War Lost - IBB: The Babble-Rama
by The Federalist

Before we get to the “main event,” some -

Breaking News!

A couple of weeks ago, the agency announced a new Chief Financial Officer (CFO).

Guess what?

Gone!  Not even the shortest tenure in that position in the agency on record. The candidate did not report for duty.

Why?

We don’t know.  However, for our friends in Congress and at the White House, all kinds of alarms should be going off:

Just how bad are the agency’s financial accounting practices?  How messed up is the agency’s money situation, particularly as it heads into sequestration?  Last and definitely not least – has there been some hanky-panky involving agency funds?

By now, we all know this agency very well and its deserved reputation – via its embedded International Broadcasting Bureau (IBB) careerists – the worst organization in the Federal Government.  Never assume any positives about the place or the people running it.  Leave no stone unturned.

I-N-V-E-S-T-I-G-A-T-E.

Yes, this agency screams for some serious investigations.  Right at the top of the list, as we’ve said before –

Follow The Money

We’ll say it again –

Follow The Money!

You never know – you may want to have some Federal marshals standing by.

A serious investigation needs to get rolling sooner rather than later.

Another person who probably wishes he could say, “Hasta la vista, baby!” is Richard Lobo, the IBB executive director.  Unfortunately for his political fortunes, his “stewardship” of the agency has splattered the administration with a whole lot of dirt it doesn’t need or want.  As a result, if and until we learn otherwise, Mr. Lobo appears to be suffering from a form of political internal exile.  He is likely seen as being too radioactive to move out of the Cohen Building and send elsewhere.  The reputation of the place which has been passed along to him will be ever-present, doggedly, relentlessly.  If the administration keeps him there for the next four years, it will be a very long time.

Losing a CFO barely before new paint dries on her office walls and even before she moves in is not a good sign.

Next:

As reported in BBG Watch, an anniversary of sorts has taken place marking 60 years of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL).  We are not sure if it’s an anniversary or a wake because we are uncertain what portends for the future of this agency, particularly in view of the debris field left by the destruction of the RFE/RL Russian Service.

We note that Ambassador Ashe made a statement marking the occasion.  As always, he renewed his support for employees who do the work of the agency.  While not offering specifics as to the future of the RFE/RL Russian service employees who were summarily dismissed, Ambassador Ashe did accent the positive in what he hopes Kevin Klose, in his capacity as RFE/RL president, may bring to the situation.

Statements were also issued by Board members Dennis Mulhaupt and Susan McCue.

And we have a statement from Jeffrey Trimble, the IBB deputy executive director.  We have read his statement carefully and view it as very closely guarded in its remarks.

Remember, Mr. Trimble, a top recipient of awards for his past performance, is supposedly in charge of the Board’s “Russian review” of RFE/RL’s Russian Service and the media environment in Russia.  That might be one reason that Trimble is holding his cards close.

But perhaps not the only reason.

At the same time, we are not seeing much from this “review” to date.  And we must also note that the IBB – twice – tried to get the BBG members to endorse the new RFE/RL Russian Service chief when the proverbial was hitting the fan big time.  We know what that kind of maneuver was intended to do – legitimize the termination of the veteran RFE/RL staff and cement the new service chief and regime in place.  That kind of renders a “review” stillborn with forgone conclusions.  Fortunately, the Board rejected this IBB sleight of hand.

Whose idea was that?

Another thing we’ve said before – if you really want to investigate the circumstances surrounding the RFE/RL Russian Service debacle, it needs to be conducted by persons outside the agency and that Third Floor, Cohen Building cabal who perhaps has knowledge of certain things that would not be well received by coming to light and in terms of how this fiasco came about and was executed.

Ambassador Ashe’s statement suggests that the BBG was unaware of what was in store for the RFE/RL Russian Service before the fact.

If so, then who did?

Last Quickie:

We note that Steve Springer of the Voice of America (VOA) Central Newsroom is going on a detail to the agency’s Persian (Iranian) News Network (PNN).  Sources indicate that he is going there to assist Billy Otwell (formerly of the agency’s Office of Program Review and now heading up PNN) with the service’s news operation.  Word making the rounds in the Cohen Building is that Otwell remarked, “We’re building him (Springer) a bunker right in the middle of the room.”

That got a good laugh from us.  It’s a bit of gallows humor, courtesy of Mr. Otwell.  PNN has a reputation for sending managers to career oblivion within the Cohen Building, sometimes out of the building completely.  Those pesky Iranians.  They know how to fight.  The reasons may not always be the right reasons, but they can be effective, formidable.

“Resistance is futile,” if you are a PNN manager.

Even in a bunker.  Especially in a bunker.  That equates with being –

Surrounded.  Cut off.  Your fate sealed.

It’s hard to top all these latest doings – the testament to dysfunctional US Government international broadcasting.

Nevertheless, we took a look at another one of those press releases from the agency, this one dated February 27, 2013:

“Citizen Journalism Training in Moldova Teaches Ethics and Innovation”

It is something to see the word “ethics” being associated with anything involving the agency.  Consider the antics of the IBB to corrupt a State Department Office of Inspector General (OIG) investigation with its agenda of gross insubordination, its attempt to purloin the authority of the BBG and to pursue personal attacks against Board members, especially Ambassador Victor Ashe, but others as well.

We are not slamming the participants or the agency employees tasked with this assignment.  Rather, we believe it important to take note of the hypocrisy of the IBB and its efforts to attach itself to values it doesn’t have or has corrupted.

Elsewhere in the press release:

“The rise of digital media has changed the way information flows.” said Bruce Sherman, Director of the BBG’s Office of Strategy and Development, “Media are no longer exclusively hierarchical, coming from large national and international providers, but rather are decentralized and networked, coming from a vast number of sources including individuals who can tell their stories directly to global audiences.”

One of our associates quipped, “You need an interpreter to translate what Sherman is saying.”

That had us rolling in our chair laughing.

But the truth of the matter is the statement is revealing of several things:

It is a perfect illustration of what former Secretary of State Clinton observed as the dysfunction inside the agency.

What we see here is Sherman talking in circles and trafficking in oxymorons.  For example, you can’t be “decentralized and networked” at the same time.  The end result is anarchy – no one in charge, no disciplined way of processing or resourcing news coverage and presenting news and information intelligently, that is credible and reliable.

“Individuals telling their stories directly to global audiences” does not equate with fact-based, verifiable, objective journalism or with any other strict set of uniform journalistic principles.  It equates with a mosh pit of babble, sometimes deliberately and intentionally skewed or false.

How many times have we seen videos posted on the Internet go viral, accepted as fact, reported as fact and later proved to be false?

Lots.

Further, this “citizen journalist” thing is overblown – sort of like the so-called “Arab Spring.”  You know how we feel about that wishful and jaded term of art.

That’s the anarchistic world of “global media” in the 21^st century – where real journalism, accurate news and information, competes daily with disinformation, misinformation and outright fiction all on overdrive.

Another thing Sherman’s statement does is run contrary to some of the stated agency goals involving its alleged effort to consolidate US Government international broadcasting.  The statement is the antithesis of a consolidated and disciplined broadcast environment.

In effect, what Sherman’s statement does is put the agency out of business, in the new world of media in the 21^st century with Sherman’s vision of “a vast number of sources including individuals who can tell their stories directly to global audiences.”

If this is the case or were to devolve to be the case,

The agency is dead.

Now.

Especially when coupled with all the other things we note in this commentary.

Former Secretary of State Clinton has it right:

“Defunct.”

And don’t believe for a moment that an insubordinate and defiant IBB or some CEO magically popping up out of nowhere will save the agency or its mission.

It’s all right before us: a trajectory for the end to an agency with a valid mission but in the hands of the wrong people.

Very wrong people.

The Federalist

March 2013

Broadcasting Board of Governors’ (BBG) Performance and Accountability Report (PAR) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2012.

Broadcasting Board of Governors - Information War Lost - Tuning Out and Gone

by The Federalist

The behavior of senior officials of the Broadcasting Board of Governors and the International Broadcasting Bureau (BBG/IBB) continues on a distaff trajectory early into 2013.

First, as reported by BBG Watch, Voice of America (VOA) director David Ensor put out a statement on his blog, “State of America’s Voice.”  This statement was timed to coincide with President Obama’s State of the Union address.

The thrust of Mr. Ensor’s post was to make a claim that the agency is in good shape.  Mr. Ensor claims, “VOA gives America real global impact.”

This is not the case.

Broadcasting Board of Governors’ (BBG) Performance and Accountability Report (PAR) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2012.

Mr. Ensor seems to be avoiding the agency’s own research which shows that its audiences, including VOA audiences,  are in a state of accelerated decline.  Hovering around 141.1 million for VOA on all platforms (radio, television and the Internet) in FY 2011, latest numbers for FY 2012 put the tally for VOA at 134.2 million.

BBG’s global audience of 175 million in FY 2012 was also less than in FY 2011 (187 million), and it was no larger than in FY 2008.

Across a global population of 7 BILLION, that reduces the agency’s “global impact” to what amounts to a statistical zero.

Remarks by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton immediately before and after leaving her post also make clear that whatever the agency is doing, it isn’t working.

With all the technical resources that Mr. Ensor cites in his statement, the payoff in audience is paltry.  That could mean a combination of various factors including countermeasures by foreign powers opposed to the US point of view, the inability of potential audiences to access the media choices made by the BBG, the agency’s own decision to cut core radio and television transmissions and the exponential proliferation of new global media.  Cumulatively, the end result is serious audience decline for US Government international broadcasting.

Once a trend becomes established, it is hard to break.  The agency’s “flim flam, Soviet style strategic plan” undoubtedly contributes to the agency’s audience decay.  Indeed, we see it as an accelerator of the decline.  As long as the IBB remains doggedly committed to this plan (they have to because they cannot admit it to being a failure – see below), the end result will not be a pretty picture for the agency or its employees.

Where things are at this point, the agency is hardly worth the millions of American taxpayer dollars being spent on it.  It is a failed agency and the IBB apparatchiks intend to keep on failing – and collecting six-figure salaries and bonuses in doing so.  Their fate hinges on continuing this multi-million dollar charade to hide the depth of the failure.

In our view, there is nothing on the radar – including the proposal for a so-called “Chief Executive Officer” (CEO) – that will come even remotely close to changing the direction the agency is heading.  That direction is implosion.

(A meteor has a better chance of hitting the earth than a CEO emerging to pull off a miracle for US Government international broadcasting.)

Broadcasting Board of Governors’ (BBG) Performance and Accountability Report (PAR) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2012.

Not to be outdone by Mr. Ensor, Brian Conniff – the head of the Middle East Broadcasting Networks (MBN), the agency’s grantee operation of Arabic broadcasts on Radio Sawa and Alurra television – proclaims that MBN has made audience gains!  But the claim isn’t supported with any published new data, even the often questioned data supplied by the agency itself. If there is new data gathered at the end of 2012, we would like to see it. Even assuming that there was an increase in Alhurra’s audience, the overall trend is down.

Here, the ploy is to make MBN appear relevant in the middle of violent upheaval in the Arab/Muslim world (you know, that Western media, kumbaya-phrased “Arab Spring” thing).

Guess what?  It isn’t relevant.  MBN is barely a blip on the radar with the rest of US Government international broadcasting – off the radar in particular with regard to effectiveness among Arab/Muslim publics.  Remember the premise behind Radio Sawa: play pop music to Arab youth and they will turn toward Western-style democracy.

Didn’t happen.

Isn’t going to happen.

What Mr. Ensor and Mr. Conniff have in common is a tactic the agency has practiced for years and – until recently – has gotten away with; namely, making unilateral declarations unsupported with facts or by the reality of events on the ground, hoping the declarations will be accepted as fact, and perhaps hoping even more to manipulate public perception of the agency.

Those days are over.

All of that changed when the IBB laced a State Department Office of Inspector General (OIG) report on the BBG with an open, virulent and insubordinate assault directed against current members of the Board, especially Ambassador Victor Ashe.  This report – and the subsequent fallout from it – revealed the agency’s senior management for what it is: a cabal of self-serving, grossly insubordinate, self-perpetuating apparatchiks intent upon carrying out their agenda and viciously attacking anyone finding fault with what they are doing.

We said it before and we’ll say it again: the IBB overplayed their hand and they did so in a very public manner – for the entire world to see.

There isn’t a whole lot that separates the IBB from operatives of some of the world’s most autocratic regimes.  They are – the IBB ‘s self-serving propagandists.  And the term fits them rather well.

Here’s another thing:

Right before the president’s State of the Union address, the agency propaganda office put out a press release on February 11, 2013:

“Iran, Cuba, Syria and Egypt Among Target Audiences for State of the Union Address Global Broadcast”

Iran and Syria: good luck.

By the way, did you happen to notice in the headline to the press release the absence of China and Russia?

Only toward the very end of the press release, almost as an afterthought, you have the following regarding Russia:

“In addition, VOA will live stream the Tuesday night event and will provide live reporting via partnerships with local media in countries including Russia, Bosnia, Albania, Ukraine, Indonesia, Cambodia and countries throughout Latin America.”

What is the operative phrase here?

Answer: “local media.”

What local media in Russia. The former RFE/RL management team and their IBB promoters gave up an AM broadcasting frequency in Moscow without much of a fight because President Putin made holding a broadcasting license by a foreign entity illegal. Rather than start broadcasting on AM from Lithuania and expanding online radio and television broadcasts to show Mr. Putin that U.S. international broadcasting will not be silenced, RFE/RL fired dozens of experienced and highly respected journalists, including digital media specialists.

We don’t know how these “local” broadcasts went.  However, right away, when you see “local media” in the context of Russia, you are talking about a very controlled media environment.

Keep in mind, the agency has fallen far and fallen hard in its broadcast effort to Russia.  At present, the effort is virtually meaningless.  The VOA has a mediocre website in place of direct broadcasts.  And Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) went postal on its own Russian Service, removing a solid cadre of veteran journalists with broad credibility to be replaced with something as bad as what VOA Russian has become.

Maybe worse.

Which brings us to China.

No mention of China in that press release headline?

That’s because the IBB “genius pool” killed live radio broadcasts by the VOA Mandarin and Cantonese services at night (Washington time).

No matter – no doubt the Chinese could probably rely upon their own CCTV for coverage of Mr. Obama’s address.  And they probably covered it thoroughly, as did the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) and others.

That said there are more serious repercussions.

No broadcast of Mr. Obama’s speech in Mandarin and Cantonese to China sends a very strong, negative message.  The message is two-fold:

First, Mr. Obama’s speech is not important to the Chinese people.

Second, Mr. Obama’s speech is not important to be heard by the Chinese people in their own languages.

In essence, Mr. Ensor and other senior agency officials dismissed the Chinese audience altogether and insulted the Chinese people as a result.

(Indeed.  Our Peoples Liberation Army [PLA] analyst would have argued to his superiors that this presented a golden opportunity to demonstrate to the Chinese people that the Americans have unilaterally capitulated in the arena of international broadcasting.  If the CCTV provided in-depth coverage of Mr. Obama’s speech, it would be argued that their broadcast coverage was superior and suggests to the Chinese people that they can obtain better information via their state-run media rather than from the decaying VOA.  It also fits nicely into the Chinese replication of its own Internet.  It is the kind of thing one would expect the Chinese to do more of and exploit the obvious weakness and defeatism of the IBB.)

So there you have it – the IBB unilaterally conceding coverage of the State of the Union address to the most important strategic nation in Asia – and increasingly to the world – and with it, the strategic Chinese audience.

Of course, let us not rule out the fact that the Chinese have been very successful in blocking VOA programs.  But, to not even mount an effort – pathetic.

(Did we say blocking programs?  Child’s play!  Our Chinese adversaries are a world leader in cyber warfare, particularly the unit of the Peoples Liberation Army based in Shanghai, even if they don’t choose to admit it.  Blocking programs is only one aspect of their cyber warfare operations.  It is but a small step to insinuate effective cyber attacks against the agency’s other cyber/computer systems. Don’t think they can’t or wouldn’t make the effort.  They can do it.  They will do it.  If successful, it would be a master stroke – disrupting or blocking programs from getting out of the Cohen Building altogether.)

Another thing:

Our sources indicate that the Third Floor operatives were being particularly self-congratulatory with regard to what coverage they did provide to the State of the Union address.

There is no question that the employees of the agency did some fine work.  They are known for that.  However, the big questions are: who saw their work, who heard their work, who read their work on the Internet?  As the audience numbers indicate, on a global scale, not many.  If we are correct in our analysis, perhaps not in places where US strategic interests count the most.

You can have the finest programs – but the net effect is that they may not be seen, heard or read by many folks outside the Cohen Building.  And that renders the programs worthless.

Our sources also report that there is talk of new programs in the pipeline either in the language services or in the schizophrenic Central Newsroom.  This could be an indication of one of two things:

First, the existing programs have no resonance.

Second, the Third Floor is desperately trying to repackage programs to see if anything sticks, in an attempt to find something that resonates with international audiences.

Maybe both.

In short, you can dismiss the pronouncements of Mr. Ensor and Mr. Conniff as nothing more than propaganda.  Neither statement is a reflection of the reality confronting the agency.  And that reality is the approaching end of US Government international broadcasting. The global audience number for BBG is now the same as in 2008. In carrying out their strategic plan, IBB bureaucrats can’t even keep up with the world’s population growth.

BBG Performance Data, 2008-2012

VOA global audience in FY 2008 – 136.5 million.

VOA global audience in FY 2012 – 134.2 million.

Result: minus 2.3 million.

MBN (Radio Sawa) global audience in FY 2008 – 17.2 million.

MBN (Radio Sawa) global audience in FY 2012 – 13.4 million.

Result: minus 3.8 million.

MBN (Alhurra TV) global audience in FY 2008 – 25.8 million.

MBN (Alhurra TV) global audience in FY 2012 – 22.9 million.

Result: minus 2.9 million.

These are BBG’s own figures. Need we say more.

The Federalist

February 2013

BBG WATCH says STOP THE PRESSES. We don’t often check the BBG Strategy Blog that almost no one reads and certainly almost no one comments on, though it must costs tens of thousands of dollars in salaries for its BBG/IBB contributors and in other costs.

The BBG Strategy Blog has an explanation for the decline of audiences and a solution: measure annual audiences instead of weekly audiences.

We could not resist reposting this most amazing bureaucratic government spin job by the Office of Strategy and Development experts who in the past had proposed eliminating Voice of America radio and television broadcasts to Russia and China and VOA radio to Tibet, claimed that their Internet strategy will help BBG reach  a 216 million audience in 2016, and  pushed “fluff journalism” in countries ruled by some of the most authoritarian regimes as a sure way of growing the audience.

From the BBG Strategy Blog:

Growing Audience Goes Beyond Distribution, Content Strategies Need to Adjust Too

It may at first sound counterintuitive, but one of the best options the BBG has for growing audience is to better serve the audience it already has…

In its latest strategic plan, the BBG stated an aspirational goal of reaching an audience of 216 million people each week by 2016.

That goal felt a bit harder to achieve last month when the agency announced that the BBG global audience for 2012 was 175 million weekly, down from 187 million weekly in 2011.

As much as we would like to see the line on the audience chart to rise at a 45-degree angle every year, we know it’s more realistic to expect gains and losses along the way. In 2012, for example, audiences we up in Ethiopia and Libya, but down in Indonesia and Egypt.

So how can the BBG add more than 40 million new viewers, listeners, and readers in four years — in an environment with more media competition and budget austerity? It won’t be easy, but it’s not a lost cause.

There are a number of tactics that could do wonders for the goal of 216 by 2016.

Most discussions about audience increases center around the need for additional distribution and marketing. While those arguments are completely valid, and the Office of Strategy and Development signs new distribution deals every week, at some point the conversation needs to turn to content. For purposes of this argument, we’ll focus on a couple of broad ideas.

Consider this premise:

One of the best ways to increase the BBG audience is to work to better serve the audience it already has.

It sounds it bit crazy until you compare just two numbers from BBG audience research. The first number is the previously mentioned audience estimate of 175 million people every week.

The second number is the BBG’s annual audience figure. That number hovers around 300 million.

This means that without a single additional affiliate, satellite transponder, transmitter, or billboard, 300 million people know about BBG services and check them out at least once a year. However, our metric is weekly audience — and just less than 60% of that 300 million spend time with us on a weekly basis. It’s notable that other large international broadcasters such as the BBC, Deutsche Welle, and Radio France International also use weekly reach as their prime audience metric.

It’s hardly surprising that BBG broadcasters would have groups of heavy viewers and listeners and occasional viewers and listeners. Virtually all product-driven businesses have similar subsets of customers.

Think about your own media consumption and you’ll undoubtedly see similar patterns of heavy and occasional use. These patterns can fluctuate based on news cycle, or even be seasonal. I, for example, don’t spend much time with WCBS-AM/New York this time of year, but will become a very heavy user once baseball season comes and the station starts broadcasting New York Yankees games.

Incoming president of CNN Worldwide, Jeff Zucker, in referencing the ups and downs of the news cycle, said that CNN needed to be relevant more than 25 nights a year. That is, the channel, like all channels, needs to constantly work to turn occasional viewers into regular viewers.

It’s no different for BBG broadcasters. I can recall some ten years ago attending focus groups for RFE/RL’s Radio Svoboda in Moscow. A few attendees at the time talked about rarely listening to Svoboda — unless there was a crisis. One respondent said Russia needed Svoboda “just in case.”

We may wholeheartedly agree, but realistically, “just in case” may be an increasingly tough sell on a budget-conscious Capitol Hill.

For any of us on the product side, our job is to take a potential customer that just walked in the door, and turn that person into a regular. Whether it’s VOA news, Levis blue jeans, or Dannon yogurt — the job at hand is largely the same.

With 125 million people aware of and using BBG news services annually but not weekly, there is a significant opportunity to turn at least some of them into more regular users – if the content is compellingand offered in a way that makes it easier to consume.

First Steps

One of the biggest obstacles to consumption of BBG content is something I call The Law of Media Clutter.

It’s a simple rule of thumb stating that as media options increase in a given market, appointment viewing and listening decreases.

Again, think about your own media consumption. It’s just harder than it used to be to remember to sit down and watch your favorite TV show on Tuesday nights at 8:30 pm. It’s a global phenomenon.

Unfortunately, for many BBG broadcasters with affiliation strategies, getting lost in the media clutter is becoming as big a threat as jamming.

An adjustment to counter The Law of Media Clutter is to employ a reach and frequency strategy. That is, get the content aired as many times as possible in an effort to reach a larger audience. Generally, this is how most cable television channels are programmed — develop a hit show, and air it almost constantly. Consumer media behavior is such that as people channel surf, new viewers find the program every time.

For example, VOA Urdu’s Zindagi 360 looks like a hit in its 7 p.m. Friday time slot. But even a single replay of the show on Saturday or Sunday morning would make it an even bigger hit in Pakistan, growing its audience and reinforcing the brand.

There are many other content strategies, such as employing short-form tactics that would enhance affiliation prospects.

To reiterate, the objective is not just to find new audiences, but also converting current audiences from annual users to occasional users (think monthly), and then the occasional to weekly.

Acknowledging that the content itself is an integral part of audience growth is the first step. Accepting the truth behind The Law of Media Clutter is another.

In the Office of Strategy and Development, we have conducted an analysis of all BBG broadcasters and language services, comparing annual versus weekly reach where such data is available. The analysis is not intended to make judgements on the quality of content, but rather look for consistencies and best practices among the top performers that might be applied elsewhere.

All BBG language services would do well to brainstorm how they might convert just 1 in 10 of their occasional viewers or listeners into weekly viewers or listeners. Converting just that ten percent would yield weekly audience growth of more than 12 million people across the BBG — all the while serving their core audiences better.

Additional specific tactics will come in future posts.

- Paul Marszalek
Office of Strategy and Development

by The Federalist

“We have basically abdicated in my view, the broadcast media.  I have tried and will
continue from the outside to convince Congress and the others.  

If we don’t have an up-to-date modern, effective Broadcasting Board of Governors, 

we shouldn’t have one at all.”

(Comments by outgoing Secretary of State Hillary Clinton at the Council on Foreign Relations, January 31, 2013)

Extraordinary.  Compelling. Unprecedented.

These are words we use to describe our reaction in reading outgoing (and now former) Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.  These were some – and by no means all – of the remarks made when she addressed the Council on Foreign Relations on Thursday, January 30, 2013.  Her remarks follow her congressional testimony of Wednesday, January 23, 2013.

With all the issues that abound around the world, Mrs. Clinton singled out US Government international broadcasting as a key issue, more than any previous secretary of state.

She continues to be on message and more forcefully than in previous remarks going back to 2011.  These remarks provide an opportunity to expand the discussion on the subject.

Lessons To Be Learned:

We have never met Mrs. Clinton nor have we spoken to her or members of her staff.  However, we don’t think it’s a stretch for us to understand the context of her remarks.

As Secretary of State, Mrs. Clinton is recognized as having traveled longer, harder and farther on behalf of the national interests of the United States.

One thing we are certain that Mrs. Clinton discovered in her travels is that the world is a very difficult place.  She is also likely to have discovered that US national interests have declining resonance around the world with global publics.  In our view, she has correctly identified where the problem lies:

The Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG).

Let us examine the situation:

When speaking about the BBG, we speak of it as not only as a board of governors but also as an agency comprising the Voice of America (VOA) and the various grantee entities which include Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL), Radio and TV Marti, Radio Free Asia (RFA) and other operations.

We look at the whole package in its entirety.  Why?  Because the failure is systemic, not limited to any one particular segment of the operation.

And we most certainly include in that failure the agency executive staff: the International Broadcasting Bureau (IBB).  Indeed, we see the executive staff as the facilitator and enabler of a failed agency.  Why?  You already know the answer if you have read our previous commentaries: the “flim flam Soviet-style strategic plan” actively, aggressively and sometimes viciously promoted by the handful of senior IBB staffers.

In recent weeks, there has been a heavy dose of misdirected blame, generated (in our view) by the IBB staff toward members of the current BBG.  In reality, the agency’s state of affairs began long before the current board members arrived on the scene.  The one constant through much of the agency’s decline and perhaps imminent downfall:

The IBB staff.

Of late, certain members of the BBG have seen through the tactics of the IBB and have raised concerns and outright objections to the direction of the agency’s operations.

Not unexpectedly, the IBB – composed of way too many entrenched,  self-serving and self-promoting individuals – co-opted an Office of Inspector General (OIG) report – giving full throat to their arrogance, defiance and (as we see it) gross insubordination.  In short, the net effect of the report was a no-holds-barred effort to neutralize the board and usurp the statutory powers of the board.

Clearly, the IBB wants to run the agency the way it wants to without interference from the board and no deference to accountability and responsibility from any quarter, inside or outside the Federal Government.

The IBB overplayed its hand – not unexpected when you are dealing with a group of pompous, overbearing and arrogant individuals who have an oversized view of their power and have become accustomed to getting what they want whenever they want it – including those bonuses they have handed themselves on top of their six-figure salaries.

None of this comes as a surprise to anyone who is familiar with past incarnations of the Board.  There is a history of similar IBB tactics being used against governors who have spoken up about agency problems.  In addition, there have been some clashes among members of prior boards, some which may have been manipulated by the IBB staff.  There have been some major egos at work on the board in the past – ultimately resulting in some equally large disasters for US national interests, as alluded to generally by Mrs. Clinton’s statements.

Like other things that go wrong in government, this is a situation that is cumulative: a process of running an agency that is flawed at best, compromised at worst, over a protracted period of time.

That is why the agency has earned a reputation for being “the worst organization in the Federal Government” and one of the worst places to work in the Federal Government.

Let there be no doubt – as long as the status quo prevails, the situation will continue unabated as the IBB continues the agency’s downward spiral.

What Is Past Is Prologue – Unless You Are The IBB

Mrs. Clinton spoke with great passion about the achievements of the agency during the Cold War.  She believes with equal passion that those achievements can be replicated now and in the future.

We share Mrs. Clinton’s passion for the agency and its mission.

The IBB does not.

The IBB believes in a “flim flam strategic plan” which has a whole lot more to do with self-interest than it does with the US national and public interest.  The IBB advocates of this plan, and their acolytes inside the Cohen Building, are not about to admit that they goofed.  That would be a major career-killer.  We see the following scenarios as the consequence of the IBB’s dogged standing by this plan:

Scenario One:  The IBB grossly overestimated its ability to reach global audiences via new online technologies versus traditional radio and television broadcasting.  They ignored or dismissed numerous obstacles which have had the net effect of reducing the agency’s broadcast footprint worldwide.  In turn, they underestimated the ability of adversarial regimes to develop effective countermeasures to the IBB’s wild embrace of new technology.

(Think about it – the government informant in your neighborhood or at the local market has now been augmented by the one encased in your mobile phone or your computer – with you all the time, watching, recording every keystroke you make and automatically reporting any suspicious activity.)

Scenario Two: The IBB may have intentionally “gamed the system,” knowing that to replicate the footprint of its direct broadcast radio transmissions would take years, possibly decades, ensuring that they would be entrenched in their positions as the process laboriously unfolded at a cost of millions and even billions of dollars to the American taxpayer as years and decades roll by.

Scenario Three: A combination of both scenarios above, along with an unwillingness to acknowledge and/or adjust to circumstances.

Another self-inflicted wound has been to the agency’s programming.

Time and again, the IBB has put forward proposals to eliminate staff and broadcasts.  Recently, it eliminated its Special English newscasts – the Special English broadcasts being among the most popular with the agency’s (dwindling) global audiences.

Instead of news and information as codified in the VOA Charter, the bedrock of the agency’s mission, we see the agency moving away from breaking and developing news along with in-depth analysis of the news.

In its place, the IBB has turned toward programming of lowered standards.  Its credibility has been severely, if not mortally, injured by the vacuum it has created and is being filled, as Mrs. Clinton pointed out correctly, by a hostile, anti-American message.

Boxed out of delivering effective programming by countermeasures by the Chinese, the Russians, the Iranians and others, the agency is now reduced to delivering more content that is in the form of “lifestyle” pieces.

Worse, with its audiences in freefall, some agency elements have decided that the way to attract new audiences is to engage in sexually provocative content – keeping in mind that the content is targeted in certain parts of the world where women are debased, devalued and abused.

In short, the place where Mrs. Clinton would see US Government international broadcasting needs to go is not getting there and won’t get there with the current IBB.

Do We Fix It Or Forget It?

That is the “to be or not to be” question.

Some people suggest that increased funding will solve the problem.

Let us disabuse everyone of that notion.  In this agency, more funding equates with more failure.  With the same cast of IBB characters in charge, the only thing that will change is the increased size and scope of failure.

To put it bluntly, there isn’t enough money in the Federal treasury to do what is required: a top-to-bottom remedial effort.  That takes time and a lot of money – and all the while you will have a renegade group of IBB operatives trying to sabotage the effort.  What the IBB bureaucracy doesn’t like, it will try to destroy.  Have a conversation with Ambassador Victor Ashe and other members of the current BBG on that subject.

If More Funding Isn’t The Answer, What Is?

This is where things get interesting.

We have said it before and we will say it again, it’s time to neutralize the IBB.  The way that is done is through legislation to transfer the agency’s functions elsewhere in the government.  The agency could be transferred wholesale – minus the IBB – in order to retain the name recognition of its entities with global audiences.  Operationally, the transformation would be seamless.  Administratively, there may be a needed break-in period.

The transformation could be incremental as opposed to abrupt.

Facilitating the transformation would be a transition team composed of individuals with superior credentials and expertise.  Indeed, we would go so far as to suggest that Mrs. Clinton can put her passion to work in short order by heading up this transition effort.

As for the IBB, Congress would perhaps be more than willing to legislate it out of the way – perhaps making it part of the Public Diplomacy Advisory Council.  There, it can while away the days to retirement generating paper, some of it no doubt in a continued defense of its “flim flam Soviet-style strategic plan.”

This approach is likely to be more cost effective than a top-to-bottom investigation of how the agency got to the place it is – no doubt with some revelations the IBB hopes might never see the light of day. As we like to say: follow the money.  When you are an agency of the Federal Government spending taxpayer funds, that’s the first place you look: painstakingly, thoroughly.

Clearly, this is a subject that will generate further debate and discussion.  However, let us be clear: as long as the status quo prevails, the end result is inevitable:

Close the place.  Mission failed.

(To Be Continued)

The Federalist

February 2013

Broadcasting Board of Governors – Information War Lost: The Secretary Weighs In – Again

by The Federalist

“Our Broadcasting Board of Governors is practically defunct in terms of its capacity to tell a message around the world. So we’re abdicating the ideological arena and we need to get back into it. We have the best values. We have the best narrative. Most people in the world just want to have a good decent life that is supported by a good decent job and raise their families and we’re letting the Jihadist narrative fill a void. We have to get in there and compete and we can do it successfully.”

“We have abdicated the broadcasting arena.  We are not doing what we did in the Cold War.”

Statements made by Secretary of State Hillary during congressional testimony on Wednesday, January 23, 2013.

The wind has changed and it has picked up in intensity.

And the International Broadcasting Bureau (IBB) staff is not in a good place.

Let us examine Secretary of State Clinton’s remarks and put them in a context.

This is not the first time the Secretary has leveled criticism in the direction of the IBB, even though she uses the term “Broadcasting Board of Governors.”  In prior congressional testimony, she made the remark, “We are losing the information war.”  She was right then.  She is even more right now with her remarks on Wednesday, January 23, 2013.  Her remarks have caught up with the present.  She was much more direct, perhaps because so much more damage has been done.

The IBB executive staff has put US Government international broadcasting on the brink of extinction in its pursuit of its own agenda.

The Secretary’s remarks come in the wake of State Department Office of Inspector General (OIG) report on the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG).  The report is biased.  The report is subjective.  The report is seriously flawed.  The report blatantly embraced the demeanor of the IBB staff, particularly its visceral dislike of Ambassador Victor Ashe, a BBG member who believes in oversight and accountability. 

We have said it before: we know these IBB people very, very well.  They are a contemptible lot, for sure.  But now one can see their level of viciousness – attacking BBG members overtly, publicly.

But the fact of the matter is the IBB staff laid the groundwork for where the agency is today long before the current members of the BBG assumed the duties of their appointment.

The modus operandi of the senior agency staff has always been to entrench itself and make it difficult for political appointees to execute their duties.  The IBB does not see itself in a complementary relationship with the political appointees.  It sees itself as some kind of Praetorian Guard with allegiance only unto itself.

What you have on display is blatant revolt – the IBB staff essentially engaged in what appears on its face to be an act of gross insubordination – making it clear that it does not want nor intend to take guidance from the BBG – presidential appointees confirmed by the Senate charged with oversight and accountability responsibilities.  In our view, gross insubordination to this degree and on this level is grounds for removal from the Federal Service for cause.

Here’s more context:

This is an agency aptly and correctly described as one of the worst organizations in the Federal Government.  This latest action by the IBB significantly adds to that reputation.

This is an agency also found to be one of the worst places to work in the Federal Government (no surprise there), consistently ranking at the bottom of the government-wide Federal employee survey.  They have held this position from the first survey to the most recent in 2012.  This constitutes a hostile work environment.  It is intentional and it is deliberate.  It is an institutionalized operating framework.  The people responsible for it: the senior IBB staff.  They brag of it.  They are proud of what they have constructed:

A hostile, toxic environment.

The behavior of those running this agency is based on “intimidation.” It is not an administrative element committed to improving the efficiency of the Federal Service and effectively carrying out the agency’s mission as codified in the VOA Charter.

This group of individuals has excelled in one thing and one thing only: their own self-aggrandizement.  Look at the record of bonuses they have handed out to each other over the years – on top of six-figure salaries.

If you know all of this, even before a discussion of the collapse of the agency’s mission, you would be not at all surprised by Secretary’s statement of record in her congressional testimony.

How Did We Get Here?

The short answer is that we didn’t get here overnight.  It has built up over time, enabled in part by lack of attention at the upper reaches of the executive branch of the government.  Like a lot of corrosion and decay, it takes time before the effect becomes apparent.

Secretary Clinton focuses in on the inability of the agency to counter an effective message by jihadists in the Arab and Muslim world.  That is one – but by no means the only – failure of the agency.  The failure is agency-wide, systemic.  The heart of the failure is a flawed “strategic plan” which we derisively refer to as the “flim flam Soviet-style strategic plan.”  This plan reaches into every corner of the agency’s operations, not any single element.  This plan is why the agency is on the ropes – as well as the dogged determination by the IBB staff promoting it to hang onto it at all costs.

This plan – by design and not by accident, but by its intended outcomes – is an abdication of the United States’ role in international broadcasting and a betrayal of US strategic and national interests.

We will serve up some examples of key issues:

The “Arab Spring” – Not!

Anyone reading our commentaries knows that we loathe this term.  It is a term of art of Western media, wishful thinking contrary to the political and religious landscape of the Middle East constructed over centuries, totally dismissive of the historical record and reality.

The agency’s failure in the Arab and Muslim world started the decline of the agency’s overall effectiveness.  The process began by eliminating the Voice of America (VOA) Arabic Service and replacing it with the grantee Radio Sawa.  The thinking at the time (after the jihadist attack of September 11, 2001) was to play pop music to Arab youth.  Put that decision on a continuum from 2001 to 2013 and benchmark events along the way.  Has Radio Sawa been even remotely effective in changing the Middle East paradigm?

Absolutely not.  Not one iota.

The television component known as Al-Hurra followed shortly thereafter.  Again: put the start of these broadcasts on a continuum juxtaposed to events in the Middle East and the growth and penetration of regional Arab media with Arab publics.  Has Al-Hurra had a positive change on the Middle East paradigm?

Absolutely not.  Not one iota.

And by the way – include in that timeline an interview done by “60 Minutes” some years back, along with a lengthy piece running at the same time in The Washington Post.  It’s not like this operation was under the radar.  Problems were being identified – and ignored or dismissed by the IBB.

Writing in the March 2013 issue of “Armchair General” (a military history/current events magazine), John Sutherland, a retired US Army officer now on the Joint and Coalition Operational Analysis (JCOA) group of the US Department of Defense Joint Staff, opined: “liberals may start a revolution, but radicals finish it.”  You might also say, “Idealists may start a revolution but realists finish it.”  The IBB is drunk on a “kumbaya” liberal-like approach to the Arab and Muslim world.  They desperately want the Arab and Muslim world to like us.  Absent an understanding of the historical record and perspective, the result is not surprising: a failed message in the Middle East.

Decisive Strategic Defeats

The IBB “flim flam Soviet-style strategic plan” has resulted in decisive strategic defeats in Russia and China.

Defeat may be too mild a word.

It started with the 2008 closure of the VOA Russian Service radio and satellite television broadcasts, just days before the Russians invaded the neighboring Republic of Georgia.  The coup de grace was delivered in late 2012 when Steve Korn, president of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL), summarily terminated over 30 employees of its Russian Service (others resigned in protest), installing activist gadfly Masha Gessen as the new service director.

At the same time, the Russian government under Vladimir Putin began tightening its restrictions on media inside the country.

In short, the end result was a brilliantly orchestrated maneuver which removed credibility and effectiveness in RFE/RL Russian broadcasts and made broadcast/Internet penetration of Russia much more problematic.

In China, the government has been largely successful in diminishing the US Government international broadcasting presence.  In this, the IBB has played the role of gullible patsy.  It has substantially reduced its direct broadcasting by radio to China, choosing instead to rely on television and the Internet, both of which are controlled by the Chinese government.  With regard to the Internet, the Chinese have taken it one step further: they have established “The Great Firewall” to block unwanted content and have busily set about the successful construction of its own Internet.  They have walled off undesired outside content while carefully internalizing its Internet operations to allow some (by no means a lot) domestic discussion of internal issues.

And – contrary to the “there is no more international broadcasting” mantra inside the Cohen Building, the Chinese and the Russians have expanded their international media reach via YouTube, Russia Today and CCTV (with news bureaus in Washington, DC and New York City).

With this mantra as the slogan for the “flim flam Soviet-style strategic plan,” the US Government is effectively out of the international broadcasting arena: intentionally, deliberately, self-inflicted.

The Morning After

From our sources:

Thursday, January 24, 2013:

The Cohen Building.

The daily 9:30am editorial meeting presided over by David Ensor, VOA director.

A language service staffer poses a question to Ensor regarding Secretary Clinton’s testimony.

Ensor reportedly attempted to deflect responding directly to the question by suggesting that “we” shouldn’t focus on that.  It’s not “our” thing.  That’s the Board.  Don’t be distracted by that.  Focus on your job.

Also reported to have chimed in a senior adviser on VOA “strategy” saying, “Why do you care about that?”

Clearly, neither Ensor nor his senior advisor wanted to address Secretary Clinton’s testimony – possibly may have been directed specifically not to discuss it.

Well, their responses have been memorialized anyway.

Their comments can be interpreted in different ways, none particularly positive.  As some have opined, on its face it appears to be a deliberate effort to suppress discussion.

The Secretary of State laid out one of the sharpest rebukes of US Government international broadcasting in the agency’s history, the specific failed mission of the agency, and Ensor tries to blow off the question – which is clearly very high on the register of employee concerns (yet another manifestation of the agency’s hostility toward its professional workforce).

The response is yet another example of the leadership vacuum at the senior levels of the agency.  It may also be seen as a testament to the arrogance and defiance on the Third Floor: a ploy to deflect blame onto the Board for an IBB action (comments to the OIG) setting off yet another serious Third Floor scandal.

What Not To Do: Two Things Guaranteed Not to Fix The Problem

More Funding Means More Taxpayer Money Wasted

Ladies and gentlemen, let’s disabuse everyone of the notion that throwing more money at this failed agency will fix it.  That approach has been tried for years – it is a bankrupt approach – both literally and figuratively.

The amount of money necessary to turn things around for this agency – or perhaps more accurately, to pull it out of the depths of the abyss that it has put itself in – is simply not there.  Neither is the time.  The jihadists and others are not sitting back content to rest on their laurels.  Neither are the Chinese, the Russians and the Iranians.  They are moving on their objectives – and not solely in the international broadcasting arena.

What does the IBB do with its funding?

Among other things, it seems to make certain that its senior officials get nice, fat bonuses – in our view, a reward for failure.

But there are other things.

Not the least of which is that $50-million dollar contract ($10-mill per year) with the Gallup research organization.  Gallup is being sued by the U.S. Department of Justice for overcharging federal agencies, yet the IBB and its director continue to defend their contract with Gallup.  But the issue here is a repeated tactic of the IBB to seek out research to affirm an intended result (in this case, to validate the “flim flam Soviet-style strategic plan”).

It’s not working with Gallup.  It hasn’t worked with other polling organizations in the past either.

We’ve seen some of the results of agency research – Bruce Sherman of the IBB giving a PowerPoint presentation to a room of empty chairs on mobile phone use in Nigeria.

For those who know the agency, this speaks volumes: the agency is no longer a top-tier international broadcaster.

And for the United States, that is a very bad development.  The agency’s focus is devolving and its global audiences are turning elsewhere.  Remember that remark by a staffer from the agency’s Office of Program review is alleged to have made:

“There is no more international broadcasting.”

B-A-L-O-N-E-Y.

That mantra exists only in the minds of that staffer and the IBB officials whose sentiments he is mouthing.

But that sentiment goes deep into the heart of the “flim flam Soviet-style strategic plan.”  That plan abandons the agency’s mission wholesale.

And you wonder why the plan attracts the volume of criticism it does.

Wake up, people.

Let’s add another example: the Office of Digital Design and Innovation (ODDI) – an office with a lofty title that seemingly hasn’t produced much in the way of substance.

What has that office been spending taxpayer money on?

In any serious, meaningful examination of this agency: follow the money:  

How was it spent?  Where was it spent?  On what was it spent?  On who was it spent?

Like everything else IBB, probes need to go deep.  Very deep.

With the IBB and this agency, you go top-to-bottom and you are almost guaranteed that you will find things that you are not going to like and make you very, very angry.

And be sure of one thing: This kind of detailed examination cannot be entrusted to anyone inside the Cohen Building.

A CEO – The IBB Canard

We’ll say it again: we know these IBB types very, very well.  They obsess over things they want.  Of late, that obsessive-compulsive behavior has become aggressive, hostile, vicious, defiant and insubordinate, seemingly sociopathic.

At other times it can be obsequious.

One of the ploys played out in the OIG report is reference to a chief executive officer (CEO).  The IBB plays it like this is the silver bullet that will solve all the agency’s problems.

B-A-L-O-N-E-Y.  (That’s two in one commentary!)

(Actually, it’s worse than baloney, but we can’t describe what it really is.)

When it comes to the IBB, don’t look for a silver bullet or a silver lining.  Don’t look for a miracle gift-wrapped on the steps leading into the Cohen Building

Instead, look for the hidden agenda.  In this case, that agenda comes in the form of one or two scenarios:

Plan A: The CEO comes from the ranks of the senior IBB.  In this scenario, the Third Floor would be in “Paradise Found.”  The perfect scenario: cover up any serious examination of the agency’s failed mission perpetrated by the IBB and continue with business as usual.

Plan B: No more BBG and a lone presidential appointee/Senate confirmed CEO.  Not as desirable as Plan A, but workable from the IBB perspective.  It is easier for them to gang up against one CEO than a full board (along with the Secretary of State).  The IBB has already demonstrated their tactics in the OIG report.  They’ve practiced it not only with Ambassador Ashe.  There’s a history.  Threats, intimidation, coercion, vicious personal attacks.  That’s the IBB, their standard repertoire, so to speak.

What’s Next?

Clearly, it’s decision time.  And the decisions are principally two: fix it or “forget it” (as in close the agency and transfer its functions).

The status quo is unacceptable and should not be left on the table.

The “fix it” option will be costly, time-consuming – and all the while, the agency will be falling further into disarray, dysfunction and irrelevance on the global arena.

The “forget it” option isn’t a piece of cake, either.  However, a judgment has to be made.  If the mission is as vital as Secretary Clinton believes – and we share the Secretary’s belief – then the priority is to salvage the mission.  That means getting the mission out of the hands of the IBB as an organization structure and in terms of the individuals who currently encumber positions within it.  The BBG may also be “collateral damage.”  If the agency’s mission is transferred elsewhere in the government as part of a transfer of function, there will no longer be a need for the BBG.

These are the options: stark and limited.

One of the Possibilities

Readers know that we believe the best option at present is a process we refer to as “transfer of function:” in essence, absorbing the agency into another department of the government.

We believe the best department is the Department of Defense (DOD).  We have argued broadly that the agency could be made part of the Armed Forces Network.

There are other possibilities:

The agency could be absorbed into DOD in its entirety, retaining the institutional name of its entities and the basic organizational chart within the entities.

A transition team could be appointed to oversee the transfer.  This transition team should be led by an individual with authoritative knowledge of the agency and its mission.  One such person could be former VOA director Robert Reilly.  Mr. Reilly knows the agency and most certainly knows its problems and could be relied upon to assemble a formidable team to work with him (as opposed to the IBB management style of working against people).

There would be no need to relocate facilities.  They could be kept in place, save that which may be required for renovation.

The BBG would be abolished.  In place of the BBG would be a director of US international broadcasting (or an assistant secretary of defense), with the entity heads replacing the IBB executive staff.

As to the current IBB: they should be removed and dispersed, spread out to details elsewhere in the government with no two of them in the same place.  Others should take retirement and just fade away.

We wish we could put them all on a C-130 and ship them off on a bumpy ride to the Seychelles or some other distant locale, but that’s not in the cards – unfortunately.

The only unanswered question is what decision will the administration and the Congress make?  Throwing up one’s hands concerning the IBB does not constitute a policy.  The situation calls for new direction and new (real) leadership.  Each day that passes, the agency sinks further into irrelevance and ignominy at the hands of the IBB.

At this juncture, perhaps the only certain thing – no one on the IBB will miss Secretary Clinton.

(Senior analysts looking at the not-too-friendly governments abroad are amazed with this latest turn of events.  Words are being used to describe the report and the behavior of the IBB: “unbelievable,” “outrageous.”  And eventually the premier question rises in the discussion:

“What are these IBB people trying to hide?”

The behavior of the IBB is too bizarre to be ignored.  These analysts wonder if the Americans will do what they would do in similar circumstances – probe deep into the organization and the individuals at the top of the IBB.  The Americans are far too delicate in these matters.  But ultimately, regardless of technique, it’s a process that if followed could be very revealing and perhaps even more scandalous.  If followed thoroughly, even in the sometimes happenstance manner of the Americans, they might very well stumble upon things that might stun and shock them.

Did someone among America’s adversaries perpetrate this debacle or is it simply a matter of the base side of human nature: greed, avarice, megalomania, ego or just plain stupidity?  Stupidity cannot be the sole, root cause.

Our analysts make their notes and place them in a file.  The file stays on top of their desks.  This isn’t over.)

The Federalist

January 2013

by The Federalist

One Particular Governor

This month, the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) for the Department of State and the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) issued a report titled: “Inspection of the Broadcasting Board of Governors.”  One of our sources provided us with a copy.

We’ve seen our share of OIG reports.  We went to the report’s executive summary, under the heading “Key Judgments.”  The report didn’t waste any time getting our interest.

There are a number of things which distinguish this OIG report from others and not in a positive way.  The one thing that dominates throughout is predicated on this “judgment:”

“Board dynamics are characterized by a degree of hostility that renders its deliberative process ineffectual. Board meetings are dominated by one member whose tactics and personal attacks on colleagues and staff have created an unprofessional and unproductive atmosphere.”

The first thing – and perhaps the most important thing – is that this report targets one member of the BBG.  That member is Ambassador Victor Ashe.  He is not mentioned by name.  However, anyone remotely familiar with the antics of the International Broadcasting Bureau (IBB) senior staff knows that Ashe is their “Public Enemy Number One.”

So – Ambassador Ashe has enemies on the IBB.  Why are we not surprised?

What is surprising is the boldness, the rashness of the IBB (because this report is really all about them) in going after Ashe in a very public way.

Memo to the White House, the State Department and the Congress:  with regard to Ambassador Ashe – You cannot spare this man.  He fights!

We fight.

We consider Ambassador Ashe a kindred soul, fighting for a just cause: the survival of US Government international broadcasting, the agency’s mission, its employees.  We do not abandon fighters for the principles and the people Ashe represents.

The more you read of this report, the more you walk away incredulous with the bias that pours off its pages, a direct reflection of the vicious antipathy these IBB characters have toward Ashe.

Why?

Answer:  He nailed them.  He clocked them for every shenanigan they have been up to for a very long time.  If you want to know who makes transparency, oversight and accountability happen in this agency, the name is Ambassador Victor Ashe.

He is not alone, but he has been the one out in front.

That’s called leadership – something none of the individuals of the IBB have and never will have.  Those individuals subscribe to a cult that puts themselves first ahead of everything and everyone else.

With this in mind, for the benefit of folks at the White House, in the State Department and up on Capitol Hill, let’s consider the environment in which Ambassador Ashe has to carry out his duties:

This is “the worst organization in the Federal Government.” 

This is the worst agency to work for in the Federal Government among Federal agencies of equal size.

It is a toxic, hostile environment.  It is an environment in which the agency has been found at fault in a variety of personnel practices and, in spite of decisions against it continues with those practices.

Is this the consequence of any action on the part of Ambassador Ashe?

The answer: absolutely not!

The demeanor of this agency has been in place for a long time, long before Ambassador Ashe arrived on the scene.

This demeanor originated with senior agency officials – IBB and Voice of America (VOA) included.  It has become an integral part of the agency’s operating philosophy.

To paraphrase a sentiment expressed elsewhere, you will never find a more wretched hive of villainy in the Federal Government than on the Third Floor of the Cohen Building.  These officials are proud of it.  Indeed, they have taken this attitude outside the Cohen Building to badger and bully employees in public.

Let’s get right to it:

This report reflects a bias.  It is the bias and vicious demeanor of the senior IBB and VOA staff.  It is clearly falsely prejudicial.

What is the intent here?

As we see it, the intent – the intended IBB outcome grossly on display in this report – is to stifle any criticism of its actions, any encroachment on its power, any oversight and accountability of IBB actions impacting negatively upon the agency’s mission.

And there’s more:

If the IBB thinks that this “report” somehow “legitimizes” their attempt to subvert the VOA Charter and demolish the US Government international broadcasting landscape to their liking, they are mistaken.

They have made a serious, strategic miscalculation.  This report reveals them for what they are – and it isn’t flattering.

The IBB has played its hand: anyone – BBG member, entity head, line employee – will be savaged if they get in the way of the ruthless bunch on the Third Floor.  That is their demeanor – less public servant and more ruthless, revenge-minded, power-hungry bureaucrats.

This is not the first time these guys have attacked a governor, but it is the most public and egregious to date.

Irony abounds.  These guys pay lip service “supporting freedom and democracy” when in fact the claim is an exercise in hypocrisy.  Free and open discussion – a cornerstone of the American Experience, commonly referred to as the First Amendment – is not welcome by the IBB.  They are a confederacy of ruthless tyrants.

Anyone who has had to deal with these guys when they are in their “revenge mode” knows full well what they are all about: to protect themselves from the consequences of their actions; namely, building their bureaucratic empire upon the destruction of US Government international broadcasting.  The numbers of their own research say it all: the place is tanking, bleeding audiences and doing so rapidly.  At the rate things are going, these guys won’t have to worry about their “flim flam Soviet-style strategic plan:” the agency will have imploded.  No meaningful audience = no agency.

The American taxpayer is not, should not and will not pay for these guys to generate paper on mobile phones in Nigeria (at the cost of millions of taxpayer dollars in a contract with the Gallup polling organization).

Is Ambassador Ashe correct to slam on the brakes and say “enough is enough?”

Absolutely.

(Note: What you get out of this report is not solely the IBB antipathy toward Ashe.  What is also woven into the narrative is what amounts to a brazen attempt by the IBB to neuter the BBG and take over all power relating to decisions regarding US Government international broadcasting.  These guys want the BBG, the White House, the Congress to simply “sign on the dotted line” to anything they want to do, at any expense to the American taxpayer, without regard to effectiveness and relevance to the agency’s mission.)

There are a whole lot of things missing in this set-up and demonization of Ambassador Ashe by the OIG and the IBB.

Here is a key, salient point:

The day-to-day operations of the agency are in the hands of the IBB.

So – what have our IBB boys and girls been up to in their day-to-day?

Answer: The kinds of things that you as a BBG member would really want to know.  Things that impact on your oversight and accountability requirements.

Example One:

How about “The Amazing ‘Parazit’ Disappearing Act?”

You remember “Parazit” don’t you?

That was the Persian News Network (PNN) television project that was supposedly “widely popular” in Iran.  We’re not only talking about moving the program up to the agency’s New York offices (costing taxpayer’s money) from the Cohen Building.

No, but that’s bad enough for the cost.

What we’re talking about here is “Parazit” going into the IBB “Bermuda Triangle” and off the air.  Of course, the general public had to find out about “Parazit” going off the air via the Iranian-American community and BBG Watch.

Why?

Because the IBB was assiduously maintaining the fiction – with the BBG and with the Congress – that the program was still on the air!  Keep in mind that the IBB exploited this program trying to use it as leverage to extract more funding (hence the cover-up).  And then – Poof!  Gone!  No explanation.

Example Two:

From the OIG report:

“The inspection team observed the behavior of the Governor in question in Board meetings and reviewed extensive communications between him and his Board colleagues and IBB senior staff. In meetings, he habitually disrupts the flow of discussion with points of order, complains of being uninformed about matters that were part of documentation presented before the meeting to all Governors, and accuses senior staff of hampering him from carrying out his fiduciary duties by keeping important information from him.”

Interesting.

You will note that the OIG report doesn’t say that the allegations rendered by Ambassador Ashe were unfounded.

And there is a reason for this.  As seen from other episodes, the IBB likes to play it tight with information that it doesn’t want reaching Ashe, the other BBG members, the Congress, the public or its audiences.

But they go beyond keeping it tight.  In some instances, senior agency officials have refused to provide information.  One notable case involved Steve Korn, former president of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) who refused to provide information to the BBG Strategy and Budget Committee, whose members are Governors Michael Meehan and Victor Ashe, unless he was ordered to do so by the entire BBG! Korn also refused to explain why his Vice President of Administration was not available to answer questions.

One wonders who gave him guidance on that maneuver.  Conventional thinking is that one need not look further than the Third Floor of the Cohen Building.

Ladies and gentlemen, where we come from, this kind of behavior is commonly referred to as insubordination.  And when a senior agency official does it, it is called gross insubordination.  It’s the kind of thing that could get someone removed from the Federal Service for cause.

Here’s another one:

“Board dynamics are characterized by a degree of hostility that renders its deliberative process ineffectual. During the course of the inspection, the majority of individuals interviewed firmly expressed the view that the Board’s current paralysis was the fault of a single Governor and that the reputations of other Board members should not be damaged because of his tactics. The inspection team’s observations and interactions with the aforementioned Governor support this view.”

Funny

The OIG (and likely persons on the IBB) think they are being charitable and compassionate when stating, “the reputations of other Board members should not be damaged because of his tactics.”

That’s playing the old “divide and conquer” game, IBB style.

It’s all bogus.

Message to the bureaucrats of the IBB: A tactic known is no longer a tactic.

And what makes it even more hypocritical is an observation earlier in the “report,” with regard to the IBB’s bogus strategic plan:

“However, in the face of criticism from within and outside the organization, the Governors have not implemented these decisions (related to the strategic plan), with two Governors in particular backsliding on their prior commitments. Instead, the Board has allowed itself to be distracted by operational issues best handled at lower management levels and has consistently undermined the IBB Director in the execution of his duties. By allowing its focus to slip from issues of strategic importance, the Board fails to exploit fully its collective talents and does not meet its legislative obligation to provide oversight of and strategic guidance to the broadcast entities.”

Well there you go: try to get the governors to play along with the hatchet job on Ashe but slam “two Governors in particular backsliding on their prior commitments…” when it comes to the highly-flawed “flim flam Soviet-style strategic plan.”

And, once again, we have Richard Lobo, the IBB Director, whining and petulant.

Let’s be plain: it’s obvious that Mr. Lobo has no demonstrative leadership skills – other than perhaps leading the way in this hatchet job of Ambassador Ashe?

By the way -

Doesn’t the report say “in the face of criticism from within and outside the organization” regarding the “flim flam Soviet-style strategic plan?”

Let’s try to follow the OIG/IBB logic: get the BBG behind a flawed strategic plan, support it without question, rubber stamp it to make the IBB look like a bunch of geniuses (not!) and help set up the agency to fail!

Amazing.

Remember what we said earlier:

The IBB has played its hand: anyone – BBG member, entity head, line employee – will be savaged.

There’s plenty more to find fault with in this “report.”  It has no credibility other than being a bald-faced hatchet job (the apt description by the AFGE Local 1812 Union) and power play by the IBB.

The bad thing – the really bad thing – is the buy-in by the OIG.  If credibility and objectivity were particularly important standards for the OIG, they demolished both with this shameful, unprofessional piece.

We’ve said it before: there needs to be a serious investigation of the IBB.  This “report” demonstrates that the State Department cannot be relied upon to carry out that investigation.  That moves things to another venue: the Congress.

And as always, there is the venue of public opinion.  In the case of BBG Watch, we know that means the court of  both American and international public opinion.

We are staunchly supportive of Ambassador Ashe and any other members of the BBG who stand with him.  Individuals who distinguish themselves accordingly are conspicuous for their fortitude in the face of abject intellectual and moral decline within the IBB.

At this time and place, if US Government international broadcasting is to be saved, Ambassador Ashe is the man.

He fights.

The Federalist

January 2013

(It is 1864.  The American Civil War is into its fourth year of bloody conflict.  In the East, the Army of Northern Virginia, Robert E Lee commanding [the most potent Confederate army in the field], had fought the Union Army of the Potomac to virtual stalemate.  A succession of six Union commanders [George McClellan twice] failed to defeat Lee and end the war.  Lincoln was beside himself.  Needing to do something to bring the war to an end with a Union victory, Lincoln appointed Ulysses S Grant as the new Army of the Potomac commander.  In 1863, Grant won a battle of strategic significance – laying siege to the city of Vicksburg, Mississippi, splitting the South in half and gaining strategic control of the river.  Lincoln had his commander.

And not only would he command the Army of the Potomac.  Lincoln gave Grant command of all Union armies fighting the Confederacy.  For the first time, the Union had a unified strategic plan.

But Grant was not without his detractors.  A “whispering campaign” began, the intended outcome to force Lincoln to choose someone else for command.  The subject was rumors that Grant had a drinking problem.  Lincoln made it plain, “I cannot spare this man.  He fights.”

Lincoln stuck to his guns and Grant came East.  Although it would take another year of heavy fighting, Grant was not intimidated by Lee’s prowess.  He knew what was needed to defeat the South and he put the armies at his command in motion and achieved his objectives.)

by The Federalist

(Note: In November 2012, the Office of Program Review (OPR) presented its assessment of the Voice of America (VOA) Central Newsroom.  This is the fourth of a series on this review.  The previous commentaries dealt with an overview of the Newsroom, the management culture inside the agency and the views of Newsroom employees.)

The VOA Central Newsroom.  The most important, vital operation in the agency.  If the Newsroom succeeds in carrying out its mission (codified in the VOA Charter – which is really all about the Newsroom when you read it and think about it), the rest of what the agency does follows.  If it doesn’t succeed – and it isn’t doing so now – the rest of the agency’s overall effort fails.

What Is “Program Review?”

The name is something of a misnomer.  In reality, this is a “program evaluation:” assessing how an agency department conforms to and/or carries out objectives set by senior officials of the Broadcasting Board of Governors/International Broadcasting Bureau (BBG/IBB) and senior VOA management.  It could be an opportunity for improving the agency’s overall performance.

It doesn’t work that way.

It is a process that is biased and subjective.  The bias is that of the Third Floor agenda.  When that bias is in support of a failed strategic plan, the process is compromised from the start.

Consider this comment from an individual familiar with the Newsroom:

“So….they hack the newsroom to bits, do everything they can to suppress filing by the beat correspondents, and THEN they complain that there’s not enough VOA-generated material to fill the (VOA) website.

This reminds me very much of the past scenario when they took away all our good program times and frequencies, and THEN complained that VOA English radio had no audience.”

This is a tactic the Third Floor has practiced for years, with the Newsroom and language services alike.

Thus, the basis of a program review is intended to bolster an intended Third Floor outcome – a familiar Third Floor “SOP” that one sees in trying to spin its “research data,” the hiring of a myriad of consultants and on its goes.

To all appearances, the intent with the Newsroom is to destroy the agency’s primary mission: the VOA Charter.  In the face of the criticisms leveled at senior agency officials for a failed “strategic plan,” these officials must generate a paper trail to maintain a fiction:  that they are on the right track when the results clearly demonstrate otherwise.  Add to the paper trail the OPR “assessment” of the Newsroom.

The November 2012 OPR review supports dismemberment of the Newsroom’s centralized editorial controls and functions, an intended objective of the “flim flam Soviet-style strategic plan” advocates on the Third Floor.  This is a radical departure from the Newsroom’s organizational structure which has served the agency and its mission well for much of its seventy year history.  This assessment has not been embraced by the Newsroom staff.  Sonja Pace, the head of the Newsroom, also opposed decentralizing the Newsroom only to have the recommendations of the OPR staff supported by Steve Redisch, the VOA Executive Editor.  In essence, this undercut Pace’s judgment, her authority as head of the Newsroom and the professional expertise of her staff.  He also undercut Ms. Kelu Chao, the head of Program Review, who publicly made it the Newsroom’s decision to make the call on the “recommendations” of OPR staffers who conducted the “review.”

We have a copy of the review.  However, for the purposes of this commentary, we will rely principally on notes from an email written by Ms. Pace and provided to the Newsroom staff summarizing the meeting.  Ms. Kelu Chao was also present for the meeting.

The three staffers making the presentation were: John Lippman, Billy Otwell and Chet Rhodes.  We know none of the three personally or by professional reputation.  Compared to many Newsroom veterans, their time with the agency and familiarity with the Newsroom does not appear to be very long.

Of the three, the most outspoken is John Lippman.  He seems to have big opinions and is not shy about making them.

Setting the Tone

Prior to the Newsroom review, we got what might have been a precursor of things to come.  Statements attributed to a person or persons in the Office of Program Review include the following:

“…There is no more international broadcasting…It’s all about feeding our surrogates.”

“What are they going to do, come and put handcuffs on you?”

Revealing.

The first statement is most certainly untrue.  International broadcasting is alive and well.  It is practiced most effectively by the Russians, Chinese, Iranians and the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), among others.  Their programs have resonance.  As part of their overall international broadcasting effort are programs directed at North and South America.  “Russia Today” is one of the most popular news sites on YouTube.  The Chinese have news bureaus in Washington, DC and Times Square, New York City.

(Note: The BBC has a “co-production” arrangement with public radio station WGBH in Boston and with “Public Radio International [PRI].”  The latter produces a program called “The World,” heard in the Washington, DC area on WAMU-FM, the radio station of American University.  A recent program segment included a feature on Leo Sarkisian, longtime host of the VOA English-to-Africa program, “Music Time in Africa.”  Mr. Sarkisian recently retired from the agency.)    

In one fashion or another, the posture of these international broadcasters is pronounced and robust.  They recognize the importance of molding public opinion with global audiences.  They have a true strategic focus.

In short, these international broadcasters make the first statement from within OPR both moronic and imbecilic.

The second statement has to do with a reference to the VOA Charter, and by inference in the context in which it was made, ignoring the Charter.  In essence, the remark suggests that there is no consequence or penalty for violating the Charter.

This is also untrue.  It puts the agency in the position of being in contempt of Congress, since the VOA Charter is a public law.  We know the agency’s senior officials very, very well.  They are an arrogant and contemptible lot, to be sure.  As this statement suggests, contempt for the rule of law has become an integral part of the IBB philosophy.  No one inside the Cohen Building would be so bold as to make this kind of statement, with the intent to coerce and intimidate employees, if this were not the case, aided and abetted by Third Floor behavior.

(Note: Recent decisions by the Federal Labor Relations Authority [FLRA] finding for the AFGE Local 1812 union shed light on how far off the rails the agency has gone when it comes to law, rule and regulation.  While dealing only with personnel issues, these decisions provide insight into how senior agency officials demonstrate their contempt for legal frameworks that can be applied to other situations.)

There are Members of Congress who are not oblivious to the rogue behavior on the Third Floor of the Cohen Building.  Marshalling congressional action to deal with the problems inside the agency will always be a work in progress, a tug of war between the executive and legislative branches of government.  These Members are very cognizant that the Third Floor has an agenda – an agenda that it isn’t good for US national or strategic interests.

Missing in Action: An Important “X” Factor

You have to know the Third Floor culture of cultivating “the worst organization in the Federal Government.”  In this environment, the OPR staffers are not about to conduct an unbiased, neutral or objective “program review.”  They are not going to go to the Third Floor and tell the “brain trust,” that their grand scheme for the Newsroom is “FUBAR” [fouled up beyond all recognition].  That would really be the kiss of death for their careers.

In reading the review and Ms. Pace’s notes, one is struck by a significant disconnect: the newsgathering process and factors which inhibit the newsgathering process juxtaposed with the Third Floor agenda.

The most salient factor absent in the review: the Newsroom is under-resourced.  It doesn’t have the staff necessary to carry out the grand design concocted by senior agency officials.

(Consider this: individuals whose primary functions are to be producers are also detailed to act as timekeepers and video librarians.)

Here’s another thing: the OPR review fails to note that the Third Floor’s “grand design” includes reducing the Newsroom staff.  In its FY2013 proposal, the reduction was upwards of 40 Newsroom positions.  One suspects those cuts to be included in the FY2014 budget proposal – and maybe more.

If the newsgathering process is under-resourced now…

You get the picture.

As a practical matter, being silent on this overarching issue impacting negatively on the Newsroom renders the OPR review worthless, nonsensical.  Unless we missed something, this issue doesn’t show up in the review, doesn’t show up in Pace’s notes.  And no one seems to raise it in the meeting.  Ignoring this pertinent issue doesn’t make it go away nor does it diminish its negative impact on present operations.

The effect is almost comical when one considers the topics that come up in the review:

** The Coverage Desk needs to achieve more centralized tracking of stories to ensure that deadlines are met.

** The Coverage Desk should be populated more with “worker bees” to pull in content from services and elsewhere, rather than being filled with senior people.

** The Central Newsroom needs to know language service deadlines and meet them.  “Most” TV reports are released at 5 p.m., long after the daily shows are over for the day.

** The reporter beats should be more formalized in order for there to be more productivity.

** Spoke of “two classes of reporters” at VOA:  English reporters and language service reporters, saying the latter are quite able and some of them “better” than the English language reporters.  And so he said the newsroom regional desks should be placed in the divisions to take advantage of that reporting.  He said the concept for Central News should be that the “major client is not the world but the regions.”  He said once the regional desks are integrated with the divisions, there will be a greater number of reports produced.  His concept is that what would remain in the newsroom is a core group that handles the top headlines, domestic coverage including Americana and presumably logistics.  (This suggestion was definitely the most contentious item in the entire review and we took great issue, as did some division and service chiefs).

Once again, everything has to be seen in the context of a core agency function that is under-resourced now and faces the prospect of being even more under-resourced in the near future.

Most assuredly the Newsroom staff is well acquainted with language service airshows and deadlines related to these broadcasts.  But once again, where is the discussion of resources, the allocation of resources and bottlenecks to carrying out production functions?  Without the resources (personnel), things are not going to get done in a timely manner, particularly in those areas that are personnel intensive (television production).  In reading email traffic among Newsroom staff, this is a large problem that appears to be increasing daily.

The comment about reporter beats being “more formalized” is way out in the “Twilight Zone.”  News reporting, by its nature, requires the ability to be flexible and responsive as news breaks and stories develop.  It is not clear what “formalization” this process needs.  However, on its face, trying to put beat reporting into a box is asking for trouble.

For example, if “more formalized” means trying to put the beat reporters into a box that is something like 9 to 5, Monday through Friday, is casting a blind eye toward the 24/7 nature of a globalized world – the kiss of death for a legitimate newsgathering operation.

In our reading of the situation, more formalization means less ability to meet deadlines, something that slows the entire process down to a crawl.  On its face, this recommendation is self-defeating.

The “worker bees” comment we see as a pejorative – demeaning the importance of having veteran Newsroom staff manage the newsgathering and reporting process.  “Worker bees” without direction and guidance equals chaos.  Indeed, some Newsroom staffer emails describe the current Newsroom process as “schizophrenic.”

”Two Classes of Reporters”

This was described in Ms. Pace’s email notes as being a “contentious issue.”  And well it should because it is nothing more than the mouthing of Third Floor-like canards.

As “the worst agency in the Federal government,” this is giving voice to an operational philosophy that is intended to be divisive, demeaning and exploitative, in addition to being generally unworkable.

We need to know what precisely incorporates the concept of “better,” beyond utterance of a generality.

Every agency employee in the building involved in newsgathering understands a language service broadcaster brings specific knowledge and expertise to the table as does his/her counterpart in the Newsroom.  This is the system that works: a symbiotic relationship that draws upon the respective strengths of each.  To say that one group is “better than” another, aside from the negatives mentioned above, is one of those obtuse agency “apples versus oranges” comparisons that is totally absurd.

Last but not least:

**The concept for Central News should be that the “major client” is not the world but the regions.

Once again, ladies and gentlemen, this is:

B-A-L-O-N-E-Y.

Among many other shortcomings, this is the decisive flaw of the Newsroom review.

The Voice of America Newsroom is an international newsroom.  The agency’s “major client” IS the world.

The world is the stage the agency performs on, not a room of empty chairs in a Bruce Sherman “PowerPoint” presentation on mobile phones in Nigeria, the kind of diminished regional focus typified in this remark.  Diminished focus, diminished expectations equate with diminished performance: “information war lost.”  These guys don’t aim high.  They aim low.  They are looking for empty space to plough, well off the target line: the agency’s mission.

The senior officials concocting this focus have no focus.  They avoid the obvious: in a globalized world, events reverberate globally and are not self-absorbed regional occurrences. 

Like the purveyors of the agency’s “flim flam Soviet-style strategic plan,” this remark is getting the agency’s mission “backwards.”  Following this absurd twist of rationale does one thing and one thing only:

It facilitates the end of the VOA Newsroom – if not the agency itself – as a major source of relevant news and information for global publics.  And it most certainly will accelerate the loss of the agency’s global audience, already occurring at a rapid pace through 2012.  That loss of audience should make the twisted logic of the Third Floor readily apparent.

Nonetheless, this is the Third Floor agenda.  It is an agenda that is incompatible with the VOA Charter.  It is an agenda that obstructs the VOA Newsroom from doing its job properly and thoroughly.  It is an agenda that puts it on the backs of VOA language services to replicate what the VOA Newsroom is able to do for the entire VOA – keeping in mind that the VOA language services have only a fraction of the staff found in the Newsroom (once again, the “under-resourced” issue).

It is most certainly not what the American taxpayers pay for this agency to do.

David Ensor’s contention that the demolition of the VOA Central Newsroom will result in 43 newsrooms (the current number of VOA language services) is laughable: 43 language services each scrambling to cover the news instead of using a reliable core source for agency-wide news distribution.

In short, this is Mr. Ensor’s prescription for setting up the agency to fail.

(Here’s a “scenario” for you: Christmas.  New Year’s.  Making the rounds of holiday parties.  We run into one of our acquaintances with experience up on Capitol Hill.  Naturally, the conversation turns to, “So how is ‘the worst organization in the Federal Government?’”  We bring him up to date: the 2012 employee survey and this latest OPR review of the Newsroom.  We go into the “43 phone calls to your office” example we’ve mentioned in a previous commentary – the one in which David Ensor’s “43 newsrooms” are tying up the office phone lines for a reaction from our friend’s boss [a congressman or senator – we won’t say who] to a story.  I reach into a coat pocket and say, “Here, you’re going to need this.”  It’s a bottle of aspirin.   “After about the 15^th phone call, you’re going to have a headache as big as all outdoors – because the receptionist can’t get any work done – and she’s giving you that, ‘This is your fault’ look.  And you were so looking forward to taking her to lunch.  Now, that look she’s giving you says the lunch date is not going to happen until you fix this.  But before you take the aspirin, make a phone call to David Ensor and read him the proverbial riot act.  Make him feel your pain.  They will hear you all over the office.  The rest of the staff will be impressed.  Then take the aspirin and make a note to your boss about cutting the agency’s funding.  They’re wasting a whole lot of taxpayer money promoting inefficiency.  And by the way, don’t forget to ask Ensor, ‘Who is this guy in your Program Review Office, talking trash that sounds remarkably like contempt of Congress?!?’”)

(Editorial Note: This story doesn’t end here.  The VOA Newsroom is important and is way up there on our radar.  It will continue to occupy a prominent place in the topics The Federalist covers.  In the meantime, there are other important stories about our failed US Government international broadcasting agency that we need to get to.  We will be switching gears to get to these other topics as time permits.  “Happy” New Year.)

The Federalist

January 2013

Broadcasting Board of Governors - Information War Lost - Bluster

by The Federalist

The Congress has thrown a bone to the Broadcasting Board of Governors/International Broadcasting Bureau (BBG/IBB), modifying the Smith-Mundt Act (as a provision of a defense authorization bill) to facilitate dissemination of agency programs inside the United States.

This is something the agency has coveted for a while.  Typically, the BBG press office can’t contain itself and has issued another gift – a press release dated January 3, 2013: “Passage of New Law Enhances Our Journalists’ Reach, Improves the Agency’s Use of Resources, Increases Transparency, BBG says.”

Well, we don’t see it that way.

For all the good citizens and third parties out there, let us consider who we are talking about here:

This is an agency of the US Government characterized as “the worst organization in the Federal Government.”

This is an agency of the US Government which has earned a reputation for being one of the worst places to work in the Federal Government.

Anything and everything this agency says about itself should be seen in the light of these two statements and actions surrounding these statements.

Why the Change in the Law?

The answer is simple: thanks to the agency’s “flim flam Soviet-style strategic plan,” the agency is shedding its audiences like water off a duck.  The agency is barely keeping its head above water.  Out of a global population of 7-billion, the agency is having a hard time holding onto about 175-million.  Since we are using a water theme here, this amounts to a drop in the bucket, spread out over the global population.  Keep in mind that this drop in the bucket is costing the American taxpayer close to $1-billion dollars annually.

That is money better spent things like Hurricane Sandy relief and reconstruction.  We’re fairly certain most Americans would agree, particularly the folks up in New Jersey and New York states.

Going after a domestic US audience is the last stand for the charlatans on the Third Floor of the Cohen.

And more than likely, they will ultimately share the same fate as other “last stands,” like George Armstrong Custer and the 7^th US Cavalry in the Battle of the Little Bighorn, without the lasting glory and immortality and a whole lot more ignominy.

But such is the megalomania on the Third Floor of the Cohen Building – an overblown and overstated sense of self-importance.

This last stand is an attempt to hold onto some audience, any audience, to justify the existence of the agency.

Let’s Talk About “Transparency”

When we saw the word “transparency” used in the heading of this BBG/IBB press release, we fell out of our chair laughing.

The very last thing the people in the Third Floor of the Cohen Building are interested in is transparency.  Their entire modus operandi is about the absence of transparency, or at best, selective transparency.

But since they brought it up:

Here are two examples of how to hold the BBG/IBB to the transparency issue:

The American taxpayer is entitled to know how their money is being spent by government agencies, especially one with the horrid record established by this agency.

In that regard, let’s see the BBG publish the annual salaries and bonuses of its top officials.  This would include people running the IBB, the Voice of America (VOA) and the entity heads of the agency’s grantees (Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Radio Free Asia, Radio Sawa and al-Hurra television, Radio/TV Marti).  The American taxpayer is entitled to know and it is all public information.

And they may very well ask why we are rewarding these people based on the record they’ve established for themselves.

The next “transparency test” for the BBG/IBB is its so-called “Russia review,” involving the fiasco of its decisions regarding the Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) Russian service.

You know our position: this review should be conducted independent of the BBG and the IBB staff, composed of subject matter experts with no connection to the agency.

That’s the first part of the test.

The second part is to examine the review itself, which the BBG should post on the agency’s website.  And it would have to be published in both English and Russian.

If the BBG wants transparency, it’s time to pony up with these two examples as leading efforts.

Enhancing “Reach”

This is a BBG/IBB canard.

This change in the law is behind the curve of reality.

The agency has had Internet websites for years.  These websites are accessible and have been accessible to Americans and generally anyone in open societies.  Internet penetration in closed societies is more problematic – in addition to covert cyber warfare operations by closed or controlled societies.  Some activities are pronounced, as in Russia, China, Iran and North Korea by way of examples.  At the same time, the United Nations (UN) is considering a resolution allowing nations to control and/or regulate the Internet.  Not surprisingly, leading that effort are the Chinese and the Russians.

On its face, what this law allows the agency to do is to make the American people the target audience for its programs.

We also know that Internet audience penetration has been and continues to be the weakest part of the agency’s program outreach.  In reality, the change in the law, operationally, gains the agency little or nothing beyond what it already has.

And on top of that, let’s consider the obvious:

The agency is up against a whole lot of domestic and international websites available in the United States.  They run the gamut: ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox News, CNN, Associated Press, the BBC, Russia Today and a whole host of others.

We do not suggest that the agency not have websites.

(It’s a good way for BBG Watch to keep an eye on what these folks are doing.)

However, as reality has already demonstrated, it is far less conceivable that the agency is going to have a marked increase in its Internet traction or its program traction generally.  That is the reality.  And it is in the here and now.

For those Americans who may be interested, the agency’s program content, delivered via Internet or otherwise, is a situational tool; and depending on circumstances, it can often be a minor one.  In terms of an American audience, one cannot see the agency’s efforts as being a primary go-to source for news and information.

And let us say clearly, this is not to denigrate the efforts of the working staff.  It is more a reflection that the primary effort of the agency’s efforts and focus is international – even though some individuals inside the Cohen Building like to expound that “there is no more international broadcasting.”

Only in the Cohen Building, folks.  And that attitude is how the place shoots itself in the foot.

The Larger Issue

We study and monitor the behavior of the agency very closely.  Based on our experiences, the greater concern we have with this change in the law is the agency using it to engage in propaganda – the kind you see in its stream of press releases.

If you know the agency and its key players, you know that the name of the game being played is self-promotion.  These people love to issue these press releases.

But there is a problem.

They don’t always tell the whole story.

For example, recently the agency issued a press release making a very big deal about a joint effort between Radio Farda (a US Government grantee service) and the VOA Persian News Network (PNN) establishing a new morning show into Iran.

Not many Americans outside the Iranian-American community care, but on its face, it sounds nice.

But therein rests the problem.  The agency often chooses ways of describing things to create the appearance of positives and/or successes but not the substance of success.

What you don’t get from this press release are the challenges to getting programs into Iran.

The Iranians are not shy about their interdiction efforts.  Indeed, the agency seems to forget context from one press release to another.  In this case, a press release prior to the one discussed here expressed the agency’s anger toward the Iranians for blocking its satellite transmissions aimed at Iran.

If this new program is transmitted simultaneously on both radio and television, there is a chance that the program will get through – IF the radio program is direct broadcast via ground transmitters.  However, if the radio program is also up on a satellite, forget it.

And of course, putting out a press release blowing your own horn also lets the Iranians know what you are doing.

These issues have always been out there.  However, in the technology of the current day, delivery of programs to controlled societies is more problematic because countermeasures can be more finely tuned and are a whole lot more cost effective for the jammer.  The footprint (a satellite channel) is a whole lot narrower than that of a radio signal beamed from a ground transmitter.

The proof is in the pudding, so to speak.  In this case, the “pudding” is in the diminished audiences for agency programs.  In part, the situation reflects successful efforts to block the agency’s programs.  However, these societies are not sitting in neutral in terms of their own technological advances.  With regard to China and Iran, they are developing their own Internet, setting up their own cyber networks as well as picking as choosing what external content they will allow their citizens to access – and this is now, ahead of whatever the United Nations ultimately comes up with in its resolutions.  The difference is a UN resolution, if approved by its member nations, “legitimizes” those controls.

The End Result

Time is rapidly passing the agency by.  As a result, the agency is becoming boxed into a corner.  In this scenario, the only thing left is for the agency to create the appearance, not the fact, that it is having an impact.

But that’s not what we’re seeing.

There are too many negatives out there that speak to a much different reality.  An agency openly described as “the worst organization in the Federal Government” and “one of the worst places to work in the Federal Government” is not a success story.

In the hands of people with this disposition, what we come to expect is a “marketing campaign” and one in which the goods being hawked may well be misinformation, disinformation or controlled, selective information – self-serving “propaganda” intended to benefit a handful of people running the agency, not to inform the American people.

Let the beholder beware.

The Federalist

January 2013

Broadcasting Board of Governors - Information War Lost:  Surprise!

by The Federalist

(Note: We thought The Federalist was taking a break for the holidays.  We were mistaken!  The Federalist offers some thoughts on 2012 and looks ahead to 2013.)

Yes, we did say after our last post that we would be back in January 2013.  However:

The work of the Federalist goes on right through the Christmas and New Year’s holidays.

One must remain ever vigilant in dealing with the schemers on the Third Floor of the Cohen Building.

2013 is shaping up to be another bad year for these folks.  Here are some of the things on our US Government international broadcasting radar:

The Central Newsroom: We will continue our series on the effort by the Broadcasting Board of Governors/International Broadcasting Bureau (BBG/IBB) to dismantle the Voice of America (VOA) Central Newsroom.  We will take a look at the Office of Program Review (OPR) staffers who were principally involved in this demolitions job.  We have a lot of material to work with and may extend the series periodically.

The Federal Employee Survey: The 2012 employee survey hasn’t escaped our attention either.  How can it?  The agency has consistently hit bottom in these surveys since the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) introduced them.

If you want a good laugh, here’s a statement from the “Office of Propaganda” (the agency’s Public Relations Office) on the latest survey results, as offered to the publication Radio World:

“Between budgetary pressures and economic uncertainty, an ongoing pay freeze and the widespread criticism of federal employees in public discourse, people in most federal agencies are not as enthusiastic as they used to be. And this agency remains no exception.”

“Our governing board and our senior management team are committed to making measurable improvements over the next year […].  We have engaged the Partnership for Public Service to help. They facilitated a series of focus groups with employees and contractors and are working with senior leaders to develop an action plan to understand and tackle employee satisfaction issues.”

“At the same time, we know our employees have a strong commitment to their work and believe in the importance of our mission.”

The last sentence is probably the one, true statement as applies to the agency specifically – and it has nothing to do with the characters-in-charge on the Third Floor of the Cohen Building.  And it is just like the IBB to purloin or exploit a quality of the agency’s employees which these same officials have made no positive contribution toward.

As for the rest of the statement as pertains to the agency:

B-A-L-O-N-E-Y.

This is the IBB spin machine at work.

The only thing the characters on the Third Floor of the Cohen Building are interested in is maintaining the integral parts of their status quo.  That is their “action plan.”

They’ve been doing it since Day One in the survey process – and this has been going on for almost a decade.

What the Third Floor is doing is adding to its “CYA” paper trail: saying one thing and doing something totally different.

The Partnership for Public Service: window dressing.

The agency Ombudsman: window dressing.

The so-called “forum” meetings with the agency’s unions (until AFGE Local 1812 – rightly – ended its participation): window dressing.

Focus groups: you’ve got to be kidding.

You already know what we call this: motion without movement.

The existing paradigm is what matters most with senior agency officials and they will defend it to the death of their careers, their six-figure salaries and bonuses.  The only way the paradigm will change is by way of some external force.  And right now, as muddled as national governance is, it seemingly isn’t on the horizon.  If anything, those above the BBG/IBB are busy with national priorities and national dysfunction.  And as far as this tiny piece of dysfunction is concerned, it seems that folks over at State, the White House and the Congress will likely allow the place to devolve and implode.  It’s doing so now, making it easier to focus on more pressing problems.

Secretary Clinton’s prophetic statement, “We are losing the information war…” may have been a signal that the fate of the agency had been sealed: failed mission, failed agency.

(We wouldn’t want anyone on the IBB to be on our management team.  They’re toxic.)

Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL): What a fiasco.  The main event is the firing of the veteran RFE/RL Russian Service broadcasters: the way it was done and the duplicitous reasons why it was done.  We’re not sure why it was done from the standpoint of professional journalism.  The fired employees have been supported by human rights organizations both inside and outside Russia.  They have also been given awards for their work, especially their online, multimedia reporting.  You would think these employees would be vital assets to the RFE/RL mission.  However, Steve Korn, the RFE/RL seem to see things a different way, putting Russian media gadfly Masha Gessen in charge of the service, firing the veteran employees and watching the audience evaporate.

And let’s not forget the latest form of trickery from the IBB – its so-called “Russian Review.”  That’s a joke.  The name of this game is to avoid accountability for the fiasco perpetrated by Korn, perhaps with active IBB guidance and maybe even support.

As to the fired employees, one thing you get to learn about the Russians:  when they put their minds to something, they don’t give up.  They have fought back, established their own operation and are not about to let go.  This is a story that keeps on giving, as evident in the reporting appearing on BBG Watch and elsewhere.

This is a good lesson for employees inside the Cohen Building.  If you don’t fight, you lose.  The Third Floor wants you to lose.  In this regard, we commend the leadership of the AFGE Local 1812 union in challenging agency actions and winning some big decisions via administrative law procedures.  It is not an easy task.

For You “Arab Springers” Out There: Looks like the Muslim Brotherhood’s proposed constitution in Egypt will pass.  The civil war in Syria continues (both sides charged with war crimes and the insurgents infiltrated by al-Qaeda fighters).  Let’s not forget Libya/Benghazi.  Al-Qaeda fighters control parts of Mali.  Hamas militants have fired rocket barrages into Israel (the rockets coming from Iran via Egypt).

For all the kumbaya advocates out there thinking that what has been going on in the Arab/Muslim world is some kind of “Summer of Love,” consider this:

“Be careful what you wish for.  You may get it.”

Another laugh moment:

From an RFE/RL press release dated December 19, 2012:

“Iranians can begin their day with a new, two hour block of live television programming from RFE/RL’s Radio Farda and VOA Persian Television, through a groundbreaking collaboration between the two international broadcasters. Radio Farda’s Breakfast with News and VOA’s Radio Tamasha are now being aired weekday mornings on VOA’s Persian Television channel, which broadcasts into Iran on the Hotbird satellite and on Livestation, a 24/7 Internet streaming platform. This represents the first time a Radio Farda production has appeared on television. …”

Of course, the press release doesn’t mention that the Iranians like to block satellite transmissions of both radio and television programs delivered via satellite from the US Government.  And on top of that, the Iranians, Russians and Chinese are backing a resolution in the United Nations to “regulate” (i.e., block) the Internet.

The agency continues to insist on an audience share in Iran of 20%.  But none of the data the agency has produced supports that claim.  To all outward appearances: IBB hocus-pocus.

Speaking of hocus-pocus: POOF!  The amazing disappearing act of the allegedly popular Farsi “Parazit” program speaks volumes.

And last but not least:

The FY2014 Budget:

Ladies and Gentlemen, a country that is already TRILLIONS of dollars in debt has already zoomed over the fiscal cliff.   Whatever – and IF ever – the Congress and the White House agree to something with regard resolving to the nation’s financial woes, those woes are not going to go away overnight.  Indeed they could be around for quite a while.

With this in mind, we fully expect more bad news for the failed agency with a failed mission.   In FY2013, the administration/agency budget proposal called for the elimination of 14 of 43 VOA language services and the elimination of over 200 positions, a large chunk of about 40 positions identified as coming out of the VOA Newsroom.  The IBB didn’t get the cuts it wanted, in part because the Congress couldn’t agree on a budget.  And on its current trajectory, it’s likely they won’t agree on the FY2014 one either.  But we’re getting ahead of things – sort of like that Mayan calendar.

We know these IBB types very, very well.  You can be sure that they likely intend to go after those same cuts again in FY2014 and add even more.  The IBB philosophy: expect more, get more!  It doesn’t always work in reality, but that isn’t going to stop them from trying.

Like we said: be ever vigilant with the BBG/IBB.

The Federalist

December 2012

BBG Dec. Meeting

Broadcasting Board of Governors - Information War Lost - Russia Reviewed 

by The Federalist

 (Special to BBG Watch to mark over 900,000 hits on bbgwatch.com since its launch in Sept. 2011)

Broadcasting Board of Governors/International Broadcasting Bureau (BBG/IBB) press releases:  always a bountiful source of information, albeit often in the form of disinformation, misinformation, and disingenuousness.

When reading these things you think you’re reading a statement from the Kremlin.

How apropos then for the press release of December 16, 2012 titled: “BBG Launches Russia Review, Recognizes Journalists And Departing Senior Managers, Adopts New Travel Guidelines.”

“Russia Review.”

Sounds like the BBG is going to get into the magazine business.

It is not.

These are not happy times inside the Cohen Building.  And the BBG meetings reflect it.  There is no room for perfunctory “happy news.”

According to this press release, in BBG/IBB-speak:

“It (the BBG) commissioned a six-month review of the situation in Russia to be led by IBB Deputy Director Jeffrey Trimble. Board members also made plans to travel to Russia in early 2013 to meet with officials and civil society and to explore distribution options for programming by Voice of America and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.”

What “situation in Russia?”

What the press release is really talking about is the demolitions job done to Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) and its Russian Service by Steve Korn, the RFE/RL president.

What Mr. Korn did was set off spontaneous combustion across a broad spectrum of the international human rights community when he fired 40 RFE/RL Russian Service employees.

On top of that, along with the new Russian Service director, Masha Gessen, they have succeeded in practically vaporizing most of the audience for RFE/RL Russian.

Thus, our gang on the Third Floor of the Cohen Building is having a delayed reaction “damage control moment.”

It’s too late.

The next phase in the RFE/RL apocalypse is the following, as reported in a recent BBG Watch post:

“BBG Interim Presiding Governor Michael Lynton…announced ‘a review of the recent developments in Moscow regarding RFE/RL to be led by Jeff Trimble.’ (Jeff Trimble is the Deputy Director of the BBG’s International Broadcasting Bureau, IBB). Prior to his work at the BBG in Washington, Trimble had a 10-year career at RFE/RL, where his positions included Acting President, Counselor to the President for Programs and Policy, Director of Policy and Strategic Planning, and Director of Broadcasting.”

Ladies and gentlemen, let’s be clear:

What is needed in the case of the RFE/RL disaster – as well as the overall state of US Government international broadcasting – is not a “review,” particularly an internal BBG/IBB review.

What is required is a full-blown, independent investigation.

As the previous BBG Watch post points out, Jeffrey Trimble has a resume with RFE/RL service included.  Perhaps someone inside the Cohen Building thinks this builds up credibility.  To the contrary, it invites questions about conflict of interest.

In addition to what is noted above, Mr. Trimble was one of the “three amigos” (along with Bruce Sherman and Steve Redisch) who put on a public spectacle at the Heritage Foundation not long ago, publicly demeaning Tim Shamble, an agency employee and president of the AFGE Local 1812 union at the Voice of America (VOA), during one of that organization’s panel discussions (the agency’s hostile work environment philosophy in action in a public forum).

Mr. Trimble is also one of the principle architects and defenders of what we like to call the agency’s “flim flam Soviet-style strategic plan.”

Last and definitely not least, Mr. Trimble is also the recipient of at least one bonus award in the amount of $10,000 on top of his six figure annual salary.

These are the kinds of things that (a) we take notice of and (b) do not inspire confidence.  Under the circumstances, we feel that putting anyone from the IBB in charge of a “review” insinuates the BBG/IBB agenda into the process.  Do not expect objectivity to be high on the list of the review process nor among intended outcomes.

As we noted, more than likely the name of the game on the part of the BBG/IBB is serious damage control.  Don’t expect a probative, detailed and thorough sifting through the debris caused by the Korn fiasco.  Do not expect the hard questions to be asked.

Here are some of the hard questions:

Did Korn act unilaterally?

If Korn did not act unilaterally, who advised him in the actions related to the firing of the RFE/RL Russian Service employees?

In turn, who approved the firings?  Was it Korn acting alone or did he do some “CYA” and have the action approved by the BBG and/or the IBB?

How was Masha Gessen selected for chief of the RFE/RL Russian Service?  Was there a vacancy announcement and a selection process from among qualified applicants?

What was the role of Julia Ragona and Dale Cohen, Korn’s deputies, in this matter?  What are Ragona’s previous business dealings with the Russian government, if any?  Do any of her previous business associations in Russia represent a conflict of interest?

And while all of this is going on, Korn, Ragona and Cohen should be placed on administrative leave.

Absent detailed answers to these questions, what we expect is a flimsy act of bureaucratic obfuscation as the so-called “Russian review.”

Indeed, the so-called “review” may be nothing more than a delaying tactic, perhaps resulting in a conclusion to keep Korn in his job despite unconfirmed reports that BBG members want him gone in 45 days.  No scenario should be dismissed out of hand.  The people on the Third Floor of the Cohen Building have demonstrated that they can be as devious and duplicitous as the day is long.

Senior officials of this agency cannot be trusted.  They have and are likely to continue to misinform and misrepresent and generally try to cloak as much of the damage they have done to US Government international broadcasting as possible.

If the American taxpayer really wants to know what’s going on inside the BBG/IBB, an independent probe/investigation is the only way to go.

We need to hear in greater detail from the fired RFE/RL employees, human rights organizations, Russian and external experts familiar with the immediate situation and the human rights environment in Russia, for context and in order to have a complete understanding of Korn’s actions.

But beyond this is coupled the actions of the Russian government to seriously curtail independent media and the movement of the government toward a regulated Internet, much like the Chinese and the Iranians.  And don’t forget, they are also leading the effort to have the United Nations adopt international regulatory restrictions on the Internet.

These guys are good.  They cover all the bases.

Those “distribution options” in Russia referenced in the BBG/IBB press release: slim to none.

The Federalist

December 2012

(Note: The Federalist’s series on the VOA Central Newsroom continues in January 2013)

Broadcasting Board of Governors - Information War Lost - Scorched Earth

Part Three: Employee Voices

by The Federalist

(Note: This is the third in a series concerning the Office of Program Review [OPR] assessment of the Voice of America [VOA] Newsroom.)

In late November 2012, the Office of Program Review presented its review of the Voice of America Central Newsroom (aka, the Newsroom) to staff and managers.

In the first part of this series, we focused on an overview of the Newsroom including remarks prior to the meeting by an OPR staffer and closing remarks to the meeting by David Ensor, the VOA director.

In the second part, we considered the management culture inside the agency and how it is reflected in some of the remarks by managers who attended the meeting and intended OPR outcomes.

This third segment turns our attention to the agency’s Newsroom employees.

In this, “the worst organization in the Federal Government,” one should not undervalue nor dismiss the personal courage and professional fortitude individual employees demonstrate in the face of an adversarial Third Floor or a negative group of acolytes for this hostile environment as one would find in the agency’s Office of Program Review.

(Note: Keep in mind that this hostile environment is intentional and is vigorously maintained at the direction of senior agency officials whose actions inhibit and intimidate worker productivity and present serious obstacles to mission effectiveness in support of the national and public interest.)

Some employees have spoken candidly to third parties like BBG Watch offering their observations as to what is being done to US Government international broadcasting generally and the Newsroom specifically.

More have shared emails talking about their Newsroom experiences on the condition of anonymity because of the agency management’s known reputation for being vindictive and retaliatory.

Finally, and by no measure the least, some have stepped up and spoken out directly in the OPR Central Newsroom meeting.

Sonja Pace is in charge of the Newsroom.  She distributed an email summary of the OPR meeting (“Central Program Review Hilites,” November 28, 2012).  We have examined the email and have pulled statements from it.  The statements are in no particular order but are chosen to emphasize a series of points we believe to be important and perhaps even decisive in the fate planned by senior agency officials for the VOA Newsroom.  These statements also reflect broad consensus among the Newsroom staff.

Ms. Pace notes the following:

“Supervising Editor Don Benson disputed the notion that language services do not need Central to cover the news, citing the many calls he gets on the evening shift asking for Central News stories.  Don also noted his months on a recent detail to the East Asia Division showed that programmers need coverage of breaking news. Michael Collins (who spent 6 months in the Africa Division and is now on detail in the South Asia Division) agreed…”

This is a theme that is often reprised among the Newsroom staff.  It is a core issue: the coverage of “breaking news” and the overarching issue spoken to previously, that of providing the language services with top news stories from around the globe.  The Newsroom does what it is supposed to do: cover the big picture for a global audience.  In turn, the language services are freed up to do more regional and local focus in additional news items or feature segments.

Mr. Benson and others mentioned here are veteran Newsroom professionals.  They know what they are talking about.  They are known by reputation and by the quality of their work, sometimes at great personal or physical peril.  Their observations directly support what we have noted: the language services are under-resourced (understaffed).  They need support from the Central Newsroom to lighten the load for them, part of the symbiosis that has existed between the Newsroom and the language services for much of the VOA’s seventy years.  The language services know who to go to when they need an assist in their news line-up or news coverage for their broadcasts or the coverage of breaking/developing news.

It is a system that works.

But our gang on the Third Floor and OPR want to break it.

Why?

(The answer is simple: they want to take US Government out of the business of international broadcasting, particularly serious and often breaking news.  They are committed to dismantling the Newsroom and demolishing not only its effectiveness but that of the agency’s mission.  The absence of breaking news and timely analysis of events equates with no audience.  They know that accomplishing these goals is crucial to their plans for turning the agency into something not worth the time of day to you, me, the American taxpayer and 7-BILLION other global inhabitants.  And keep in mind when something they break ends up not working, these same officials turn around and place blame on the employees.)

Back to the Pace email of November 28:

“Mark Snowiss, a newsroom writer, warned that moving the creative process out of the newsroom could “lobotomize the thinking process.”  Andre de Nesnera agreed and said the newsroom would lose its worldview by moving desks out.” 

Both Snowiss and de Nesnera hit the nail squarely on the head.  Indeed, their phrasing may be an apt description of the agency as whole, not just the Newsroom, thanks to the scheming that goes on among Third Floor managers and finds expression in these OPR reviews or the agency’s notorious “flim flam Soviet-style strategic plan.”

That’s the problem – these senior officials aren’t thinking.  They aren’t thinking globally.  They aren’t thinking strategically.  They aren’t thinking about global realities including challenges and countermeasures by adversaries.  They most certainly are not thinking about the VOA Charter.

If they are thinking at all, they are pandering to their self-interest (their bonus-mongering), how something benefits them, not the national or public interest.

In addition to employee pushback on the OPR assessment of the Newsroom – and the idea of “cherry-picking” the Newsroom regional desks and packing them off to the language divisions – Ms. Pace herself notes:

“I also spoke out strongly against any such move or any decentralization of the Newsroom.”

Ms. Pace’s statement speaks to the consequences of dismembering the Newsroom operation.  Decentralization of the Newsroom operation is detrimental to the effectiveness of the agency’s mission.  Even with her brittle relationship with her staff, she does not shy away from the obvious.

Another key official in this OPR meeting is Kelu Chao.  Ms. Chao is the head of the Office of Program Review.  Like Ms. Pace, she is a longtime agency employee, spending many years of service in the agency’s Mandarin (Chinese) Service along with other postings.  Clearly, Ms. Chao was aware of and sensitive to the contentiousness of this issue for the Newsroom staff.  As Ms. Pace notes in her email:

“Kelu Chao summarized by praising the discussion but noted that what needs to be done will be directed by Central News.”

In essence, Ms. Chao is making it the Central Newsroom’s (Ms. Pace’s) call as to how this issue was to be handled.

In effect, this puts two management officials with key roles in the discussion on the opposite side of the OPR staffers and their “review.”

In the week following the OPR review, Ms. Pace met with the same OPR staffers in what appears to be a follow-up discussion of the proposed dismembering of the Newsroom’s regional desks.

Not long afterward, Newsroom employees report that Ms. Pace showed up one morning with boxes of cupcakes.  She is reported to have stated that, “We have dodged a bullet,” apparently a reference to the meeting with the OPR staffers.  Seemingly, the attempt at Newsroom dismemberment had been beaten back – a good thing for the Newsroom and the agency’s mission.

However, the celebration appears to have been premature.

In the scheming fashion of people who don’t get their way (and put their way ahead of the best interests of the agency’s mission), the OPR acolytes did an end-around both Pace and Chao, appealing directly to Steve Redisch, the VOA Executive Editor.  Instead of supporting Chao and Pace and respecting their professional judgment, institutional memory and expertise, Redisch (one of the outsiders from CNN) backed the OPR staffers.

That supposed “dodged bullet” ricocheted off the desk of Redisch and hit Pace squarely between the eyes.

This left her with the dubious task of telling Newsroom staff that the agency would do a “test” of the regional desk dismemberment by packing off the Africa Desk in the Newsroom to the Africa Division.

As veteran hands of the agency know, these “tests” end up becoming permanent.

Those cupcakes must have appeared mighty stale and symbolic of the loss of power and authority of the Newsroom to maintain best journalistic practices in pursuit of the principles of the VOA Charter.

Worse than that, Redisch and his acolytes have discredited Chao and humiliated Pace, demonstrating that the hostile work environment created by the IBB includes managers as well as employees.

In the hostile and sometimes misogynistic environment reveled in by the Third Floor of the Cohen Building, it is business as usual.

Remember those quotable quotes from David Ensor, the VOA director, in one of his first meetings with the Newsroom staff:

“Blood on the floor.”

“No turning back.”

There is no missing the meaning of what is taking place.  Redisch and others clearly intend to put the Newsroom in a no-win situation, as much for Ms. Pace as for the rest of the staff.

It is unfortunate that Ms. Pace is not in a position to advocate effectively for her group of agency employees – perhaps in part the price one pays for disaffecting the staff with a “sharp elbows” approach in dealing with her staff (and also practiced by some of her subordinates).

As is clear in this matter, trying to carry out the agency’s mission buys you nothing.  Not your years of service.  Not your expertise and knowledge of the organization.  Whether Ms. Pace, Ms. Chao or Newsroom staff, as far as the Third Floor is concerned, your commitment to using your skill sets for the betterment of the agency’s mission represents -

Nothing.

It’s your “blood on the floor” and if Redisch and others have their way, there will be more.

(You are dealing with “demolitions experts,” kind of like the Taliban blowing up ancient artifacts in Afghanistan.  It’s the same mindset.)

Redisch and others seem to believe that by destroying the Newsroom you destroy its legacy.  Not so.  It makes the legacy even more potent because what replaces it has not nearly the same worth, value or potency.  Look at the precipitous decline in audience numbers for the agency as a whole.  The decline in the agency’s audiences speaks volumes to the effect of what Redisch and other Third Floor “demolitions experts” are doing.

There is no silver lining in Redisch siding with some minor OPR functionaries over the head of the Newsroom and a staff of veteran broadcasters and correspondents who have some heavy duty throw weight in personal and professional credibility.  It’s an insult, plain and simple.  But then again, we consider where it’s coming from.

(The senior analyst for a not-too-friendly government would see this as the process of implosion well underway inside the Cohen Building: senior officials intentionally undermining mission effectiveness and bullying a core agency constituency.)

Next: Taking the Office of Program Review staffers to the woodshed.

(Note: Breaking News – The results of the 2012 Federal employee survey are in and once again the BBG/IBB is at rock bottom maintaining its position as “the worst organization in the Federal Government.”  No one should be surprised by this.  The Third Floor is doing what you would expect from any rogue regime: fighting to the bitter end.  So be it.  You can be assured that the survey results are on The Federalist’s radar and will be the subject of future commentaries, following the series on the VOA Newsroom.)

The Federalist

December 2012

Broadcasting Board of Governors - Information War Lost - Scorched Earth

Part Two: The Managers Speak, Sort Of

by The Federalist

(Note: This is the second in a series concerning the Office of Program Review [OPR] assessment of the Voice of America [VOA] Newsroom)

In late November 2012, the Office of Program Review presented its review of the Voice of America Central Newsroom (aka, the Newsroom) to staff and managers.

In the first part of this series, we focused on an overview of the Newsroom, remarks prior to the meeting by an OPR staffer and closing remarks to the meeting by David Ensor, the VOA director.

In this second part, we consider the management culture inside the agency and how it is reflected in some of the remarks by managers who attended the meeting and intended OPR outcomes.

We note that this agency is “the worst organization in the Federal Government.”  It has earned that title and its senior officials work assiduously to maintain that reputation.  Broadcasting Board of Governors/International Broadcasting Bureau (BBG/IBB) rankings in the annual Federal employee workplace survey are consistently at/or near the bottom among all Federal agencies.

The atmosphere inside the Cohen Building is toxic.  The prevailing BBG/IBB management “toolbox” makes use of fear, intimidation and retaliation.  There is no effective mechanism for open and critical review of management directives without fear of reprisal.  The relationship between agency officials and the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) Local 1812, the largest of the unions at the agency, is estranged.

This is the BBG/IBB landscape which we refer to as “scorched earth.”

With this in mind:

If you are a manager in the agency, you are expected to tow the line as dictated by the Third Floor of the Cohen Building.  Being critical of the “brain trust” on the Third Floor is suicidal for one’s career.  Few are able to pull it off and often at great professional cost.  The ones who cannot are punished in a variety of ways including being made a “senior adviser,” usually a meaningless position with no power or authority.  You may find yourself with a windowless office in the basement of the Cohen Building.

What senior officials expect from its various managers is complete fealty and obsequious obedience to their grand, self-serving (some would say addled) designs.

No questions asked.

Even before the late-November meeting, a Newsroom manager had been counseling staffers not to raise objections to the grand designs on the Newsroom because they could lose their jobs by voicing opposition.

As to be expected, the managers attending the meeting fell in line with supporting the plan.  But being the way they are, they immediately started to hedge the plan to protect their interests and/or to protect themselves from inherent shortcomings of the so-called “conclusions” reached by the OPR staff.

The agency is under-resourced for its mission – by design.  The agency’s budget proposal for FY2013 (as part of the White House budget submission to Congress) called for a reduction or elimination of 14 of 43 VOA language services.  It also called for the reduction in staff of 200 positions agency-wide with 43 of those positions coming out of the Newsroom.  Divided over three, eight-hour shifts, that comes to 14 positions each shift, plus one.  These cuts never were acted upon because of congressional budget gridlock on Capitol Hill.  However, the intentions of the Third Floor are clear.  And, even though not acted upon, the likely expectation is that the Third Floor will ask for these cuts again, if not more, in FY 2014.

All that BBG/IBB talk about creating a “global news network” was, is and always will be: B-A-L-O-N-E-Y, to put it mildly.

As a result, agency managers are confronted with impossible expectations.  Rather than oppose Third Floor plans outright, they sometimes come up with their own revisioning of the plan, in order to protect themselves from its negative consequences (i.e., “hedging the plan”).

This tactic manifested itself in the November 2012 Newsroom meeting.

One division manager suggested that regional Newsroom operations be physically relocated to the various language service divisions spaced out over three city-block floors of the Cohen Building.

On its face, this is a very bad idea.

There is a reason why certain functions are centrally located.  As we see it, the principal resources of the agency’s news-gathering operations are together in one space where information and additional resources can be shared and drawn upon for news coverage.

During the course of any 24-hour period, the Newsroom is responsible for generating a line-up of top global news stories which the language services would normally use to lead the news portion of their broadcasts.  The language services are expected to use good judgment as to how much of this line-up to include in their top news stories before going over to other news germane to their target area and intended audience and then onto what is called “back half” programming, made up of a variety of feature material.

This mirrors a common news practice heard every day across the United States.  For example, all-news radio stations such as WTOP in Washington, DC and local television news stations use the resources of national news networks (WTOP is a CBS affiliate) to provide over-arching news coverage of top news stories before going over to their own news programming and features (“traffic and weather together on the 8s,” “sports every 15 minutes,” etc.).

In the case of VOA, following this practice frees up the individual language services to concentrate on regional news stories as noted above.

This is a tried and tested system and it works.

What doesn’t work is the nature of resource management inside the Cohen Building, making demands on an under-resourced staff to generate large amounts of cross-platform content.

It isn’t rocket science to see the train wreck coming.

For the agency’s newsgathering ability, decentralization equates with dispersing resource utilization effectiveness, increasing a disparity in the quality of the news reporting and running the risk of diminished editorial consistency.

In short, it sets up the agency’s overall news operation to fail.

Whether they speak to it or not, agency division managers should know this.  But in the current environment, this is not the top priority.  For them, that top priority is “CYA,” to make sure that one isn’t snake bit by the built-in deficiencies that come with being under-resourced.  If the latest wild-blue idea from the Third Floor/OPR doesn’t work, you best make sure it isn’t seen as your fault.

(Meanwhile, on the strategic front, our analysts in the not-too-friendly countries that have invested heavily in their international broadcasting operations have to be feeling very, very good.  They know that this is a period of fiscal austerity for the United States Government, one that is going to last for a while.  Examining a range of actions that the BBG/IBB will do/won’t do, should do/shouldn’t do, the agency comes through almost always with the negatives!  Instead of maintaining consolidated resources for more effectiveness and efficiency, the agency decides to disperse its resources!  Can the BBG/IBB be this stupid?  You’ve studied their actions and know the answer.  Yes, they can!  You know that all your government has to do is keep up the pressure and watch the BBG/IBB stagger from one stupid decision after another, surrendering the initiative to your government and others to communicate directly and effectively with global publics  You listened carefully to Secretary Clinton when she said, “We are losing the information war.”  You know that you are on the verge of a great and perhaps decisive victory.  You have waited seventy years for this moment and are about to be rewarded for patience, discipline and perseverance.  America is withdrawing unto itself.  If deftly managed by your counterparts in the political, military and intelligence departments, this could last for fifty perhaps one hundred years.  The wind has changed.)

Newsroom management

The VOA Newsroom is headed by Sonja Pace.  Ms. Pace is a longtime agency employee.  This is Ms. Pace’s second tour as the lead Newsroom manager, an example of the agency’s practice of recycling a small group of managers over and over throughout the building.

Ms. Pace has a number of subordinate managers including Jim Fry (one of four assistant managing editors), Kate Dawson (a daytime “coverage” editor) and Amy Katz (a senior executive producer for Central News), people whose names pop up regularly in employee emails.

All have varying degrees of a brittle relationship with the Newsroom staff (what we call the “sharp elbow syndrome”).  In reading voluminous material from our sources, what drives this estranged relationship is an unrealized expectation on the part of the staff that the Newsroom management act as a firewall between the newsgathering staff and intrusions from the Third Floor or non-news agency elements, like the Office of Program Review (which we know from staffer statements is a repository for some negative predispositions toward the VOA Charter and the agency’s international broadcasting mission).

The Third Floor management philosophy is “our way or the highway.”  Every subordinate manager in the building knows this and knows the penalty for resistance – you can be bounced out of your position, reassigned to some innocuous function, humiliated and discredited in the Third Floor’s institutional memory archive.

If Ms. Pace were of the mind to champion the cause of the Newsroom staff in a meaningful way, she would most likely be replaced, perhaps with someone of a mindset similar to that of the OPR staffer who proclaimed, “There is no more international broadcasting,” and who would likely welcome the opportunity to demonstrate fealty to the Third Floor by kicking the obliteration of the Newsroom into overdrive and turning it into nothing more than a pandering propaganda mouthpiece for the IBB.

In turn, the Newsroom staff is a group under duress – unsupported by its management and made to attempt to meet the conflicting demands to service the cross-media platforms that the Third Floor expects, but without the resources or the skill sets in key production control points to pull it off.

Not surprisingly, the Newsroom isn’t the happiest of places inside the Cohen Building.  It is a no-win environment, undermined at every turn.

Cohesiveness, a cornerstone in successful news operations, is yet another scorched earth casualty.  We recall yet another comment by David Ensor, the VOA director, in which he proclaimed that every language service would be its own newsroom!

We have a term for this:

Anarchy.

Here’s another one:

Duplication.

Want a third?

Redundancy.

It is a complete fantasy to believe that the agency’s individual language services can function with the same efficiency as the Newsroom staff and its corps of veteran, experienced correspondents.

What Ensor and the OPR crowd are trying to disrupt is the symbiotic relationship between the Newsroom and the language services.  To disrupt is to destroy.  To have 43 language services each assume the Newsroom function is absurd.

In short, we don’t need VOA language services to be practitioners of “a jack of all trades, masters of none.”

(Let’s look at it this way – If you are working as a staff person for a US Senator or Congressman, you don’t need 43 calls from VOA language services asking for reaction from your boss on some issue that has your boss in the news.  You can be guaranteed three things: (a) the staffer is placing a call to David Ensor and asking him why your receptionist is taking all these calls, (b) you are asking him what happened to the one person you normally talked to from the VOA Newsroom and (c) while you’re listening to Mr. Ensor explain the latest BBG/IBB attempt to “reinvent the wheel,” you are preparing a list of pointed questions for your boss to ask the next time Mr. Ensor, the IBB or the BBG appear before his sub-committee wondering why the American taxpayer should continue to fund “the worst organization in the Federal Government.”)

Let’s return to that first sub-set of the VOA Charter:

“(1) VOA will serve as a consistently reliable and authoritative source of news.  VOA news will be accurate, objective and comprehensive.”

Consistent.

Reliable.

Authoritative.

(“CRA:” kind of the exact opposite of “CYA.”)

This covers it and the VOA Newsroom staff, when properly led and resourced, delivers the goods.

To expect the same high level of performance from VOA’s under-resourced language services is wholly unrealistic.

In typical fashion, the Third Floor, via its OPR sycophants, is blissfully going about its scorched earth agenda.

Next: Newsroom voices.

The Federalist

December 2012

by The Federalist

As we like to say:

We know the Broadcasting Board of Governors/International Broadcasting Bureau (BBG/IBB) officials very, very well.

We know that their “flim-flam-not-so-strategic-plan” is bogus.

What it really represents is a “scorched earth” plan, intended to fully destroy US Government international broadcasting and render it useless, ineffective.

Think this is an exaggeration?  Let’s look at the track record, just in 2012 alone:

The proposed elimination of 14 of 43 Voice of America (VOA) language services in FY 2013,

The proposed elimination of approximately 200 positions throughout VOA,

A precipitous loss of  VOA’s estimated audience in less than one year, from about  141-million down to 134-million, across all its media platforms (BBG’s total audience dropped from 187-million in 2011, which was overestimated by BBG’s own admission, down to 175-million),

The decimation of the veteran Russian Service of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) and replacing it with what is derisively being referred to as “Radio Gessen,”

The miniaturization of the US Government strategic broadcasting global footprint through eliminated radio broadcasts and frequencies along with successful interdiction efforts by foreign governments intent on blocking agency programs on TV and the Internet, and

The perpetuation of an institutionalized hostile work environment for its employees as determined in the annual Federal employee workplace survey.

Impressive – in a wholly negative way.

This is what the cabal on the Third Floor of the Cohen Building is all about.

They aren’t finished.

They won’t be finished until they have successfully eliminated all effective US Government strategic broadcasting, leaving the agency nothing more than a useless waste of taxpayer money generating press releases related to its $50-million dollar contract with the Gallup organization and websites of dated news and social media chit-chat.

(Kind of like The Rolling Stones tune [I Can’t Get No] “Satisfaction.”  You know that part of the verse – “…useless information supposed to drive my imagination…”)

The damage that has been done is extensive as it is intentional.

But there remains one department to be completely destroyed that will virtually assure that US Government strategic international broadcasting will no longer be mission effective:

The VOA Central Newsroom.

The VOA Central Newsroom (aka, the Newsroom) is a core strategic component to the agency’s mission.  It is the primary gatekeeper of the principles of the VOA Charter, including:

“(1) VOA will serve as a consistently reliable and authoritative source of news.  VOA news will be accurate, objective and comprehensive.”

The BBG/IBB “scorched earth” strategy lays waste to the VOA Charter and the Newsroom in particular.  The BBG/IBB has gone way off the reservation, ignoring the Charter and unilaterally redefining the agency’s mission as “supporting freedom and democracy.”

“Supporting freedom and democracy” is hollow ideological pandering by the BBG/IBB.  At best, it is an intended outcome.  Judging by events around the world, it is a difficult and elusive outcome for the BBG/IBB.  Actions by the BBG/IBB make this outcome even more unachievable, as noted above, with the cuts to its program effectiveness.

And because it is not achievable in any meaningful or sustainable way, mouthing this BBG/IBB mantra severely damages any residual credibility the agency may have left with global publics.

And it isn’t much.

In the last week of November 2012, Newsroom personnel were presented with the results of an Office of Program Review (OPR) assessment of the Newsroom.  We have obtained a copy of that report.

(Note: Our principal focus in this commentary is the OPR meeting with Newsroom staff.  Future commentaries will also focus on this meeting and comments coming from the meeting.  At some point, we will also examine the OPR Newsroom document itself.)

The mindset of the OPR is important to note.  There are people in this office who are of like mind with the apparatchiks on the Third Floor of the Cohen Building.  Perhaps they see this is an opportunity to further their personal interests and curry favor with the bosses.

One story making its way around the Newsroom is of an encounter a Newsroom staff person had with an OPR employee.  As our sources report, during the meeting the broadcaster raised the subject of the VOA Charter.  Allegedly, the OPR staffer retorted:

“…There is no more international broadcasting…It’s all about feeding our surrogates.”

(Note: this OPR staffer appears to mean either foreign radio/TV stations which the agency has placement agreements for VOA programs or the US Government grantee broadcasting entities which have a different mission than that of the VOA.)

Ladies and gentlemen, the only place where “there is no more international broadcasting” is in the Cohen Building.  One would be hard-pressed to make this argument to “The Big Three -” China, Russia and Iran – all of whom have robust international broadcasting campaigns underway.  And more than likely, the British Broadcasting Corporation (even with its own difficulties) would also find this statement absurd.

But most importantly, the United States Congress believes that international broadcasting is in the national and public interest.  This OPR staffer takes it upon himself to subvert the intent of the Congress.  This is called contempt of Congress.

Contempt is one of the things the Third Floor of the Cohen Building excels in: contempt for the Congress, contempt for American taxpayers, contempt for its employees and its intended audiences.

(Here’s a thought: if you are an analyst for a foreign government not too friendly toward the United States, a statement like that of the OPR staffer from inside the Cohen Building has to make you feel very, very good.  In essence, it is a clear indication of the rot and decay that pervade this agency: giving up on its strategic broadcasting mission.  The Big Three know what strategic broadcasting is all about.  They are not trying to be “CNN-lite.”  They are not trying to be an insipid social media operation.  The big boys are professionals.  They are playing serious hardball.  In this contest, the wimps of the BBG/IBB are big time in only one category: big time losers, with a loser/defeatist mindset.  And most importantly, you know that the BBG/IBB is on the cusp of imploding – one more indication that the 21^st Century will not be an American Century – our former greatness to be replaced by weakness and defeatism.)

The OPR staffer then loaded up with another blast concerning adherence to the principles of the VOA Charter:

“What are they going to do, come and put handcuffs on you?”

“They” in this context means the United States Congress.  If this is an accurate representation of the statement made, this staff person was suggesting violating the Charter (a public law) regardless of Congressional intent and leaving it to Members of Congress to do something about it.

And worse, it can also be seen as a form of threat, intimidation and coercion: as an employee on the receiving end of the statement, the message is clear: do it the BBG/IBB way – or else.

In short, the attitude of contempt for the rule of law coming from the BBG/IBB is seeping down into the ranks of its staffers to find root with opportunists only too eager to give expression to their arrogance and defiance that has become a trade-mark of the BBG/IBB (as in Steve Korn’s act of gross insubordination in refusing a request for information from members of the BBG).

Considering the agency’s mission, the mindset of the BBG/IBB appears to be every bit as coercive and threatening as that of any foreign government which acts in a similar manner to stifle free discussion.

In other words, if you are looking for guiding principles of American democracy, do not look to the BBG/IBB.  This is a rogue agency conducting a rogue operation, making a mockery of American principles and ideals.

And what is also intimated in the OPR staffer’s outbursts is the agency taking a hard turn toward propaganda, disinformation and misinformation.

Returning to the November 2012 OPR meeting with the Newsroom staff:

Front and center, we have David Ensor, the VOA director.  We recall early on in Mr. Ensor’s appointment another meeting with the Newsroom staff in which he described the future as one with “blood on the floor” (staff reductions) and “no turning back” (putting something in place that would likely represent a radical departure from the norm of VOA operations).

We also recall a recent interview that Mr. Ensor gave in which he marked the agency’s audience at 140-million.  It was in fact  estimated at only 134-million, a drop of  several million from the 2011 estimate of 141-million. As we note, this would be a significant audience drop for  VOA.  At this  pace, VOA might lose its audience  before too long.

That would make the collapse of this agency complete.

Mr. Ensor delivered closing remarks to the proceeding.

According to our sources, Mr. Ensor believes that VOA is not broken, that it is effective and reaches a lot of people and that he wants it to reach more people.

Mr. Ensor is fond of this refrain.  But fondness doesn’t make the refrain a fact and clearly runs contrary to reality.  We don’t know if Mr. Ensor truly believes it.  Clearly, he wants the Newsroom staff to believe it.

However, VOA and US Government international broadcasting most assuredly is broken.  It does not reach a lot of people and on the IBB scorched earth trajectory it faces the prospect of even smaller audiences.  At 175-million for all of BBG, and 134-million for VOA, out of a world population of 7-BILLION, one can surmise that global publics see things quite differently than Mr. Ensor.  A couple more hits like this and the VOA will be most assuredly –

Dead.

(Yes, we repeat these numbers because it is shocking.  Seventy years worth of American taxpayer investment in strategic international broadcasting is about to crash and burn at the hands of the IBB.  This is simply unconscionable and atrocious.  It is an abuse of a public trust.)

Mr. Ensor also offered that the agency must commit resources to doing more news content that the VOA language services need for their programs.  At the same time, he also suggested that the language services start doing more themselves and not relying on Central News (aka, the Newsroom) to do everything the services want.

These resources do not exist.

Let’s repeat the fact that the agency proposed to eliminate 43 positions in the Newsroom.  The cuts didn’t come because the budget legislation stalled in the Congress.  However, the Third Floor most certainly hasn’t given up on this objective and may add more positions to be cut in FY 2014.  (We’ll know about that in February 2013 when the White House releases its FY 2014 budget proposal.)

In addition, the VOA language services are not fat with personnel either.  Not surprisingly, they must rely on the Newsroom’s agency-wide material which the language services then use for their specific broadcasts.

The bottom line: whether the Newsroom or the language services, the staff is under-resourced, scrambling to cover multiple platforms (radio, TV, the Internet) and doing all badly.  On top of that, the staff is besieged by competing demands from a poorly constituted Newsroom management.

Mr. Ensor also offered that he doesn’t want to go to Congress and ask for permission to re-organize VOA and then started talking about management “teams” to achieve results.  In an already hostile work environment, we can only imagine what the results of this idea might be.

It is well that Mr. Ensor doesn’t want to go to Congress and ask for permission to re-organize VOA.  Certain Members of Congress are fed up with BBG/IBB failure, including the constantly revised “flim flam Soviet-style strategic plan.”  Mr. Ensor and the rest of the crowd on the Third Floor of the Cohen Building would have to answer a whole lot of questions and subject themselves to further scrutiny that, at this juncture, they probably would prefer to avoid.

(Next installment: the managers speak, sort of.)

The Federalist

December 2012

Broadcasting Board of Governors – Information War Lost – Thanksgiving Holiday Gifting

by The Federalist

How do you define “insanity?”

Answer: The Broadcasting Board of Governors/International Broadcasting Bureau (BBG/IBB)!

Perhaps more to the point, it’s the BBG/IBB mindset.  And here, the Einstein definition of insanity is most appropriate: “Doing the same thing over and over, expecting a different result.”

So what has the BBG/IBB done this time?

You guessed it – another press release, this one dated November 19, 2012, titled, “BBG Content On Google Currents Mobile Platform in 40 Languages.”

The BBG/IBB likes cranking out these press releases.  Maybe they think it shows they’re doing something (other than losing their audience).

Perhaps in addition to keeping up the appearance of busy work, maybe the BBG/IBB is just throwing stuff out there to see what sticks.

In closed or controlled media environments, the answer is: not much.

Maybe nothing at all (Bruce Sherman’s “empty chairs” research presentation about media in Zimbabwe).

The first thing that catches our attention with this latest press release is the picture used to highlight the Google Currents application on a Samsung Android phone.

What language service did the agency decide to highlight?

The Voice of America (VOA) Indonesian Service.

Wait a minute!

This is the service that got clobbered in the latest Gallup audience survey data:

“The largest change was in Indonesia, where the audience numbers dropped by 17.4 million from 38 million to 21 million people, in part due to a potential overestimate in 2011.”

That’s a direct quote from the agency’s press release dated November 14, 2012 titled, “BBG Measures Audience Growth in Key Markets.”

Remember what we said about “potential overestimate?”

Baloney.

The agency probably never had the audience to begin with.  No “potential overestimate” about it.

VOA Indonesian Service: The agency’s first place leader in lost audiences!

What an achievement!

(Nothing like drawing attention to failure – sort of like using the image of the Titanic to promote a cruise line.)

That lost audience (radio, TV, Internet, mobile devices) didn’t all migrate over to Google Currents for VOA content.

Come on.  Get serious.

Here’s the deal:

The Indonesian government is a believer in controlling foreign news content.  That means, regardless of the media platform, Indonesian media and other providers are prohibited from disseminating foreign news content.  Now that the self-promoters on the Third Floor of the Cohen Building have announced that they have “program material” from VOA Indonesian available in-country on Google Currents, what do you think the Indonesian government will do?

They will block it, if it contains content the Indonesian government thinks is inconsistent with their media regulations.

We call this “Service Unavailable.”

This isn’t rocket science.

More than likely the only content that will be permissible are the “lifestyle” pieces that the VOA Indonesian Service cranks out.

But that is not the primary mission of VOA, the VOA Indonesian Service or of US Government international broadcasting.

The primary mission of what the agency is supposed to be doing is codified in the VOA Charter.  The BBG/IBB has ignored the Charter and the results are predictable: the agency’s audiences are bottoming out, heading straight for the category of being a statistical zero in terms of audience versus world population.

Having a total audience of 175-million juxtaposed to a world population of 7-BILLION doesn’t cut it.  Nor does it justify almost a BILLION dollars in US taxpayer money annually for the agency’s budget.

And reversing this trend isn’t going to happen with a weak, manipulated and exploited BBG and a cabal of insubordinate and rebellious IBB bonus-mongers.

We’re not at all surprised with the misfortunes of US Government international broadcasting.

Why?

Because it isn’t what it is supposed to be, thanks to the BBG/IBB.

There is an important irony in all this:

What the Gallup polling numbers show is that global publics are engaged in a formative demonstration of their own “freedom and democracy” (as opposed to the hypocrisy coming from the BBG/IBB).  In effect, they are “voting” to repudiate the BBG/IBB flim flam not-so-strategic-plan and hitting their own “OFF” switches.  They are tuning out BBG/IBB and tuning in to content from other providers of international news and information, across all media platforms, and/or their own domestic media.

This is really no surprise.  These audiences are in “Reset” mode.

Why?

Global publics have an expectation from the United States.

They expect the United States to speak with authority and resolve.

The BBG/IBB program trajectory does neither.

And there is another important missing ingredient as the BBG/IBB turns away from the VOA Charter.

It has abandoned moral authority.

As recent events demonstrate what you have on the Third Floor of the Cohen Building is amorality – the absence of any moral standards.  If anything, these characters have embraced venality, self-aggrandizement and self-interest.

Professional conduct?  There is none.  In its place you have arrogance, defiance and gross insubordination.  In its place you have an agency run by a group of individuals who employ harassment, intimidation and threats – not only against employees but members of the BBG who have the audacity to stand up to IBB scheming.

Here are some of the areas that show the progression of the corrosion taking place:

Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty: (the Steve Korn fiasco involving the firing of over 40 veteran journalists of its Russian Service).

Persian News Network (the still-to-be fully explained disappearance of its “Parazit” program and lying about the status of the show to the BBG and Members of Congress).

Hostile employee work environment (consistently at/or near the bottom in the annual Federal employee workplace survey).

Precipitous loss of global audiences: (down to 175-million and seemingly going lower).

Deliberate reduction in the US Government international broadcasting footprint and accessibility.

Gross insubordination: (the Steve Korn refusal to answer questions about his decisions regarding the RFE/RL Russian Service and other, separate IBB-driven incidents).

Absent its moral and ethical compass (the VOA Charter) this agency has gone off a cliff.

With all of this comes the perception that the United States has lost its way, is weak and decayed.

These are not good notions to have afoot in a very violent and troubled world as we see today.

Making matters worse: this has all been deliberately set upon by an entrenched group of careerists who believe they are not accountable.

As we have stated before: fix it or close it.  However, the latter is becoming not only more likely but perhaps the only option when one considers the totality of the destruction these individuals have brought to this agency.

With each passing day, they are making the outcome inevitable.

The Federalist

November 2012

###

BBG Press Release

BBG Content on Google Currents Mobile Platform in 40 Languages

November 19, 2012

Washington, D.C. - The Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) is using Google’s new Currents platform to provide enhanced mobile access to text, audio and video content in more than 40 languages.

The BBG’s use of Currents will provide users abroad with a richer mobile experience when accessing content from Voice of America, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Radio Free Asia, Middle East Broadcasting Networks or the Office of Cuba Broadcasting

Google Currents is a magazine-like experience that allows users to swipe through content on mobile phones and tablets, as if they were flipping through the pages of a magazine.  The Currents application comes pre-installed on many Google Android devices.

The BBG has long seen mobile as an important platform in reaching new audiences, particularly in developing countries. Worldwide, mobile devices outsell desktop computers, and 75% of the world’s population has access to mobile phones.

“We are gratified to see early enthusiasm for our multimedia content on this new mobile platform,” said Susan McCue, co-chair of the BBG’s Communications and Outreach Committee. “The fact that the Currents application comes as a standard feature on these devices presents a huge opportunity for us to distribute BBG content to targeted overseas audiences.”

Numerous U.S. international broadcasting news shows and features have already proven popular in Apple’s iTunes store.

“Google Currents is one of our early strategic efforts and we are working toward distributing content through several other leading Web and mobile based portals,” said Randy Abramson, Director of Products and Operations for ODDI.

The Google Currents application is available for both Apple iOS and Google Android supported devices.   Users can find the BBG editions by downloading the application in the Apple App Store or Google Play Store and search for VOA, RFA, RFE/RL, Marti and MBN respectively.

The Broadcasting Board of Governors is an independent federal agency, supervising all U.S. government-supported, civilian international broadcasting, whose mission is to inform, engage and connect people around the world in support of freedom and democracy. BBG broadcasting organizations include the Voice of America, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, the Middle East Broadcasting Networks (Alhurra TV and Radio Sawa), Radio Free Asia, and the Office of Cuba Broadcasting (Radio and TV Marti).

BBG | 330 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington DC 20237 | 202.203.4400

Broadcasting Board of Governors – Information War Lost – Insubordination and Rebellion

by The Federalist

“There is something about a sense of entitlement and of having great power that skews people’s judgment.”
(Robert M. Gates, former Director of Central Intelligence and former Secretary of Defense, The Washington Post, November 18, 2012)

The United States Government’s international broadcasting has been rocked with a variety of disasters over the 21st century. One of the most egregious has been the firing of dozens of journalists in the Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) Russian Service Moscow bureau. The consequences of that action – and what was put in place afterward – continue to send shockwaves through the international broadcasting arena. Radio Liberty supporters and its audience in Russia have rebelled against the new RFE/RL management, which responded by engaging in an act of internal censorship.

BBG Watch has published many reports, commentaries and analyses on this continuing story. One most recent piece is entitled,

“RFE/RL president Korn refuses to provide information to BBG committee on Masha Gessen and his trip to Moscow.”

In the piece we learn that Steve Korn, the RFE/RL president, refused to comply with a request for information from the Broadcasting Board of Governors Strategy and Budget Committee regarding salary and benefits for Masha Gessen, the new head of RFE/RL’s Russian Service, and expenses relating to his recent trip to Moscow.

Korn also refused to explain why Dale Cohen (RFE/RL vice-president for administration and interim legal counsel) was unavailable to answer questions from BBG committee members who had asked that he be present.

Korn took the position that he was not going to answer the questions of the committee members unless ordered to do so by the entire BBG.

In total, this is as defiant a grandstand play as you will ever see in any agency of the Federal Government.

In our view, Mr. Korn has no basis for taking this position. Considering all the things swirling around him, this is more than just an act of defiance.

In our view, it is an act of gross insubordination.

And that’s where things get interesting.

We live in a world corrupted by power. Every day we read stories of people getting themselves into all kinds of trouble because they psychologically overdose on a belief that they are untouchable, beyond the law and not subject to personal or professional standards that the rest of us are expected to adhere to.

This kind of poison has been present in the Cohen Building for a long time. Over many years, the modus operandi of senior careerists in the agency and its International Broadcasting Bureau (IBB) has been to survive the rotation of presidential appointees, minimize or nullify the impact of these appointees on the agency and solidify the careerist agenda: in essence, making US Government international broadcasting the personal playground of senior bureaucrats.

Normally, a game play like the one used by Mr. Korn would be career suicide. But “normal” is not the case here. We’re dealing with the BBG/IBB – particularly the IBB – where abnormal is more the case.

In our view, it is unlikely that Korn acted on his own. As we have said often, we know these IBB types very, very well. They have a history.

Our sense of things is the scenario in play in which Korn is getting advice and support. As we see it, the most likely source of that advice and support is from somewhere within the IBB.

And we can see the game plan here: afford the IBB the opportunity to spread its tentacles into the BBG and attempt to make any unanimous or majority decision to hold Mr. Korn accountable impossible. BBG Watch readers have seen the report on Governor Mulhaupt’s recent “disappearing act.” One would expect a repeat of that scenario or something else to keep the IBB firewall against accountability intact.

Over the years, the IBB has worked to undermine the authority of the BBG. They insinuate their agenda into the bi-partisan board, attempting to exploit and divide the board along partisan political lines. Far too often, members of the BBG have acquiesced and have allowed themselves to be manipulated and exploited or have used the IBB itself to pursue power plays and other agendas between board members. Not all BBG members have gone along with this IBB tactic. Those BBG members who stand up against IBB antics have been subjected to various forms of personal or political pressure, and when that doesn’t work, attempts at intimidation and retaliation.

The end result for most BBG members has been the presidential appointment from hell. Some have had the sense the bail out before their terms have expired. Others try hanging on.

However, the worst of it is that the IBB has successfully reduced BBG authority and its oversight and accountability responsibilities to practically zero.

The result is predictable: the IBB – as venal and self-aggrandizing a group of bureaucrats as you will find anywhere in the Federal Government – has pushed its agenda – the infamous Soviet-style “flim flam five-year strategic plan” – that is well along the way to destroying US Government strategic international broadcasting. The latest numbers in recent survey data shows just how far along they are in the effort: audience loss in 2012 counted in millions, depending on how you look at the different numbers the agency puts out in its press releases or other statements.

US Government international broadcasting demands a thorough investigation. We’re not talking about a tepid Office of Inspector General (OIG) report. This situation requires the kind of investigation that puts people under oath, the kind of investigation that demands accountability – something that has long been absent in the IBB.

In Russia, Radio Liberty has become an enemy of the human rights and democratic opposition movement. It is losing its audience and credibility among critics of President Putin and his increasingly authoritarian rule. A rebellion in response to abuse of power, a public diplomacy disaster, to which Mr. Korn responded by creating another one — blocking access by his employees to the Radio Liberty in Exile new news and information website SvobodaNew.com.

How will the BBG explain issuing yet another press release condemning censorship and blocking of its news websites in Iran and China if it tolerates such actions by its own executives?

As we’ve said before, Mr. Korn should resign or be fired. And if he is being advised to engage in gross insubordination from any quarter of the IBB, any person involved should be fired for cause.

“The worst organization in the Federal Government.”

Absolutely.

The Federalist
November 2012

BBG's 2012 Global Weekly Audience Estimate

Broadcasting Board of Governors – Information War Lost – Slip Sliding Away

by The Federalist

We now see in stark detail the dire consequences of where the agency’s misguided direction has taken US Government international broadcasting.

Here, we address another press release (below) dated November 14, 2012 titled, “BBG Measures Audience Growth in Key Markets.”

First of all, the audiences are not growing. They are decreasing.

Rapidly.

Dramatically.

Precipitously.

To outward appearances, US Government strategic international broadcasting is in free fall at the hands of the Broadcasting Board of Governors/International Broadcasting Bureau (BBG/IBB).

In late 2011/early 2012 the BBG/IBB estimated their unduplicated global audiences at around 187 million: about 100 million each for radio and television and perhaps 10 million for the Internet.

Now, the agency is claiming 175 million “on a variety of media platforms” in the November 12, 2012 press release.

The press release claims a loss at 12 million but attributes it to “…a change in research providers and resulting changes in the survey questionnaire, both of which occurred in FY 2012.”

Ah, yes – the blame game, laying it on the previous polling contractor.

Further:

“The largest change was in Indonesia, where the audience numbers dropped by 17.4 million from 38 million to 21 million people, in part due to a potential overestimate in 2011.”

Baloney.

Either you have an overestimate or you don’t. The dictionary defines “potential” as “that can, but has not yet come into being.”

Either the overestimate happened or it didn’t, BBG/IBB. There’s nothing “potential” about it. Once again, another obtuse pronouncement from the Third Floor of the Cohen Building.

More than likely, they never had the audience to begin with or used the smokescreen of claiming an audience within local Indonesian stations where the BBG/IBB (its Voice of America, VOA Indonesian Service) tries to place “lifestyle,” non-news feature content.

(Note: It is well known to readers of BBG Watch that The Federalist has long disputed the BBG/IBB claims of audience reach in Indonesia, citing Indonesian laws prohibiting the dissemination of foreign news broadcasts by Indonesian broadcasters, including programs of the BBG, in addition to common broadcast production techniques to edit, censor or not run at all the program content supplied by the BBG’s Voice of America Indonesian Service to the Indonesian broadcast stations.)

But wait, there’s more!

Didn’t the BBG/IBB “flim flam strategists” approve the survey methodology and questionnaire before going out into the field?!?

Come on. Most assuredly, they did.

What happened?

Answer: they got a result they weren’t expecting.

Here’s another one:

In Russia, the BBG/IBB talks about audience declines, “where government media regulations have curtailed distribution.”

Putin’s crackdown on Radio Liberty and Voice of America affiliates in Russia happened in previous years, not in 2012, so the latest loss could hardly be attributed to curtailed distribution in 2012. What did change in 2012 were management changes introduced by new RFE/RL president Steven Korn.

The most damaging changes at RFE/RL, however, have occurred probably after the 2012 survey was conducted. The BBG/IBB conveniently ignores the recent “Steve Korn Fiasco,” destroying the Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) Russian Service by axing bout forty veteran broadcasters who have now set up shop as “Radio Liberty In Exile.”

In effect, the actions of Mr. Korn facilitated and enabled diminished RFE/RL effectiveness in Russia. Good-bye audience.

Fortunately, the former RFE/RL Russian Service employees have taken their credibility to marshal an alternative to the “Korn Fiasco” and in the process demonstrate to their Russian listeners the BBG/IBB hypocrisy of “supporting freedom and democracy” (which we know they are not).

For being at least one of the principal architects of this fiasco, Steve Korn should resign or be fired.

Lastly, the press release claims an audience of 10-million in Iran. We find this to be highly suspect. That’s almost one in every eight Iranians (a total population of around 80-million). What makes it even more suspect is the effectiveness of Iranian jamming of BBG/IBB satellite transmissions which the agency has been wailing about in other recent press releases.

This 10-million figure is also suspect, given the disappearance of the agency’s “Parazit” program on its Persian News Network (PNN) which was supposedly popular with Iranian audiences.

If the survey was conducted during a brief period when the Iranians were not jamming satellite signals, that fact should have been clearly acknowledged. It was misleading for Mr. Bruce Sherman, the BBG chief strategist, to announce to the world at an open BBG committee meeting, which was streamed online live and on-demand, that the audience grew in Iran in 2012 without at the same time pointing out that it is a temporary phenomenon and the TV audience in large part may no longer be there due to satellite signal jamming. It is yet another example how BBG members, members of Congress and American public are mislead by being given only partial information, with essential facts obscured or not presented at all.

(Perhaps now the biggest audience in Iran is the Iranian Cyber Army and the Iranian intelligence services.)

But even after all this, things get really bizarre:

At the November 15, 2012 meeting of the BBG, Bruce Sherman, who is also one of the IBB players in the flim flam Soviet-style strategic plan, did acknowledge briefly the audience drop was from 187-million to 175-million.  But,  in an apparent effort to obscure and deflect attention from a tremendous loss of global audience, Mr. Sherman then made a big deal out of the research findings that the agency picked up some audience in Latin America. That part of his presentation was far longer than his comments about audience losses.

(Note: Also keep in mind that the agency wants to eliminate programming to Latin America as part of the elimination of 14 of 43 Voice of America language service broadcasts and a reduction-in-force that could affect as many as 200 employees or more throughout agency assets.)

And then,

In an interview with Tom Fox on November 13, 2012 (Fox writes for The Washington Post’s “Federal Coach” blog and is the vice-president for leadership and innovation at the Partnership for Public Service and also heads up the Partnership’s Center for Government Leadership), David Ensor, the Voice of America director, claims a worldwide audience of 140 million for VOA. In fact, the BBG’s 2012 figure for VOA is not 140-million but 134-million — by far the largest audience among all BBG entities — but still a loss of seven million from the BBG’s 2011 figure of 141-million. Again, the public was getting misleading information about the actual size of VOA’s global audience.

(Note: Our sources report that the Partnership for Public Service apparently has been enlisted by the BBG/IBB to address the agency’s horrid record in the Federal employee survey. The latest survey again shows the agency at/or near the bottom in leadership and employee morale – as it has been from the first survey to the latest. Some of our sources have expressed concerns about the appearance of a conflict of interest between this article and the role the Partnership for Public Service has with the agency in attempting to address the matter of the survey results.)

BBG's Weekly Audience Estimates

Ladies and Gentlemen, this is what we see going on here:

The BBG/IBB either has no idea how precipitously they have killed off their global audiences with their “flim flam strategic plan” or they are randomly throwing out numbers here and there with no rhyme or reason, perhaps thinking no one is paying attention, or to obfuscate the extent of the destruction.

The things that are apparent here are the following:

* This is a failed agency with a failed mission as the result of a failed strategic plan.

* We – the American taxpayers – are wasting close to a BILLION dollars annually on an agency whose officials have deliberately and intentionally reduced the footprint of US Government strategic international broadcasting and communication with global publics.

* There is no such thing as a reinvented “global news network” remade from the agency’s various assets and entities as agency officials have claimed.

* The direction these officials have taken has increased not reduced the vulnerabilities to delivering critical news and information to global publics by relying on technologies that can be controlled, blocked and interdicted almost at will when foreign governments choose to do so.

* The IBB’s flawed strategic plan is making it more difficult, not easier, for global publics to get reliable news and information as well as a clear articulation of US policy directly from the United States Government as the agency is required to do by law (the VOA Charter).

In essence, we have no reliable way of knowing if there is any audience of any consequence out there for US Government international broadcasting.

(Note: the agency is paying $50-million dollars to the Gallup polling organization for research data – $10-million per year over five years.)

The only thing we know with any clarity is that what the BBG/IBB has become is a spin factory for useless information in the form of numerous press releases extolling “research” that has little or no strategic corollary to US Government international broadcasting where vital US interests are at stake.

What these numbers suggest – particularly the low end figure of 140-million – is that the BBG/IBB is reaching almost no one, when viewed in the context of a global population of 7-BILLION.

We can see where this is going. If this accelerated pace of audience loss continues, in the very near future the agency will reach a point where its audience becomes, in effect, a statistical zero.

It is time for the US Congress to stop treating this agency and its budget as a billion-dollar loss for the US Government. Fix it or close it. Send the employees and the mission to another Federal agency (transfer of function) where they may be managed more effectively. Thank the BBG political appointees for their service and send them on their way.

And as for the perpetrators of this disaster – the IBB careerists – send them into the land of buyouts and early retirements. The American taxpayer does not need them selling their corrosive strategies elsewhere in the Federal Government.

Put them out of business.

The Federalist
November 2012

###

BBG PRESS RELEASE

BBG Measures Audience Growth in Key Markets

November 14, 2012

Washington, D.C. - U.S. government-funded, civilian international broadcasters reached an estimated 175 million people per week on a variety of media platforms in 2012, including large audiences in countries that are key priorities for U.S. foreign policy, the Broadcasting Board of Governors announced today.

The figure, which reflects the combined viewership and listenership of Voice of America, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Radio and TV Martí, Radio Free Asia and the Middle East Broadcasting Networks (Alhurra TV and Radio Sawa), is a net decrease of 12 million from last year’s record total as detailed in the BBG’s annual Performance Accountability Report.  While this drop likely reflects actual loss in overall audience, some of it may also be attributable to a change in research providers and resulting changes in the survey questionnaire, both of which occurred during FY 2012.

“Reliable and high-quality research informs our strategies, which in turn helps us fulfill our critical mission of reaching marketplaces around the globe, such as Afghanistan, Iraq, and Pakistan,” said BBG Presiding Governor Michael Lynton.  ”This agency is committed to evaluating and assessing performance through a rigorous research program as required by law. And as audience preferences change, we will continue to innovate on all platforms – radio, TV, the Internet and social media.”

Audiences grew substantially in Iran, where more than 10 million people watch or hear BBG programs, and in other key countries including Libya, and Ethiopia. The largest change was in Indonesia, where audience numbers dropped by 17.4 million, from 38 million to 21 million people, in part due to a potential overestimate in 2011.  Among other countries that saw audience declines were Egypt, Nigeria, and Burma, as these markets became more competitive and open; in Haiti, where surge broadcasts instituted after the 2010 earthquake diminished; and in Russia, where government media regulations have curtailed distribution.

BBG broadcasts reached significant audiences in other important markets, including 75 percent of the adult population in Afghanistan, 75 percent in the Somaliland and Puntland regions of Somalia, 67 percent in Iraq, 30 percent in Libya, and 27 percent in the FATA region of Pakistan.  In FY 2012, the BBG enhanced its distribution network, adding new FM transmitters in key cities in Libya and Afghanistan.

Consistent with the practice of other international broadcasters, the BBG measures and reports unduplicated audience; each individual, regardless of how many programs watched or listened to, or media platforms used, is counted only once. This is a conservative approach to quantifying the audience and in keeping with the mission of BBG to inform and engage people, rather than count individual interactions with them.

Other indices of impact – such as how trustworthy audiences find BBG programming and how much the broadcasts increase their understanding, the scope or quality of an individual’s consumption of BBG programming, the level of social media engagement, website page views, file downloads or media citations of BBG news coverage – are important factors considered for program and strategic planning purposes.

Radio and TV are increasingly close in terms of reach by platform, with radio reaching more than 95 million people per week and television measures in at 92 million people. The Internet audience was between 12 and 13 million, with the largest online audiences measured in Iraq, at 2.7 million.

The audience estimate includes research conducted within the past five years in over 70 countries and territories and surveys representing 2.8 billion people in markets around the globe. The 2012 Performance and Accountability Report will be available to download on Nov. 16. For further facts and figures as well as information on research methods, please refer to the following information.

BBG 2012 Audience Overview (PDF)

BBG Research Methodology (PDF)

BBG's Bruce Sherman, Director, Office of Strategy and Development, speaking to empty chairs

Broadcasting Board of Governors Information War Lost: A Thousand Words in a Picture
by The Federalist

(We are also reminded of a Rod Stewart album from years ago, “Every Picture Tells a Story.”  This is the story we see in this picture.)

Once again, the Broadcasting Board of Governors/International Broadcasting Bureau (BBG/IBB) provides us with another gift.

Below is a BBG/IBB press release dated November 8, 2012: “In Zimbabwe, Satellite Dishes Are Widespread And New Media Are Growing Rapidly.”

Please note the photo accompanying the press release.  It plays an important role in this commentary.

Pictured are two unidentified women and Bruce Sherman of the IBB, the point man for the agency’s “flim flam strategic plan.”

Mr. Sherman doesn’t make the picture.  What does is a row of empty chairs across the front of the room for one of Mr. Sherman’s well known PowerPoint presentations, the accompaniment to his monologue narrative.

One of the first rules of press release pictures: never show a room with empty chairs.  It conveys an impression:

Lack of interest.

Apparently, there isn’t a whole lot of interest in the subject matter: “In Zimbabwe, Satellite Dishes Are Widespread And New Media Are Growing Rapidly.”

Second rule of press releases: timing.  What are Americans interested in right now?  The answer is pretty simple: the recent national election, the possibility of a whole lot of serious economic repercussions arising from a potential government budget sequestration, the destruction brought to the northeast United States from Hurricane Sandy.  They’re not much interested in the BBG/IBB’s latest press release, something disconnected from the daily realities confronting American citizens.

But there are things which we need to make note of:

BBG/IBB Research

This presentation by Mr. Sherman is in conjunction with the Gallup polling organization.  You will note that the BBG/IBB let a contract for $50 million dollars spread out over 5 years at $10-million dollars a pop annually.  People wonder what this contract is supposed to produce.  This press release is one answer.

Let’s be clear, we aren’t picking an issue with the Gallup organization.  It is doing polling research as directed by the BBG/IBB.  It’s easy money for Gallup.

But it is a waste of American taxpayer dollars.

What we see in this BBG/IBB-directed research has little to do with US Government strategic communications, the national or the public interest.  It has more to do with the self-interest of the IBB.  Perhaps the more appropriate term is the self-preservation of IBB bureaucrats.  Their Soviet-style five-year flim flam strategic plan has left US Government international broadcasting in ruins.  As we see it, in order to divert attention from the fiascos it has perpetrated upon the American taxpayer, the IBB is now engaged in diversionary tactics in subject matter that has little global strategic value.

While the BBG/IBB is dallying in the obtuse, there are much more serious issues afoot around the world; and the BBG/IBB has marginalized the US Government’s ability to communicate with global publics on those issues.

Free-Fall off the Strategic Communications Cliff

The United States Government is no longer a major player in strategic international broadcasting.  This press release makes that clear.

While the BBG/IBB is dabbling in the subject of this press release, here are things that are going on of significant importance:

In Russia, the Putin government is preparing to take on the United States over the US strategic missile defense deployment.  The Putin government sees the US Government as weak.  It has scored a major victory in the realm of strategic communications by watching Steve Korn, the president of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) destroy its robust Russian Service of Radio Liberty.  It has long ago seen the demise of the Voice of America (VOA) Russian Service.  Skillful chess players as the Russians are, they are now moving more powerful pieces into play to deal with the United States and protect Russian interests.  One can see Vladimir Putin, the iconic Russian leader and former KGB agent with that ironic half-smile (or smirk).  He gets it.  He knows what Korn and the BBG/IBB have done.  He has the initiative and he won’t surrender it easily or cheaply.

In China, the Party Congress is electing its next decade of leadership.  Of course, the BBG/IBB has systematically destroyed its radio broadcasts to China.  The BBG/IBB thinks the Internet will save the day!  However, the Chinese have successfully neutralized the BBG/IBB on this score by effectively blocking BBG/IBB websites and establishing its own Internet infrastructure.

(Note: The November 9, 2012 online edition of Foreign Policy Magazine reports that there are self-immolations taking place in Tibet as the Chinese Communist Party holds its Party Congress to elect new leadership.)

The Middle East

How are you “Arab Springers” doing?  Here’s how:

Libya is on the cusp of being a failed state with well-armed militias running around the country, who by the way refer to themselves as “revolutionaries,” and “liberators;”

In Egypt recently, one of those angry, almost all-male crowds in Tahrir Square raped another Western female journalist, this one from France;

In Lebanon, a top intelligence officer was assassinated, some believe by Hezbollah;

In the widening civil war in Syria, Israel has responded to mortar fire from Syria twice this past weekend with its own counter-battery fire, once as a warning but the second time onto dedicated targets.

In Iran, always those pesky Iranians.  Guess what they did this past week?  Iranian military aircraft fired on a US drone (they have already captured/recovered one virtually intact).  The United States claims that the drone fired upon was in international airspace.  Well, maybe.  But the fact is the Iranians just rearranged the chessboard in the Persian Gulf.  They’ve upped the ante.  They’re taking what opportunities present themselves to study US tactics in evading Iranian aircraft and in turn refining their attack techniques against unarmed drones.  If the Iranians get good at it, the US might have to consider arming the drones with air-to-air missiles.

And lest we forget, there is the Iranian Cyber Army waiting in the wings with whatever they are planning as the next demonstration of their capabilities in cyber-warfare against the BBG/IBB and other US cyber targets.

That Warm and Fuzzy Feeling

If you are an intelligence analyst for any of the Big Three mentioned above, as well as others, looking at this press release has to make you feel good.

Very, very good.

While the BBG/IBB is off in a wilderness of its own making, you can feel very good knowing that their escapades belie a deeper meaning.  The United States is no longer a major player in international communications with global publics.  You have routed the United States on this front.  The Russians have the top YouTube news site with “Russia Today.”  The Chinese have state-of-the-art news bureaus in Washington and New York (the Washington one looking down – literally and figuratively – from its vantage point in DC’s Chinatown across the National Mall to the Cohen Building).  The Iranians are making inroads with Spanish-language broadcasts to Latin America.  Life is good!  The self-serving careerists of the IBB are like putty to be molded, manipulated, formed,

And flattened.

Best of all, your countermeasures blocking satellite programs and controlling the Internet seem to be working very well.  You are continuing to expand, refine and improve upon your capabilities.

You know that the BBG/IBB is foolish, inept and stupid.

These are good times.  The technologies of today favor those with a bold vision and the ability to defeat those – like the BBG/IBB – who require an open media environment, rather than the controlled one at your disposal.  Plus, you have the discipline, resolve and resources to get the job done.

Ignorance is Bliss!

The BBG/IBB likes to talk about the proliferation of new technologies.

But wait!

Cited in the press release as countries where this new technology is taking off are places like Iran, Burma, Indonesia and Tibet.

Excuse me?!?

None of these countries are what one would consider media free-for-alls.  Iran jams satellites carrying foreign news broadcasts including those of the BBG/IBB.  Burma is still ruled by a military junta which can clamp down on the press, foreign and domestic, at any time.  Tibet – you’ve got to be kidding.  The Chinese have tight control over media there and elsewhere in its territories. And Indonesia has laws on the books prohibiting the dissemination of foreign news broadcasts.

In short, in the examples the BBG/IBB cites these countries now or at any future moment interdict these new technologies when and if they believe their national interests are jeopardized.  This is the inherent vulnerability of these new technologies.  They are wholly dependent upon a favorable in-country political climate that is willing to be receptive to IBB programs.  If you don’t direct broadcast, you lose.

Plus, the presence of these new technologies does not mean that most people want BBG/IBB content.  Domestic content is often, if not normally, the first choice, for obvious reasons.  It pays to know what’s going on in your own backyard, as opposed to what comes to you from the la-la land of the Cohen Building.

IBB Pickpockets

No doubt the IBB wants to sell to the Congress the idea of funding new initiatives that it dreams up.  On that subject,

Congress needs to be clear that the IBB has undermined the effectiveness of US Government international broadcasting by cutting programs and becoming reliant upon technologies that are vulnerable.

More than that, the United States faces serious economic challenges.  Money is needed elsewhere for important domestic priorities, including the disaster delivered on the northeast United States by Hurricane Sandy.

The BBG/IBB has not made a compelling case that its handling of US Government international broadcasting is effective and is worthy of continued funding.

It is time for the Congress to stop treating US Government international broadcasting as a billion dollar write-off of American taxpayer dollars.

Either fix it or close it (transfer its functions to another agency with real management).

The proof is in the picture – a press conference to an empty room, on a topic that no one is interested in, with no resonance or value to the American taxpayer.

This is what the BBG/IBB is all about.

The Federalist

November 2012

###

In Zimbabwe, Satellite Dishes Are Widespread And New Media Are Growing Rapidly

In Zimbabwe, Satellite Dishes Are Widespread And New Media Are Growing Rapidly

Bruce Sherman, Director, Office of Strategy and Development, BBG

Word of mouth and radio remain the primary sources of receiving news and information in Zimbabwe, but satellite ownership and the use of mobile devices to access the Internet are growing rapidly, according to new data issued by the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) and Gallup.

“Even youth are still turning to radio to get the news on a regular basis,” said Jenna Levy, Consulting Specialist, Gallup, “though they are more likely also to use new media.”

About 6 in 10 Zimbabweans say they have a working radio in their home (59.8%), and half have a working television (47.2%). Mobile phones, by far the most popular platform for accessing the Internet in Zimbabwe, are even more prevalent, with 75.6% reporting that they have a mobile phone in their household. In urban areas, mobile penetration approaches 100%.

Read the Research Brief
View the Presentation

“The notion that Zimbabwe is a radio-only market is outdated,” said Sonja Gloeckle, Africa Research Analyst, International Broadcasting Bureau, adding that “new media helps us reach out directly to people in Zimbabwe”

For the past several years, Zimbabwe has been a leader in Sub-Saharan Africa for satellite dish ownership, and this trend has further intensified. About two-thirds of Zimbabwean television owners say their TVs receive its signal via an individual satellite dish (65.8%) or shared satellite dish (2.0%), while a similar percentage (68.2%) use an antenna. TV has become a key means of reaching urban Zimbabweans, with nearly half watching television at 8 p.m. and just 7 percent listen to the radio at that time.

Past-week Internet use has more than doubled in the past year, standing now at 22 percent, and 9 in 10 regular Internet users go online through a mobile phone. Three quarters of regular Internet users name Facebook among their top three websites for news and information.

More than 8 in 10 of Zimbabweans who have their own mobile phones or have access to one (85.1%) say they used their phone to send an SMS/text message in the last week. Approximately one in four users accessed the Internet (25.6%), accessed Facebook or other social media (24.3%) or listened to the radio (24.1%) on their phones.

The BBG’s global audience research program is conducted in partnership with Gallup. The data on Zimbabwe, like that on Iran, Tibet, Burma, Nigeria and Indonesia released earlier this year, shows how communications technologies are evolving even as traditional broadcasts in TV and radio continue to play a significant role in news distribution. This research informs the current and future operations of the agency’s broadcasts in 59 languages to more than 100 countries.

We offer commentary on Broadcasting Board of Governors/International Broadcasting Bureau (BBG/IBB) press releases in October 2012:

“In Indonesia, TV Still Rules, But Mobile, Internet Are On The Rise (October 16, 2012).”

According to the BBG – and its polling partner – the Gallup organization,

“The new data shows that use of mobile phones continues to rise, with more than eight in 10 Indonesians (81.0%) now saying they have a mobile phone in their household, up from two-thirds (67%) in 2011. Half of Indonesians (49.8%) now say they use SMS/text messages at least once a week to get news.”

The press release goes on to say,

“Any communications strategy for Indonesia has to take into account the large and growing role of social media, especially among the young,” said William Bell, Research Director at the International Broadcasting Bureau.

“The findings show that about one in five Indonesians (20.6%) used the Internet in the past week. Almost all past-week Internet users (96.2%) say they used social networking services in the past seven days. The upward shift in Internet access across Indonesia – driven largely by mobile – is national in nature, and not just confined to more affluent urban areas.”

Analyzing BBG press releases means looking beyond what they say. Clearly, the BBG/IBB doesn’t realize what a gold mine of information these press releases are for those who see the weaknesses in the agency’s “flim flam strategic flam.”

For example:

What would be of more interest to us would be: who do the Indonesian people rely upon for news content, regardless of the media platform. Is it their own domestic media or foreign media? And, do they even want BBG/IBB program content on these devices?

You have to believe that if it was the Voice of America (VOA) Indonesian Service as the go-to news source, the agency would be SCREAMING from the roof of the Cohen Building. But that’s not evident here.

We think we have the answer:

Early-on in the 21st century, the Indonesian government took the lead in developing law that forbids or limits the dissemination of news broadcasts by foreign broadcasters, including VOA.

We know that this is a problem for the service because the VOA Indonesian service chief decided to be critical of these laws when a delegation of Indonesians visited the service in DC. That didn’t go over too well either with the delegation or Indonesian lawmakers back home. As one lawmaker pointed out, the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) plays by the regulations, why not VOA? The answer for the folks back in Indonesia may well be that VOA officials have that magic combination of misguided self-confidence and strong-arm tactics. The VOA Indonesian Service chief overplayed his hand. Lucky for him, it doesn’t make big news here. But it does in Indonesia.

We already know that VOA Indonesian program content going into Indonesia is subject to “editing,” (as in, censorship). If an Indonesian television station doesn’t like the content of a VOA Indonesian Service piece or if station managers feel the piece will get them in hot water with the government, the stuff goes nowhere. That leaves the agency producing “puff pieces,” as in lifestyle features and the like which are then inserted into domestic Indonesia media programs.

More than likely, the same holds true if the agency were to attempt to place its news content on mobile devices or the Internet. More than likely it is going to be blocked, by the government or the local service provider (with the government looking over its shoulder).

And then there is the pitch regarding “social media.”

The game that is being played here is the agency intimating that it should be heavier into the business of social media – and no doubt laying the groundwork for suggesting as much to the Congress.

Message to our friends in Congress -

The American taxpayer should not foot the bill for the agency’s attempt to turn itself into a social media website. If the agency wants to engage in frivolous online chit-chat and take itself offline from the VOA Charter, it can go it its own way without American taxpayer funding and try to dig up private funding as a private enterprise. The American taxpayer pays for what is embodied in the VOA Charter and it is the Charter that serves the US national and public interest.

If the agency isn’t delivering the goods as far as news and information is concerned and isn’t explaining US Government policies to foreign publics, it should no longer by funded by taxpayer revenue.

Syria – Again

The BBG followed the above-referenced press release with one dated October 19, 2012: “US, European Broadcasters Condemn Jamming From Syria.”

Here, the BBG alleges that satellite transmissions of international broadcasters intended for Syria are being jammed from within the country. It wouldn’t surprise us if this were happening. And it wouldn’t surprise us if the Iranians are aiding the Assad government in this effort, since they have expertise to do so and do it themselves in Iran.

We are well acquainted with the BBG/IBB tendency to ignore objective reality and its attempt to create its own alternative world view. Here, the BBG/IBB ignores the obvious: Syria is in the midst of an all-out, no-holds-barred sectarian civil war. Both the Assad regime and the various insurgent groups have been cited for war crimes. Fighting in places like the Syrian city of Aleppo resembles that of Stalingrad and other major European cities during World War Two: it is turning a major urban environment into rubble. The fighting is building-by-building, street-by-street, with the Syrian government using heavy artillery and airstrikes, in addition to ground troops backed by armor.

Seemingly, the “brain trust” of the IBB thinks that it should have unfettered access to the Syrian people. Guess what?

It isn’t going to happen. The last thing the Assad government would be willing to do is have external broadcasters give vent to their opinions regarding the conflict.

Let’s be clear: we are not taking sides. There is plenty to find abhorrent by the conduct of the Assad regime and also by the insurgents, which include jihadist elements perhaps linked to al-Qaeda. It’s a bad situation all the way around.

On October 28, 2012 the BBG issued a press release (“Photo of Cameraman Surfaces: BBG Renews its Call for the Release of Bashar Fahmi and Cuneyt Unal”) including a picture of Cuneyt Unal, the Turkish cameraman who went missing along with al-Hurra correspondent Bashar Fahmi.

The photograph was produced by a Turkish humanitarian organization. The photograph is undated. There was no indication of contact being made with Unal.

The BBG renewed its call on the Syrian government to produce information regarding its al-Hurra employees. To date, the Syrian government hasn’t come forward with information regarding either individual. For now, as we have suggested previously, it is likely that the best course of action remains with third parties, such as the Turkish humanitarian organization that produced the photograph. They may have more leverage and credibility than the BBG – and we hope so, for the sake of the missing al-Hurra employees. The best thing the BBG can do is drop down below the radar and let these other groups do their work.

The Big Picture

In all the BBG self-serving chatter about alternative media, there is an important missing ingredient. Its absence is intentional.

The BBG/IBB, with their “flim flam strategic plan,” has created a major strategic vulnerability for the US Government. They have abandoned the basic, fundamental means of delivering news and information to global publics:

Radio – shortwave radio in particular.

The BBG/IBB has gone for the “glitz.” They want to move away from radio (which by its nature, is optimized to deliver broadcasts with the largest communications footprint over a ranging land mass) in favor of television and the Internet.

From an “inside the USA” perspective, this seems logical.

It is not logical when the perspective becomes global and moves in the direction of strategic communication.

The reason being that delivering BBG program content via both television and the Internet to foreign audiences (a) requires unrestricted/unfettered access, (b) an electrical infrastructure that is 24/7 in the target area, (c) reliance upon who is in control of the downlinks in-country necessary to access these technologies and (d) a substantial per capita income on the part of the general population, not just a limited proportion of societal elites to acquire the technology and pay for it.

And then –

Governments in Russia, Indonesia and elsewhere have developed a strategy: put laws into effect that inhibit, prohibit, obstruct or otherwise control the dissemination of foreign news broadcasts to their publics.

Add to that the fact that they can control the Internet, block sites they don’t like and disrupt the ability to downlink satellite transmissions and place restrictions on domestic service providers and you have a formidable and cost-effective way of messing with the BBG and anyone else who has developed the same kind of flawed broadcast strategy.

And the worst of it is:

This is going to be the playbook for a long time. One wouldn’t expect the comedy-in-progress of the IBB to leap ahead of these countermeasures for some time to come. Of course, you can expect the BBG/IBB to ask the Congress for a TON of money for an R&D response to these countermeasures, but guess what? That money isn’t there. And in the meantime, in Russia, China, Iran and elsewhere, you can best believe that the intent is to stay as far ahead of the BBG as they can. They are not the least bit concerned with the IBB and its temper tantrum complaining that, in essence, these other countries are not playing by the same rules as the IBB.

If anything, the IBB is first class as an enabler and facilitator of effective measures against its “flim flam strategic plan.” It has abandoned its most important strategic component critical to its mission, when one remembers what that mission is.

And on top of all this, keep in mind that there are resolutions floating through the United Nations that would allow national governments to limit and control Internet access within countries.

In short, the BBG/IBB has put itself in a weakened position where its programs can be easily interdicted or restricted. In addition, by adopting the approach of “US Government international broadcasting as social media,” the BBG/IBB has put itself in the position of having to compete with hundreds, thousands and perhaps millions of websites.

And they are not doing a good job of it at all.

Remember:

The BBG/IBB has lost the information war.

We don’t like losing. We like winning.

Winning is better.

It’s time to reject and eject the BBG/IBB losers.

The Federalist
October 2012

In Indonesia, TV Still Rules, But Mobile, Internet Are On The Rise (Video)

by The Federalist

To reiterate our opening to Part One of this series:

If the press releases by the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) were Christmas presents, we’d have a closetful – stacked floor to ceiling.

These guys are the perfect combination of arrogance and incompetence – a combination that has led to a failed agency with a failed mission.

Let’s consider the latest press release from the BBG’s Public Affairs Office dated October 11, 2012: “BBG Condemns Jamming, Intimidation as Threats to Media Freedom.”

The press release describes the board’s “enduring outrage over persistent attempts to stifle the free flow of news and information through satellite jamming, intimidation and detention of journalists in Iran, Syria, Cambodia, Ethiopia and elsewhere.”

The press release goes on to cite specific cases that has the Board figuratively throwing a temper tantrum in a display of the one thing it is known for:

Failure.

But, we thank the agency’s press flaks for at least obliquely acknowledging its failed mission and its failed “flim flam Soviet-style strategic plan;” or more to the point, the effective countermeasures being adopted by other governments that ensure its failure – on top of the ludicrous premises and faulty decision-making that are trademarks of the BBG and its International Broadcasting Bureau (IBB) staff.

Here’s the deal:

If you are the national government of a country that has a different point of view regarding press freedom, this press release acknowledges that you are being effective in blocking BBG programs.

These governments know that they can act with impunity and there is little or nothing the BBG (or the US Government) can do to stop them. When one talks about intimidation, it is evident that these governments are not intimidated one iota by the flailing temper tantrum of the BBG/IBB.

Further, they are taking advantage of the agency’s Achilles heel: abandoning its direct radio broadcasting in favor of satellite transmissions, in-country program placement or the Internet – all of which can be effectively interdicted by variety of means.

With regard to the pesky Iranians, when they block a BBG program transmitted by satellite, they may be disrupting all the channels transmitting from that satellite as well. That means other broadcasters are losing programming they pay for and the satellite company may be losing revenue. It’s happened before. The agency has been kicked off of other satellites. This is the Iranian “daily double:” knocking off BBG programs and doing a little collateral damage in the process to make the point of the BBG/IBB as a financial liability for satellite companies. The Iranians know when they have a good thing going, from their point of view. In effect, they are making a statement: don’t mess with us. It kind of reminds us when the Iranian Cyber Army hacked all BBG/IBB websites not long ago and posted a personal message to Secretary of State Clinton. We can still visualize the Iranian flag waving gently in the cyber breeze with an AK-47 near-by, across all BBG websites for something like five hours. These guys know what they’re doing and they do it well. And if you are the “geniuses” in the Cohen Building, you should be worried about how much further along and how much more sophisticated the Iranian capabilities have become since that memorable cyber attack.

In addition, these governments have gotten busy with legislation to impose press restrictions inside their countries. This is another “daily double:” they interfere with foreign news organizations reporting inside their borders and successfully clamp down on their own domestic media.

Recently, Cambodian government officials called in reporters of the Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) for “cooperation” talks. Translation: that means “co-opting” talks. The BBG is gamely trying to hang on in Cambodia, but it may be a losing effort. Prime Minister Hun Sen (whose motto is: “The only person who can remove Hun Sen is Hun Sen”) is the kind of guy who would enjoy showing he’s the “big man on campus” by drop-kicking RFA/VOA out of his country. It adds to the image of toughness he likes to cultivate. He knows he has a lot to lose by RFA/VOA reporting inside Cambodia on a whole lot of issues. It would be a great play for him to send the agency’s reporters packing. And that would be a blessing for those reporters when juxtaposed to other tactics he could employ. The guy has a hair-trigger temper, literally as much as figuratively. You cross the guy and he will make sure you understand that doing so comes with consequences.

When a relatively small country like Cambodia can put a twist on agency reporters and programming, you know that the BBG has no muscle. They can mouth off a lot, as in these press releases. But these other governments hold some good cards and are not afraid to play them.

Syria

In this case, two employees of the BBG’s al-Hurra television have gone missing for over 50 days (and counting) inside Syria. This is not a good sign. Syria is in an all-out, no holds barred sectarian civil war. Both the Syrian government and the polyglot of insurgent militias have been cited for war crimes. These al-Hurra employees were last known to be reporting from Aleppo. Aleppo is the Syrian equivalent of Stalingrad. It is being systematically reduced to rubble, largely due to the Syrian armed forces using heavy artillery and air strikes in an urbanized environment.

It is understandable for the BBG to raise the issue of the welfare of al-Hurra employees Bashar Fahmi and Cuneyt Unal in a combat zone. At the same time, 50 days into this incident, one must take into account certain grim possibilities. At this juncture, we believe it would be better to work in a less public way through others rather than to continually raise the issue in press releases. Why?

Because it is another example of the lack of resonance the BBG has around the world. It creates the view that entreaties from the BBG are having zero effect and that the US Government is also powerless. These press releases put both of these deficiencies on global display. If these two employees are being held by someone, these press releases raise the value of holding them.

With this kind of track record, you know how we feel. We have zero tolerance for failure. Failure is hateful, contemptible and despicable; and the BBG/IBB has set upon it deliberately and they reward themselves for it. Seventy years worth of hard work building up US international credibility and prestige around the world is being reduced to nothingness by the mercenary IBB staff.

There is work to be done regarding these perpetuators of failure:

As to the BBG: it has demonstrated itself to be worthless as a management oversight and accountability body. Their appointments should be terminated immediately.

And as for that group of self-aggrandizers in the IBB: they should be removed from the Federal Service for cause.

It’s time for leadership: because this agency has none.

More to come.

The Federalist
October 2012

The BBG Watch website — www.bbgwatch.com or www.usgbroadcasts.com — has reached the 700,000 hits since it was launched in September 2011. BBG Watch is published anonymously by former and current Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) journalists and other employees, as well as outside contributors and supporters.

We want to thank everybody who has contributed to the success of our website, especially those who visit our site regularly, as well as our writers, editors and everyone who has sent us information and comments.

Your support is highly valued and helps us continue our public service.

The mass firing of Radio Liberty journalists in Moscow last month has generated tremendous interest and greatly increased the number of site visitors and views.

We republish here some of the most popular posts of the last 30 days.

The most popular post was by Mario Corti.

Former Radio Liberty Russian Service director Mario Corti – RFE/RL management turns radio listeners and visitors to its website in Russia into anti-Americans

Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty Management Turns Radio Listeners and Visitors To Its Website in Russia Into Anti-Americans

by former Radio Liberty Russian Service director Mario Corti

I worked for RFE-RL for several years in different capacities and positions. As a manager, one of my responsibilities was to participate in the selection and firing of employees. A very difficult task, the risk being hiring or firing the wrong people. And I certainly made mistakes, some of which I am aware of and regret them. When I was in charge of the Samizdat Unit, which analyzed the underground press in the Soviet Union, I tried to fire one of the members of my staff, probably the best specialist in his field. In my opinion, his behavior inside the unit and working habits were more damaging then beneficial to the organization. My decision provoked a turmoil both inside RFE-RL and outside. Letters of protest against his dismissal came from RFE-RL employees and from prominent academics from all around the world. My supervisors got scared and cancelled my decision. During a major reorganization of the RFE-RL Research Institute, I participated as deputy director of the Information Resources Department in the outsourcing of media monitoring services. We found a company in Moscow perform the same tasks that were performed by our Monitoring Section. It was a much cheaper solution. All the members of the unit were fired. On April 11, 2001, NTV’s offices were stormed and sized by a new management team appointed by Gazprom and lead by Boris Jordan, an American businessman, and Vladimir Kulistikov, a former RFE-RL employee (what an irony!) Savik Shuster, the RL Moscow Bureau Director, who had previously been allowed by RFE-RL management to comment on soccer matches on NTV, immediately decided that he would never again work for NTV. For three weeks Savik Shuster was on the air everyday in his Liberty Live show condemning the seizure of NTV as an attempt against freedom of speech. After three weeks, all of a sudden, here was Savik again commenting on soccer matches on NTV. I was then director of the Russian Service and I thought that Savik, with his decision to cooperate with the Gazprom team, had betrayed the trust of Radio Liberty’s listeners. I decided that, if Savik would continue to appear on NTV that he had previously sharply attacked, then he must leave RFE-RL. But he insisted on doing both: working for RL and for the new NTV. I suggested termination. Although my direct supervisor was against this decision, I was able to make my point and convince some of the higher level executives. My direct supervisor suggested that I should sign the termination letter since it was my initiative, but he was ordered by his superiors to sign it himself. While most Russian Service staff members in Prague understood that I had a point, most Moscow staffers insisted that we had not done much to convince Savik to change his mind. This situation increased the already existing division between the Russian teams in Prague and Moscow. But this is another story. In brief, I had my own trouble working with some of my most talented and skilled colleagues. Then my turn came to go. I was first removed from my position as Russian Service director and a year later I was fired altogether. I was not happy with the situation that led to my removal and tried to resist for as long as I could. But much later I realized that I had been only a small part of that glorious institution. The Russian Service existed before me and it would exist after me for a long time. People go, and new people step in. It’s the life of any vital organization. But only to a certain degree.

After I was forced to leave Radio Free Europe  and Radio Liberty and my position as the director of the Russian Service  several years ago in a dispute with the management over their proposed program content changes, I could only remotely imagine that only a few years later,  some of the same BBG and  new RFE-RL executives would put at risk the very existence of the Russian Service.

Put at risk is a very mild expression. In fact by firing almost all of the Moscow bureau team, including the best journalists, RFE-RL President Steve Korn and his acolytes inflicted a mortal blow to this great institution. To mention but three journalists who were fired or left on their own: Mikhail Sokolov, Anna Kachkaeva and Marina Timasheva are not only among the best professionals in their field, they are also celebrities in Russia.

Why it has always been so difficult for the BBG and RFE-RL executives, managers and administrative personnel to work with and get along with talented professionals?

I think no one would argue that Robert Oppenheimer, Enrico Fermi and their colleagues were far more important than General Leslie Groves for the Manhattan Project to be successful. Oppenheimer and his team of scientists knew far better what was to be done. Lots of people around the world know who Oppenheimer and Fermi were, hardly anyone has ever heard of Groves and his team of  administrators and military technicians. Oppenheimer and Groves spoke different languages, but they still somehow managed to understand each other.

Similarly, Russian Service broadcasters are much more important than any BBG member or RFE-RL administrative personnel for the success of Radio Liberty. They are the ones who do the real job. They are the experts. They know better by definition. They are on the front line, they are the identity of Radio Liberty and they grant the visibility to America in Russia. People in Russia care about what they are being told on the radio and who is addressing them.

In Russia, the country of Radio Liberty’s audience, the name Sokolov means a lot, as a journalist he has made history there. He and his colleagues are the stars. For a radio to be successful, you need strong personalities to go on the air, and they are. Russian listeners couldn’t care less about the Trimbles, the Korns, the Ragonas.

I tried to explain this simple truth to my supervisors. They didn’t get the point. They thought they knew better. As far as they were concerned the Russian Service had too much visibility, too much power, it was too much of a radio with too many personalities.

And this is something administrative managers of RFE-RL after Kevin Klose, the last great President of RFE-RL, could never put up with. It is not easy to manage and work with strong personalities. And RFE-RL bureaucrats did only see one part of the medal, preferring to consider and treat their Russian broadcasters  only as capricious, awkward and annoying human beings.

This mentality hasn’t changed.

General Groves main function was to obtain the necessary financial resources, identify the sites, provide the facilities, coordinate the work of the different components of the Manhattan project. Similarly–once the editorial policy is in place, and it has been in place for a long time–the BBG and the RFE-RL administrative personnel functions are to seek and provide the financial means, the technical facilities, administrative experience, support and the other necessary means for the broadcasters to perform their job and to succeed.

But the most essential task they had and needed to be always focused on was providing radio program delivery and distribution, so that the broadcasters’ work reaches and can be appreciated by the listeners. They failed.

Because they failed and since the departure of Kevin Klose as  RFE-RL President, they put the whole blame for falling ratings on the Russian Service staff. Since then, their obsession has been to reform the Russian Service no matter what. They never understood that it is useless to have the best possible journalists team (and they had it) and the best possible radio programming (and they had it) if the programs cannot be widely distributed and heard.

Whether your radio is good or lousy, your ratings will be low if you have a lousy signal and no program distribution. However, there have been opportunities to get a powerful medium wave (AM) transmitter covering the whole North West of European Russia that would not be under the control of the Russian government. Just days before the RFE-RL management announced that it was being forced to abandon AM rebroadcasts in Moscow, they were again offered an AM transmitter in the Baltic states. They refused the offer.

Not that this one transmitter could on its own attract a vast audience, but it would be a step in the right direction while other options are being considered. It would be a response to Putin rather than the current capitulation. At one time, they could have even obtained an FM transmitter in Moscow.  RFE-RL management failed to grab these opportunities.

Mikhail Sokolov argued that, even under under Putin, RFE-RL could have had a mix of effective broadcasting presence in Russia if the management tried hard and put some brains, flexibility and creativity into it. I agree with him. After all, you can always distribute a perfect digital radio signal or even better radio studio/TV hybrid program over the satellite and advertise it. There are millions in Russia who have satellite antennas. You can always broadcast radio over the Internet, and even put video cameras in the studio, as an excellent byproduct. But you have to have an excellent radio program, talented hosts, and a team of journalists and broadcasters to produce it who enjoy the trust and respect of their audience.  The main statutory purpose of RFE-RL is to create radio broadcasts, or broadcasts in any case, and no one has removed the two initials for “Radio” in that acronym.

I admire the Moscow bureau team for what they did in incorporating radio into one of the best news and commentary websites in Russia. They were not only part of the digital revolution, they led it in Russia in social media and in using well known radio personalities of Radio Liberty to promote the unique power and influence of the broadcast medium over the Internet. They increased traffic to the site tenfold. The entire Moscow Internet and social media team was fired along with some of the best radio journalists. They were fired by RFE-RL President  Steven Korn and his Vice President Julia Ragona, which makes me wonder what they know about Russia, journalism, Runet (Russian Internet) and Russian social media that these Russian journalists and media experts do not.

As far as the past recent history of RL is concerned, I have already touched upon some of what happened a few years ago in my interview to Free Media Online, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty Has Lost Its Uniqueness Warns Former Director of Radio Liberty’s Russian Service.

Another “cultural” divide between broadcasters and bureaucrats has to do with work habits and work ethics. The former make sure that broadcasts are on the air 24 hours a day and 7 days a week. If necessary they are at work during the night, on Saturdays and Sundays, while RFE-RL administrative personnel is there hardly 8 hours a day from Monday to Friday. (I am not referring here to RFE-RL technical personnel. I know them and I have the highest appreciation for their professionalism and dedication. But they could and can only do what bureaucrats order them to do.) Broadcasters expected more support and understanding from the administrative personnel, including their managers. This was very annoying for the bureaucrats. One of my impressions when I worked at the radios was that RFE-RL executives would have been much happier doing away with radio altogether. I didn’t realize though that I had a right premonition.

Because BBG and RFE-RL administrators miserably failed in program delivery, program distribution and multimedia program presentation–a lot of the blame, of course, also goes to the Russian authorities who clamped down on foreign rebroadcasts–they now decided to do away with radio altogether and concentrate on Internet only.  And what did they do? They did not even blame the Kremlin with any  forcefulness or tried to use the influence of the United States government to win concessions, considering that Voice of Russia and Russia Today are widely distributed on AM, FM, cable, and satellite TV channels in America. Crazy as it may sound, they rented new, bigger and more expensive facilities in Moscow and then fired the whole Internet team and most broadcasters. The transition to the new facilities is not over yet. Masha Gessen, the newly appointed Russian Service director, and her team, will have to wait a few months before they can enjoy them.

Something I have not seen underlined by the media so far about the new director is that when Masha Gessen was initially offered the job by RFE-RL, she refused it. Instead she accepted another job in Moscow and only when very soon she was fired from that job for refusing to cover one of President Putin’s publicity stunts, she agreed to join RFE-RL, which says something about her preferences. RFE-RL was not her priority, it was only her second choice.

Why did Korn choose Masha Gessen?

Steve Korn may be convinced that he and Masha Gessen speak the same language. But he does not seem to have the same appreciation for foreign cultures and administrative skills as those who managed Radio Liberty in the past. He will be disappointed. He has already encountered controversy and very soon will run into even greater trouble with Masha Gessen and her team.  He should have taken a closer look at her professional history.

In conclusion, Mikhail Sokolov, Anna Kachkaeva, Marina Timasheva, Elena Fanailova and their brave colleagues–forgive me for not mentioning them all–will remain as prominent figures in the post-perestroika history of RFE-RL. Steve Korn will only be remembered as the person who, with his clumsy responses and lack of understanding threw out the baby with the bath water. He will be remembered as the person who managed to turn even Radio Liberty listeners and visitors to its website into anti-Americans.

About Mario Corti:

A member of the FreeMediaOnline.org Board of Directors and the International Advisory Board, Mario Corti is a distinguished journalist, writer, and analyst of Russian politics, society, and culture. He has been an active supporter of independent journalism and publishing in Russia and in other countries of the former Soviet Union and throughout Eastern Europe.

In 1979, Mario Corti joined Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) in Munich as a research-analyst/editor of the Samizdat unit of Radio Liberty. He later became deputy chief and chief of the Samizdat unit and served as Deputy Director and Director of the Information Resources Department of the RFE-RL Research Institute. After RFE/RL’s move from Munich to Prague, Mario Corti worked as a broadcaster in the Russian Broadcasting Department, serving as Deputy Director (1996 – 1998) and as Director (1998-2003). While in charge of RFE/RL Russian broadcasts, he expanded Moscow and Saint Petersburg news bureaus and opened a news bureau in Ekaterinburg. He also organized training seminars for journalists who contributed news reports to RFE/RL and instituted the “Radio Svoboda” Journalistic Award. While at RFE/RL, he also launched a number of cooperative projects with independent media outlets and independent journalists in Russia. He also started a multimedia educational project with the Moscow University for the Humanities (RGGU) based on the Radio Liberty series dealing with the XXth Communist Party Congress. He retired from RFE/RL in 2005.

Before joining RFE/RL, Mario Corti worked as a translator and interpreter in the Italian Embassy in Moscow, cofounded a publishing house (La Casa Matriona) in Milan, and was actively publicizing the work of Soviet human rights activists and Samizdat writers. Between 1969 and 1978, he edited several books on dissent in the USSR. In 1977 he served as chairman of the Italian Organizing Committee of the Second International Sakharov Hearings in Rome and contributed to an exhibit on Soviet dissent for the Venice Biennale. He organized exhibits of Samizdat documents in Turin, Italy (sponsored by La Gazzetta del Popolo in 1978), and in Washington, D.C. (sponsored by AFL-CIO in 1979). In 1979, he helped to organize the Third (American) Sakharov Hearings in Washington, D.C. on violations of human rights in the USSR and Eastern Europe.

Mario Corti is the author and editor of several books. Dreif, a book written in Russian about philosophy and culture, was published in Russia and Ukraine in 2002. His book, Salieri i Mozart, on the relationship between the two composers, was published in Russian in 2005. His book about Italian physicians in Russia appeared both in Russian (Drugie ital’iantsy. Vrachi na sluzhbe Rosssii, St. Petersburg, 2010), and in Italian (Gli “altri” italiani. Medici al servizio della Russia, Rome, 2011). His articles on human rights and Soviet dissent have appeared in several languages in many countries. He speaks Italian, Rusian, English, German, Spanish, and French and has a working knowledge of several other European languages. He currently lives in Italy and writes for the Russian media.

‘Special operation’ at Radio Liberty in Moscow, Part One

BBG Watch Commentary

Also read: ‘Special operation’ at Radio Liberty Moscow, Part Two

It is being described as the Korn-Ragona special operation.

Some were called at home early in the morning by a receptionist. Others found out something was wrong when they reported for work at the Radio Liberty bureau in Moscow. Newly hired guards stopped them. They were told to go to the Moscow law office of DLA Piper which does legal work for Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL).

Some 20 journalists and web editors would be fired that day and about the same number the next.

Sometime earlier, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty President Steve Korn promised employees they would finally be getting medical insurance, moving to a new, larger facility, and be trained in digital media. They had no idea what was coming.

Mr. Korn was looking for a new director of the Russian Service. He read a political biography of Vladimir Putin, The Man Without a Face: The Unlikely Rise of Vladimir Putin, by Masha Gessen, an American-Russian-Jewish expatriate. Earlier this year, she turned down a job offer from Radio Liberty and started to work for a Russian magazine instead. But she consulted for Mr. Korn on the side and told him how to reform the Moscow bureau. Then, she lost her Russian magazine job — a reportedly frequent event in her professional life — when she refused to cover a publicity stunt featuring President Putin. Putin found out about it and decided to act.

Even though she’s been calling him a dictator, he invited her for a semi-private meeting at the Kremlin. He apparently couldn’t stand the idea that a journalist, married to another woman and living with their children under his imperial protection in Russia, would lose her job because of him, or so we were led to believe.

More likely, Putin’s FSB snoopers told him about Masha’s job negotiations with the American broadcaster, and he may have decided to play mischief. Gessen wrote later that Putin barely knew who she was and that he gets most of his information from state TV. That was strange. She at first accepted his help and didn’t say anything about it, then said no to Putin and yes to Korn, to the latter’s great delight. Radio Liberty journalists in Moscow were doomed.

In Washington, the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) members, appointed by President Obama but representing both political parties, were not told about the meeting at the Kremlin. Mr. Korn assured them he found a terrific candidate to lead the Russian Service and had plans for restructuring the Moscow bureau. He was not specific.

Gessen’s selection was officially announced and she was to report for work on October 1. Several days later, about 40 journalists, the RL Moscow website team, and technical staffers, practically the entire bureau — some of whom worked for Radio Liberty for over 20 years — found themselves without jobs.

About five of these were not dismissed but chose to resign in protest and solidarity with their colleagues. Radio Liberty as it was known during the Cold War and during its long struggle against the assault on independent media under Putin was no more.

“This dismissal wasn’t voluntary – neither for me, nor for my colleagues,” one former Radio Liberty woman journalist wrote to BBG members. Hers is one of many letters the BBG received from Moscow, in addition to a statement of concern from President Gorbachev and a letter of protest sent to Secretary Clinton and members of Congress by a group of prominent Russian human rights activists led by Ludmila Alexeeva.

Letters to BBG members including striking details of the “special operation,” as some Radio Liberty journalists described their mass firing:

“We were subjected to serious psychological pressure. The administration of RFE/RL hid their intentions from us until the last day. Previously, President Steven Korn repeatedly stated that he would try to save all the positions, and colleagues who had been dismissed the day before us were forbidden to tell us about it.

We were given to understand that we would be dismissed under any circumstances, even if we did not sign these documents. We were given to understand that it was better to agree, otherwise we would be thrown out without any payment.

In the Moscow RFE/RL bureau, the guards of frightening appearance were especially hired for this purpose, and we were led from one floor to another, being under escort, and had only two hours to pack our personal belongings. The guards blocked the entrance to the building and blocked access to our computers.

We have been treated as enemies. We, who for so many years worked for the radio, who gave it so much strength and energy, who worked much more for the idea rather than money; we for whom the promotion of democratic values and human rights was the mission and the purpose in life, were treated by these RFERL American executives like common thieves.

In fact, the whole old team of the Moscow Bureau was fired — brave people, real human rights activists, who for many years led the fight for human dignity in the complicated (to put it mildly) conditions of Putin’s Russia. I do not understand why we deserved such treatment and who gave the RFE/RL Prague management the right to treat us in such a way.”

Mr. Korn told BBG members the fired employees, and especially the “seven Russians,” as he called them, who signed the protest letter were confused. The employees signed termination agreements. We went out of our way to treat them with respect, he said. Alexeeva and others didn’t understand that Radio Liberty lost an AM radio transmitter in Moscow and didn’t know they were criticizing Masha Gessen. If they knew it was her, they wouldn’t do it because they knew her since she was a child growing up in Russia, he was quoted as saying. She called to confront them and they said they didn’t know.

On the firing itself, former employees, including those who resigned in protest, tell a completely different story:

“Mr. Korn and Ms. Ragona are saying that the dismissals were based “on the agreement of both parties.” This may be legally or technically true, but it is nevertheless simply at variance with facts and reality.

The truth is that RFE/RL management representatives forced the staff to sign dismissal agreements. What could these journalists do faced with blocked computers, canceled electronic passes, and prevented from accessing RFE/RL’s website publishing system? If an employee refused to take the offer to be fired, he or she would be dismissed anyway. RFE/RL management would have an opportunity to fire the employee, according to Article 81 of the Russian Labor Code.

The audio recording of the whole ugly dismissal scene is available and can be provided to the BBG or become evidence in court, if needed.

Such methods and style of management – bragging about a new multimedia concept and firing people who succeeded in its implementation and increased RFE/RL Russian Service web audience tenfold; dismissing all journalists, who throughout the last twenty years have become a part of RFE/RL’s brand – all this looks like the worst kind of mismanagement and a gross violation of moral and ethical values.

That is why I resigned in protest.

The Radio Liberty editorial office, which consisted of people who spent years risking their health and lives (RFE/RL didn’t provide its staff in Moscow and in other Russian cities with medical insurance) advocating for human rights and freedom of expression, was ruined not by our antagonists but by our own top management – at the expense of American taxpayers, whose money was used not for promoting democracy but for hiring guards to keep those doing the promoting from going on the air and posting human rights stories on the web.

Tens of professionals with irreproachable reputation, the second most popular Russian multimedia platform and the respected brand developed throughout years of hard work – became victims of such incredible bad judgement that it brought condemnation from some of the most famous Russian human rights activists and former president and Nobel Peace Prize laureate Mikhail Gorbachev.

I respectfully urge the honorable members of the Broadcasting Board of Governors to find out for themselves what happened to this venerable public institution to restore what was lost before it is too late. I speak here on behalf of myself and my colleagues.”

Did Ludmila Alexeeva and other human rights activist know what was going on when they signed their protests letter? One fired journalist wrote to BBG that the famous Russian human rights activist was right in the middle of it:

“I was lucky in that I was able to say farewell to my listeners who have followed my human rights programs for 10 years. The majority of fired journalists were not afforded such an opportunity.

My own opportunity to say good bye was pure luck. On the day I was fired, I was recording an interview with the famous human rights activist and founder of the Moscow Helsinki Group Ludmila Alekseeva. Owing solely to this circumstance did my program eventually air. Alekseeva saw first hand what was happening in the bureau, and soon a letter was drafted by ten of Russia’s most prominent human rights activists. They were outraged by the destruction of the Moscow bureau. Most importantly, no one knew at the time, and no one knows now what the real reasons behind this decision were.

From a strictly legal standpoint, I have no qualms with RFE/RL’s management; I signed the papers I was asked to sign. But no one can silence my moral condemnation of what happened. I still have not heard a satisfactory explanation for why such an enormous percentage of our staff was fired, considering the fact that the BBG’s annual report named the Russian Language Service one of the best under its supervision.

RFE/RL’s management has stated on a number of occasions that our future is in multimedia. Why, then, were the first people fired those who staff our Internet division – the people who brought coverage of the protests in Russia to hundreds of thousands of online users? The number of our website visitors and social network subscribers has been growing unabatedly, and these figures were part of the BBG’s annual report.

RFE/RL’s management talked about convergence, but our journalists already wrote pieces for the station’s website, produced video materials, maintained personal pages and broadcast over the Internet. Many of them took the initiative and took multimedia training sessions in order to improve our mass-media outreach. Was this not a clear enough demonstration of our willingness and ability to adapt to new conditions?

RFE/RL’s management also talked about cutting costs, but due to the timing of the dismissals — not wanting to see these loyal employees for even one more day or to allow them even to say good bye — the company was forced to pay out hefty severance packages.”

Well-known former Radio Liberty journalist Mikhail Sokholov who drafted the earlier decree that gave Radio Liberty legal right to broadcast in Russia took issue with RFE/RL executives’ claims that the firings were necessary because the station lost its AM frequency in Moscow. Former President Yeltsin personally handed the decree to Sokholov in recognition of his courageous on-the-scene reporting during the communist coup in 1991.

“The real story behind the AM frequency license, which was bound to be lost, and the inability to broadcast is very different from what RFE/RL management is saying. The truth is that RFE/RL Vice President Ms. Julia Ragona deliberately rejected and ignored the proposal of a joint project to rebroadcast radio transmissions in Russia together with the opposition media outlet “Novaya Gazeta.” RFE/RL executives did not even bother to respond to emails.

All other major Western broadcasters in Russia, including BBC, CNN and European media, have operated and will continue to operate under similar arrangements with other licensed Russian stations and networks. They are not affected at all by the new media law.

To suggest that the loss of a specific license or AM frequency — an event that was known for months in advance — required the sudden mass firings affecting almost the entire bureau, including the outstanding Internet team, and to say that while everybody knows that a much larger RFE/RL facility is being built in Moscow, or to suggest that the Russian Service did not already have a vigorous digital, multimedia outreach strategy, is ludicrous and misleading.

Prominent Russian political figures, including Mikhail Gorbachev, have emphasized that the self-created defeat for Radio Liberty in Russia occurred just at the time when the Russian authorities have stepped up their pressure on the independent media. The enemies of freedom and democracy certainly have good reasons to applaud RFE/RL President Mr. Steven Korn’s decision to dismiss the entire Russian team of journalists.”

Another fired Radio Liberty journalist wrote about Masha Gessen’s media notoriety in Russia:

“It is not good form to discuss other people’s private lives, so I was reluctant to bring up this issue, but numerous reports in Russian media have made it abundantly public. Now the head of up-to-now respected public American institution in Russia is a woman who has made her private life the subject of national gossip: among other things, she is notorious in the press for stories of her sexual adventures.

As a result, RFE/RL is incurring enormous reputational damage. The most widespread explanation circulating on the Internet is that it took Putin one day (the day he met with Masha Gessen) to accomplish what the KGB could not do in 30 years – to destroy Radio Liberty. I subscribe to this opinion.”

As for those Radio Liberty journalists who were fired or resigned, for some of them — especially the older ones — the future doesn’t look very bright. One woman journalist wrote:

“It seems that the President of  Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty Mr. Steven Korn and Vice-President  Ms. Julia Ragona have never thought for a moment about what  will happen to us who live in an authoritarian state, where anti-American feelings are very strong, where Radio Liberty is still called «hostile voice», as in Soviet times, and where for the large segment of the population we are perceived as enemies.

Just one example: my colleagues and I have been regularly attacked by aggressive people while making polls on the streets Moscow. (Some individuals tried to beat us and to take away our recording equipment.) After a few such attacks we were given life insurance, but the RFE/RL management never provided us with medical insurance, which we would need if any of us suffered physical injuries or developed a serious illness. All these years we had been working without health insurance!  I wonder if BBG members were aware of this situation.

Now, when in Russia the attack on the rights and freedoms of its citizens is now in full swing, I’m sure, that no one from among us, journalists fired from RFERL, «foreign agents», «enemies of  Russia» will be hired. For example, I still have four years  remaining until retirement, and I risk staying unemployed these next years, and consequently I will get only a very small pension.

My colleagues (about 40 people) were thrown out onto the street from Radio Liberty with the same “wolf ticket” (a Russian expression which applies to individuals under any kind of suspicion by the authorities or powerful employers, whom no one dares to hire or treat decently because it would offend or annoy those who have power and control). Among us, there are people of pre-retirement age, there are single mothers with many children, and some who are physically disabled.

How  are they going to live now? How can they feed their children? How will they be treated by the Russian state authorities?  The answer to the last question is, at least, obvious.

If the  RFE/RL’s management decided to dismiss so many distinguished journalists, who because of their visibility in pro-democracy reporting have become tarnished goods in Putin’s Russia, they should have at least thought about pensions for them or, for example, whether to extend invitations and help them get a refugee status in the United States. But this was not done or even thought of. Mr. Korn just told us all “thanks” in a written statement posted on the website from Prague, and gave to understand that we are no longer needed.

All these years, working for Radio Liberty, we were sure, that behind us stood a strong organization, a powerful and fair country – the United States of America, and that we would always be under its protection and would get help and wouldn’t be left unprotected in case of threat or  dire need. And now we are threatened, and we won’t be defended. We were all thrown to the mercy of  fate.

The new Director of the Russian Service Masha Gessen came to the radio with her new team, and the people who had been working  here for 20 years and more, became a used commodity for the management, things which can be safely dumped and not thought of anymore.

Dear Members of the BBG,  please tell me that I am not right. Tell me that there is at least one person among you who cares or even worries about my future and the future of my colleagues. Let me know the answer to the question which we are asking together with the leaders of the Russian human rights movement: will there be an investigation of the activity of the management of RFE/RL? And another question: what should we, the fired journalists, do now? How are we to survive in a country where many of our compatriots consider us enemies because we have worked for so many years for American radio?

What can we do if no one cares to answer these question? Some of us will appeal to the  Russian courts against the management of Radio Liberty or to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. Among other things, we suffered a huge moral damage. And we are still in Russia and can’t leave.

Is all of this a political reset against traditional human rights reporting? A capitulation to Mr. Putin? Digital transformation? A special operation by clueless management? Mr. Korn’s gift to Putin, a gift to Masha Gessen, or both?

One thing is certain from a journalistic perspective. Masha Gessen, a journalist and media personality, denies any responsibility for the purge at Radio Liberty. To suggest such a thing would be slander.

She has indeed made accusations of slander against one former Radio Liberty journalist, the station’s former website editor-in-chief, as well as a former outside contributor, a famous Russian satirist, for suggesting a link between and her and the mass firing. She said she was not even on board and it wasn’t her decision.

President Putin, whom Gessen called a dictator, recently signed a law which re-criminalizes slander with fines of up to $150,000. Former Radio Liberty journalists and others say the law is designed to silence independent media and investigative reporting even more.

Gessen is now officially the director of Radio Liberty Russian Service. The journalists and the old programs are gone. The guards are still there. Only a handful of staffers in Moscow struggle to fill the broadcasts and the website. Masha Gessen will no doubt bring in her own people. But who is going to work for her? Presumably someone who doesn’t engage in slander. Mr. Putin will be watching.

Also read: ‘Special operation’ at Radio Liberty Moscow, Part Two

‘Special operation’ at Radio Liberty Moscow – Part Two

“I remember guards at our beloved RFE/RL Moscow editorial office and frozen eyes of bureaucrats saying ‘Thank you, we no longer need your service. Here is your compensation, hope you are satisfied.’”

The following excerpts are from the letters to members of the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) from Radio Liberty Moscow bureau journalists and other staffers who were fired by RFE/RL managers or resigned in protest.

Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty executives did not seemed worried how the mass firings at the Radio Liberty (Radio Svoboda) office in Moscow are going to be viewed by the Russian public opinion, but Radio Liberty journalists did. You might be surprised to learn that they worried about the reputation of the station that was firing them and about America’s image in Russia. They were, in fact, engaging in pro-American public diplomacy. The RFE/RL management was not. Quite the opposite.

“We are often asked why we didn’t refuse to sign our dismissal agreements, why we didn’t protest, why we did not strike and occupy the office?

What could be the outcome in such a case?

We could have a big scandal with big damage to the image of the station and the American government. All anti-American propagandists in Russia would be ready to blame USA in connection with this incident. In fact , the fired journalists, me included, worried more about saving America’s and RFE/RL’s reputation than the RFE/RL management , which hired guards to repress us. Imagine photos in the Russian newspapers, TV and online media how these guards are leading us out! A very good news for everbody who hates America.”

Radio Liberty journalists and staffers were not only fired in a most brutal “special operation.” Before this action, they say they were mislead by the two top RFE/RL executives:

“RFE/RL officials prepared for their action very carefully. They told us that we would be fired anyway and suggested a “soft way.” We were so shocked and so loyal to our company, which we considered to be part of our family, that we one by one signed our dismissal agreements.

At the same time we were deeply pained that the company, for which we worked for many years with all our energy and dedication, was getting rid of us in this way. It seemed like an awful dream.

We had several meetings with Mr. Korn and Ms. Ragona before. Every time, they were informing us that we will work in a new digital office. We asked about training on how to use the new equipment, and Mr. Korn promised that such training will be organized. He also informed us that we will have medical insurance at last. It seemed perfect.

Mr. Korn asked us to give him proposals on how to work in a new digital format of Radio Liberty. Because I follow closely developments in new media and participated in many seminars with experts in this field, I have written such proposals – how to produce multimedia news in a new Radio Liberty newsroom step by step. Ms. Gloushkova told me that she had sent this document to Prague. There was no answer.

At the same time, plans for the new office where made where there would be only 35 work stations. Somebody told us that half of the journalists would not need work stations because they would work remotely via Internet, doing on-site reporting on news events. There was not a word about any mass dismissals.

In retrospect, this whole situation was very strange, because until then RFE/RL always had a very open and honest atmosphere and good communications between management and employees.

If we were told that the station didn’t have enough money for our staff, I’m sure that my colleagues would be ready to work for less money, because money is not the main issue for us. We all felt that our work for the legendary Radio Liberty was our mission, our main purpose in our professional life.

We were already working very effectively on the new digital Radio Liberty. As an experienced and qualified specialist in this area, I was very interested and delighted to take part in this very challenging digital project. But on September 21, I was informed by the management – you are not needed in the New Russian Service together with many other very experienced and qualified journalists and new media specialists. Who can tell me, and us – why?”

Many Radio Liberty web team members found out for the first time that they were fired when the guards prevented them from entering the Moscow bureau. According to other accounts, they were then told to report to the offices of an international law firm representing RFE/RL where many of these employees claim they were subjected to extreme psychological pressure to sign their termination agreements. the author of this letter, was not fired. He resigned to protest RFE/RL management’s actions.

“September the 20th, almost all my colleagues from the Internet team of Moscow RFE/RL bureau were not allowed to enter the building. This was the first way to notify them of being suddenly and without any explanation fired from their jobs.

The next day almost all of the radio staff was fired too.

I was not on that list, but I decided to quit because to me this kind of behavior by the management is unconscionable.

The Internet team under Ludmila Telen’s leadership has reached significant results – Russian RFE/RL website became one of the most popular in the radio/news segment of the Russian web.

With the very significant help from our technical director Ilya Tochkin, we became one of the pioneers in live video streaming via Internet in Russia, covering such forbidden on Russian official TV themes, as court processes against Mikhail Khodorkovsky, Platon Lebedev and Pussy Riot, visiting Butyrskaya prison on the anniversary of Sergey Magnitsky’s death and gathering hundreds of thousands of visitors for live video coverage of protest actions in Moscow and so on.

We have made a significant progress and were regularly praised by our bosses in Prague and in Washington – there was not even one complain about our Internet and multimedia work. But suddenly all the fully organized process was destroyed.

The reorganization turned out to be the total annihilation of the Russian Service of RFE/RL.

These actions amount to violations of civil and ethical laws, journalistic standards, and human rights.

I was working at the RFE/RL Moscow bureau for almost 12 years – first as a freelance correspondent, then as the morning live radio show host and as video editor. We had a successful strategy of developing RFE/RL web, radio and video presence.

Our audience was shocked by the destruction of Radio Liberty, which was one of the last politically balanced media in Russia.”

Among those fired by RFE/RL management were single mothers with many children and disabled employees. Some have worked for Radio Liberty Moscow for many years.

“Firing a disabled but fully employable and well performing person is extraordinary in any civilized country. I became disabled after a strike, which happened in 2008. My schedule, created at that time by RFE/RL management, was very demanding. I spent more than ten hours a week doing live broadcasts, three days – early in the morning. My stroke didn’t happen at the work place, but it came just one hour after my exhausting morning shift. I didn’t demand that RFE/RL pay for my medical treatment, although it wouldn’t have been hard to prove in court that my work schedule was the principle reason for my stroke.

I’ve always thought that RFE/RL’s mission is more important than my health, and that we would always come to an agreement, if needed.

We did. In 2008, RFE/RL management arranged my schedule in a different way. I started working from home on the web team as an editor, coming to the editorial office just once a week. As a longtime disabled employee, I thought that I would never be thrown out on the street by an American publicly-funded and publicly-owned company. I did not think that given my employment record and the public nature of my employment, such a thing would be likely to happen to me if I were employed in the United States and that RFE/RL would treat its employees as if they were working in America. But I was employed in Russia and I was wrong.

The mass firings at the RFE/RL Moscow bureau were done so inappropriately and with the use of such strong psychological pressure, that many of my colleagues and I got a distressing impression that fighting for our rights would be fruitless and impossible.

When RFE/RL managers said I was fired, I reminded them that I was disabled. They suggested that I could work one more month as a freelancer, a prolongation of the suffering.

It will be quite impossible for me to find a job in Moscow. I’m 52, and I’m disabled.

It is worth mentioning something that the chief executive did to increase our torment and humiliate us even more. Shortly before the mass firings, Steve Korn told us that we would finally be getting medical insurance. We spent years fighting for it, and this apparent victory seemed especially valuable for me. But as it turned out, we were not the ones to see the fruits of our struggles. Medical insurance will be a bonus for some other people who didn’t become disabled working for RFE/RL. Not for someone like me.

The new RFE/RL management keeps bragging about Radio Svoboda’s transformation into as a multimedia platform, which doesn’t involve dividing staff into radio and Internet teams. I was one of the employees who worked exactly without such a division of functions as one of the website’s editors, sports columnist and radio correspondent.

I also did photos and videos while covering UEFA championship in Kiev. I think my experience could become an example of new, multimedia Radio Svoboda.

But instead I was fired without any warning whatsoever or anyone bothering to talk to me or seek my input. I was informed of the fact that my experience in an area which coincides with RFE/RL multimedia strategy, as well as my health, are of no concern to the RFE/RL management. Such an attitude on the part of RFE/RL’s top American executives is capricious, nonprofessional and disreputable at the same time.”

RFE/RL executives claim that the mass firing was designed to transform Radio Liberty to become a multimedia digital platform. These claims are disputed by many former Radio Liberty journalists, web editors, video producers and technicians who all point out that they were all deeply involved in online and social media activities and that the station was already part of the digital future.

“I worked as RFE/RL’s Russian Service Internet team editor-in-chief for only three and a half years. Throughout that time, in spite of obvious difficulties of trying to reform traditional media, the website svobodanews.ru has become a remarkable presence on the Russian Internet.

I was convinced that our website was already leading a transformation Radio Liberty’s Russian Service (known as Radio Svoboda) and in fact that this process was already advanced. The number of website’s visitors grew eight times during these three years. The number of constant visitors – 20 times.

Radio Svoboda’s quotation index reached the second place among all Russian radio stations.

It took us one year to create active and rapidly growing communities on Facebook (more than 17 thousand subscribers) and Twitter (more than 21 thousand followers). The number of comments on Radio Svoboda website increased hundredfold.

Radio Svoboda’s Russian Service website was the first one among all non-TV media in Russia to video-broadcast live from the places of politically important events – including protest rallies, some of which took place in the depths of Russia.

www.svobodanews.ru was the only website in Russia which broadcast live the latest plea from the nation’s most famous political prisoner Mikhail Khodorkovsky.

These results were achieved not by me but by a great team of journalists, radio broadcasters, and online content editors working together as colleagues. Radio Liberty’s Russian Service website team and I, as its editor-in-chief, had a concept of turning the Service into a comprehensive multimedia platform with all deliberate speed, but not through a revolution that ignores the station’s reputation, discards its best human talent, and produces a scandal in the blogosphere and in traditional media, as well as among our audience, which may now be lost forever after the deluge of negative publicity.

I delivered my concept of team building and multimedia expansion to RFE/RL Vice President Julia Ragona when I applied to be a candidate for the post of Radio Liberty’s Russian Service director.

Unfortunately, on 20 September, we were informed that we did an excellent job, but that all of us are no longer needed by RFE/RL. I am sure that if our team of dedicated, highly experienced and highly respected radio and web journalists were allowed to implement fully all of our concepts and projects, Radio Liberty Russian Service could have become a modern multimedia platform, having saved all of its traditional brands that make this media outlet what it is, what it means to our audience, and what it wants to achieve as part of its noble mission, which all of us proudly served.”

Another journalist makes similar observations and points out how the actions of RFE/RL management have resulted in waste and inefficiency.

“Even if we put aside the debate over the role of radio and the Internet in contemporary Russia, it is impossible to ignore the fact that journalists in the Moscow Bureau acted as both radio and Internet broadcasters and online content producers. We prepared materials simultaneously for the air and for the web – two different versions (for each of which we did our own editing and preparation work). Many of us used time outside the office to learn how to produce and edit video materials. In other words, we were fully prepared for transitioning to the new platform. Nonetheless, the first people fired were those who produced professional video materials and even entire films for the station’s website. Moreover, some of these individuals had been recognized with awards for their work by RFE/RL’s management. What was the benefit of firing the very people who would have been instrumental in facilitating the transition to the so-called “multimedia platform”?

Ms. Ragona and Mr. Korn had several discussions with us about new equipment, new facilities, new furniture, but not once did they address the issue of how they envisioned broadcasting online. We posed this question on numerous occasions, but never received an answer. We were told where we would film our material, but not what our content would be like. If RFE/RL’s Mission Statement has significantly changed, then why is this fact being concealed from the employees? If the Mission Statement has not changed, then why has the Moscow Bureau been practically obliterated?

For many years, we have been reminded by the management about the importance of efficiency and doing more with less, and we accepted the loss of many important features of our work environment because we understood that the budget situation required these measures. Now we are being laid off, but others are being hired and a much larger facility is being built at a very high cost. By law, employees require at least two months’ notice before dismissal. This means that we could have worked for another two months and earned money for the work we actually performed. Instead, we are now being paid this money as compensation for agreeing to leave immediately, while others are being hired to fill some of our former positions. Where is efficiency in this? In the senseless spending of American taxpayers’ money?”

This last letter from a fired Radio Liberty sound editor and producer points out how difficult it will be for him and his colleagues to find a professional job in Russia because they are tainted by their fight with official censorship.

“I am exasperated and confused. I worked with RFE/RL Russian Service for 14 years, and witnessed such a notorious ending!

People, who gave years of hard work to popularize democracy and human rights activism, are caught unawares, and fired one by one in no time.

I remember guards at our beloved RFE/RL Moscow editorial office and frozen eyes of bureaucrats saying ‘Thank you, we no longer need your service. Here is your compensation, hope you are satisfied.’

As time goes by I begin to more fully realize what happened. Seizure, devastation? What will happen to the Radio, what will happen to my colleagues? Will everyone have a knack to stay healthy after such a strike?

Why did RFE/RL top management decide that we can’t and don’t want to work in a new – multimedia – format?

Everyone knew about the switch to multimedia, and was getting prepared for it. Everyone dreamed of working with new equipment on an updated radio station.

Why were we fired? Still no answer.

Our RFE/RL Moscow bureau team consisted of professionals, who were invited to Radio Svoboda by different directors. Directors changed, and my colleagues carried on doing their job with great talent and honesty.

Many of them, due to their political beliefs and censorship in Russia, will not be able to find jobs in Russian media. Training for a new profession and the unemployment office are awaiting most of us.”

Read ‘Special operation’ at Radio Liberty Moscow – Part One

Both parts represent BBG Watch Commentary on the events in Moscow.

Fired Radio Liberty Moscow employees included famous journalists and digital media experts

Some of Radio Liberty Moscow journalists on the day of their dismissal. From left to right: Ivan Tolstoy, Valdimir Abarbanell, Elena Fanailova, Veronika Bode, Elena Rykovtseva, Elena Kolepaeva, Andrey Trukhan, Yulia Ivanchenkova. Ivan Tolstoy is based in Prague and was not affected by this round of lay offs in Moscow.

BBG Watch Commentary

The new director of the Radio Liberty Russian Service, Russian American journalist, writer and gay rights advocate Masha Gessen, claims that she had nothing to do with firing of almost the entire staff of the Radio Liberty Moscow bureau. She has also accused one former Radio Liberty contributor and the fired editor-in-chief of the Russian website of slander for suggesting links between her and the mass firing because they happened after she was selected for the job but before she officially came on board. She continues to deny any direct role in the firings. Slander is a criminal offense in Russia under a new law signed by President Putin with fines up to $150,000.

Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty President Steven Korn and Vice President Julia Ragona insist that the reorganization of the Moscow bureau was done to prepare it for Radio Liberty’s new role in digital media in Russia after RFE/RL lost a medium wave (AM) radio frequency in Moscow under a new Russian media law. But the list of the fired employees (some resigned in protest) shows that the entire Internet and social media team was also dismissed along with some of the most famous Radio Liberty journalists. Russian human rights leaders, former President Mikhail Gorbachev and other opposition politicians protested the firings at Radio Liberty. The head of the liberal radio station Ekho Moskvy said that he would consider hiring some of the fired Radio Liberty broadcasters.

Ms. Ragona, who oversaw the firings in Moscow, said that Russian human rights and opposition leaders who sent a letter of protest to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and members of the U.S. Congress were confused about what happened at Radio Liberty. Neither an experienced journalist nor a Russian scholar, she was put in charge by Mr. Korn as Vice President for Program Content, Distribution and Marketing after he fired veteran journalists and Eurasia experts who previously occupied some of the senior positions at Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty and whom he called privately “old white guys.”

BBG members rebuked Mr. Korn for this “old white guys” comment and quietly reversed some, but not all of his personnel decisions in Prague, but at that time the majority strongly resisted calls from at least two BBG members to fire him over the incident and his earlier personnel decisions, which — according to our sources — they considered disastrous. BBG Watch has learned that BBG members have scheduled a special teleconference for later this week to discuss the latest crisis over the firings at the Radio Liberty Moscow bureau and Mr. Korn’s role.

“This is such a major crisis and public diplomacy disaster that it will be difficult for BBG members to ignore it,” one expert on U.S. international broadcasting told BBG Watch.

“On the other hand, they are responsible for ignoring clear signs of Mr. Korn’s complete unsuitability for this job. Admitting that they were responsible and reversing his decisions will be difficult for those BBG members who defended him earlier. Therefore, the final outcome of this public diplomacy crisis and the future of the outstanding and brave team of Radio Liberty journalists in Moscow are still unclear. It is also unclear whether the BBG will do anything to repair this terrible damage to Radio Liberty’s reputation and America’s image in Russia,” the expert said.

Mr. Korn issued a statement in which he implied that the fired Radio Liberty employees were treated with great respect and made the following observation:

“Though we have said good-bye to some of our journalists and other colleagues, we are thankful to have had the benefit of their creativity and dedication over the years and hope they will continue to contribute their voices and ideas to the public forum.”

But some of the fired journalists said they were humiliated by being fired in a law firm office in Moscow and prevented from returning to work, and one independent Russian journalist described Mr. Korn’s statement asmockery.

The list of fired journalists and employees of the Radio Liberty Moscow Bureau was sent to BBG Watch by some of them along with the photograph taken on the day of the mass firing.

Radio Liberty Moscow — Partial List of Journalists and Other Staffers Who Were Fired or Resigned

Michael Sokolov – on air personality, the host of the Radio Liberty political show,
President Yeltsin personally handed him the license for Radio Liberty broadcasting
in Russia in recognition of his role in live reporting during the communist coup in 1991

Elena Rykovtseva – on air personality, the host of the Radio Liberty news show

Vitaly Portnikov – on air personality, the host of the Radio Liberty news show

Marina Timasheva – one of the best expert on Russian culture, the
editor and presenter of cultural programs on Radio Liberty

Anna Kachkaeva – on air personality, university professor and dean, expert on Russian
media, host on Radio Liberty programs on media issues, including social media, organized BBG seminar for Russian journalists on using social media to report on migrant ethnic workers in Russia (resigned herself)

Elena Fanaylova – poet, on air personality, the host of the show Liberty in
Clubs (resigned herself)

Veronika Bode – on air personality, the host of the Radio Liberty Public Opinion Program

Danila Galperovich – on air personality, the host of the Radio Liberty program Face to Face

Ivan Trefilov – one of the best observer of economics news in Moscow
(resigned himself)

Kristina Gorelik – experienced human rights reporter, the host of the Radio Liberty
show Third Sector

Vladimir Abarbanell – the coordinator of the Radio Liberty correspondent network in
Russia, editor and presenter of the Radio Liberty program about Russian regions -
Correspondent Hour

Valeria Shabaeva – the editor and presenter of the Radio Liberty program Press Review

Andrey Trukhan – editor of the evening Radio Liberty political show

Lubov Chizhova – Radio Liberty special correspondent

Vitaly Kamyshev – Radio Liberty special correspondent

Mumin Shakirov – Radio Liberty special correspondent

Ludmila Telen – the chief editor of the Radio Liberty website and social media

Alexander Kulygin – Radio Liberty cameraman, video editor

Nikita Tatarsky – Radio Liberty cameraman, video editor (resigned himself)

Marina Petrushko – Radio Liberty’s specialist on Internet and social media promotion

Alexey Kuznetsov – editor of Radio Liberty’s website and online content, sports expert

Yury Vasiliev – editor of Radio Liberty’s website

Michael Shevelev – editor of Radio Liberty’s website

Tatiana Skorobogatko – editor of Radio Liberty’s website

Alexey Morgun – editor of Radio Liberty’s website

Nairi Ovsepian – editor of Radio Liberty’s website

Yury Timofeev – Radio Liberty photographer

Daria Zharova – Radio Liberty news service

Eugenia Melnikova – Radio Liberty news service

Maria Stroykova – Radio Liberty news service

Ekaterina Evseeva – Radio Liberty news service

Yulia Ivanchenkova – Radio Liberty news coordinator

Ekaterina Skariatina – Radio Liberty news coordinator

Elena Kolupaeva – Radio Liberty sound chief editor

Ekaterina Visotskaya – Radio Liberty sound editor

Dmitry Nalitov – Radio Liberty sound editor

Valery Proydakov – Radio Liberty sound editor

Alexander Orlov-Sokolsky – Radio Liberty sound editor

Ilia Tochkin – Radio Liberty technical director (postponed to 31 Dec)

Bella Kaloeva – Radio Liberty administration (postponed to 10 Nov)

BBG’s Victor Ashe disassociates himself from (now removed) statement of support for RFE/RL President Korn

UPDATE: After the protest from Governor Victor Ashe, the statement of “Governors’ support for Steve Korn’s leadership” has been removed from the BBG website.

BBG Watch Commentary

Victor Ashe

Reached by phone by an independent reporter who contributes to BBG Watch, the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) Republican member Governor Victor Ashe said he completely disassociates himself from the just posted official BBG statement, which included the following sentence: “Lynton [BBG Interim Presiding Governor Michael Lynton] reiterated Governors’ support for Steve Korn’s leadership of RFE/RL in its efforts throughout the region.”  Governor Ashe called the mass firing of Radio Liberty Moscow bureau journalists and other staffers “a terrible tragedy”  and said the decision should be reversed. He said that after the events in Moscow his confidence in RFE/RL President Korn has been shaken to the core.

BBG.gov Screen Shot 2012-10-11 at 3.41.16 PM with statement of support for RFE/RL President Steve Korn

Governor Victor Ashe said that he did not hear Governor Lynton make this statement during Thursday’s meeting and would have objected to it if he heard it.

BBG.gov Screen Shot 2012-10-11 at 10.43.55 PM without statement of support for RFE/RL President Steven Korn

Governor Ashe was quoted by the reporter as saying that the mass firing of Radio Liberty journalists in Moscow and the cancellation of many of their political and human rights programs and the manner in which these dismissals were reportedly conducted have shaken his confidence in Mr. Korn’s leadership to the core.

To imply in the statement that he, as just one member of the BBG, supports Steve Korn’s leadership of RFE/RL in its efforts throughout the region “would be revisionist history,” Ashe was quoted as saying.

Ashe said that he was deeply shaken by the events in Moscow. “For Mr. Korn to say that the whole controversy will soon die down is wishful thinking,” Ashe is quoted as telling the reporter. “It avoids a serious discussion of very serious issues,” Ashe said.

“After the events in Moscow, I deeply worry about the direction in which Radio Liberty is going,” Ashe told the reporter. “Frankly, it will have to take a revision through Congressional oversight to have a mid-course correction,” Ashe said and suggested that Mr. Korn does not listen carefully to any criticism.

Asked about what he would like to say to Radio Liberty journalists fired in Moscow, Ashe said:

“I feel terrible about it. My heart goes out to them. It’s a terrible tragedy. I completely understand their sense of betrayal, but I don’t have have the support of the rest of the Board members to reverse these decisions.”

Asked about his exchange with Mr. Korn during the meeting about the proposed layoffs of Radio Liberty Russian Service staffers in Prague and Mr. Korn’s answer that the number of those who will lose their jobs is between five and twenty, Governor Ashe told the reporter that these layoffs, as well as those in Moscow, are “foolish and self-defeating vis-a-vis Vladimir Putin and his increasingly repressive policies.”
BBG Watch has heard unconfirmed reports that 17 Russian Service employees in Prague will lose their jobs.

BBG Watch Commentary

From the BBG Statement, Oct. 12, 2012:

“Lynton spoke at length of recent Russian legislative steps that have imposed restrictions on freedom of expression, including a law that is forcing RFE/RL programs off of the organization’s last AM affiliate in Moscow. He noted, ‘This board strongly objects to the tightening stranglehold on the free flow of information taking place today in Russia.’ Lynton reiterated Governors’ support for Steve Korn’s leadership of RFE/RL in its efforts throughout the region.”

This part of the statement, just posted, on the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) website, especially the last sentence, if it is accurate because we did not hear Mr. Lynton say it, would be a gesture of complete contempt for former President Gorbachev, former Prime Minister Kasyanov, other Russian democratic leaders and human rights activists like Lyudmila Alexxeeva, who have sent appeals and letters of protest to the BBG against the firing of Radio Liberty journalists in Moscow and demanding that they be reinstated and their political and human rights programs resumed.

These prominent Russians all put the blame on the RFE/RL management team headed by Mr. Korn, some also blamed the BBG and the Obama Administration.

It would be a gesture of contempt toward the journalists against whom RFE/RL executives used security guards and prevented them from even saying good bye to their radio listeners and website visitors of many years.

It would be a gesture of contempt toward more than 2000 Radio Liberty listeners who have signed a petition to the BBG in just two days and a copy of which was forwarded to Governor Lynton.

Mr. Lynton had on his cellphone copies of numerous protests and appeals, but he did not acknowledge them in any way.

Furthermore, Mr. Lynton spoke of a new anti-slander law in Russia, signed by Mr. Putin and used by the Kremlin to stifle free speech, even though he had been informed that a new RFE/RL manager in Russia made accusations of slander against pro-democracy journalists.

What we can gather from the BBG statement that, if it is accurate, Mr. Lynton and the other BBG members — now with the exception of Governor Victor Ashe and Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy Tara Sonenshine (who was not present at the meeting0 — have a complete contempt for the views of:

Mikhail Gorbachev, former President and Nobel Peace Prize winner:, “Radio Free Europe Radio Liberty’s management decision to dismiss almost all of the Russian service staff looks especially strange in this context”[attacks on glasnost], “It is hard to get rid of an impression that RFE/RL’s American management is prepared to make an about-turn”;

former Prime Minister Mikhail Kasyanov: “We were shocked by the decision of the officials of RFE/RL. This decision will cause tremendous harm to the political media freedom in Russia and therefore we are expressing our deep concern”;

former Deputy Prime Minister Boris Nemtsov: “The purge in Moscow bureau has badly damaged the reputation of RFE/RL as a free international media working in traditions of democratic standards”;

former Vice Speaker of the Parliament (Duma) Vladimir Ryzhkov: “We recommend the Broadcasting Board of Governors in Washington to revise the RFE/RL management decision and restore medium-wave broadcasting and the Radio Liberty Moscow team”;

Russian United Democratic Party “Yabloko” leaders, former Duma member Sergei Mitrokhin and former presidential candidate Grigory Yavlinsky: “This team made Radio Svoboda website one of the most competent and highly quoted political resources in the Russian segment of the Internet.To the best of our judgment, a bureaucratic mistake took place, which is turning into the other – political – mistake. Bureaucrats supervising mass media were making their narrow decisions, without considering the political consequences, which are indeed political. The Russian audience has lost the information source which it trusted throughout many decades. It is obvious that mass media reputation is the reputation of its journalists.”

former Deputy Energy Minister Vladimir Milov: “You’ve seemingly done all you could so far, demonstrating instead a stunning example of desperate political idiocy. Thanks for making Putin’s life easier, and ours much harder”;

Lyudmila Alexeeva, Chairwoman of the Moscow Helsinki Group: “Reorganization of Radio Liberty work was carried out in a form of ‘special operation’ that was shameful and abusive for its employees. The KGB could not harm the image of the radio and the United States in Russia as did US managers – the President of the Radio Liberty Steven Korn and the Vice President Julia Ragona”;

Sergei Kovalyov, Chairman of the Russian “Memorial”, the chairman of the Public Commission for the Preservation of the Heritage of Academician Sakharov — Andrei Sakharov Foundation: “We ask the Congress to set up a special commission to investigate the activities of the Radio Liberty’s management, which caused such damage to the image of the United States in Russia and review the decisions that have been made”;

Vladimir Bukovsky, writer, a former political prisoner in the Soviet Union: “Mr. Korn and Ms. Ragona’s staffing solutions were conducted without even slightest consideration of the creative contribution and potential of each employee. Dismissed are the professionals with stainless reputations. Some of the journalists have left Moscow office of Radio Liberty deliberately on moral grounds”

Tatiana Yankelevich, Center Associate, Davis Center for Russian and Eurasian Studies Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, daughter of Elena Bonner and stepdaughter of Andrei Sakharov: “Today a grave and gross error of judgement is taking place with Radio Liberty,” “Digging an early grave for Radio Liberty”;

Pavel Litvinov, a former political prisoner in the Soviet Union: “Scandalous publication about the activities of American management team of the radio appeared in Russian and foreign press. The managers themselves could not explain its decisions to the Russian society. These decisions look very strange, while the financing or the Russian service for years 2012- 2013 has not been reduced, but in fact even increased”;

Alexei Simonov, the President of the Glasnost Defense Foundation: “Mass dismissals of journalists have disorganized the work of the broadcast and the work of the radio’s website for extended period”;

Lev Ponomarev, Executive Director of the Russian movement “For Human Rights”: “From now on, every time Russian authorities will decide to close one or another independent media, they will refer to for them very convenient “experience” of the management of Radio Liberty”;

Lilia Shibanova, Executive Director of the Association of Non-Profit Organizations “In Defense of Voters’ Rights «GOLOS»;

Valeriy Borzshov, the rights advocate, the member of the Moscow Helsinki Group;

Svetlana Gannushkina, the human rights activist, who was reported to have been a serious contender for the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize;

Dr. Vladimir Shlapetokh, renowned sociologist, Michigan State University: “My reaction was perfectly conveyed by Viktor Shenderovich, a leading liberal blogger in Russia, who stated that ‘the KGB and FSB, all ideological departments of the Central Committee of CPSU, all detractors of the West in Putin’s Russia, all of them together’ could not do what Washington did to Radio Liberty”;

Dr. Lev Gudkov, Director of the Levada Center, an independent social research institute in Russia with the rest of the management and employees: “In an authoritarian state, and especially in the period of reaction and ‘crackdown,’ permanent restriction of freedom of speech (which is what is happening now in Russia), it seems extremely untimely to suspend the Radio Liberty broadcasting and to fire its old team. These are people, who advanced the country’s democratic values and human rights. We ask you to consider the situation and conduct a full and thorough investigation into the decisions of the Radio Liberty administration: President Stephen Korn and Vice President Julie Ragona, which resulted in the actual elimination of the radio in Russia”;

2000 Radio Liberty listeners who have signed a petition in just two days: “We demand that the fired journalists be hired back. Probably the journalists, who quit Radio Svoboda to show solidarity with their colleagues, will then come back,” “Almost all Moscow bureau journalists, specializing in democracy and human rights issues, were fired in just two days with no clear explanation. They just
disappeared, without even having a chance to say good-bye to their listeners. The dismissal was so indecent that those who were not fired decided to quit. We still do not know the names of those who were hired instead of the former workers. We have no proof that Radio Svoboda will continue its independent policy.”;

Radio Liberty employees who were fired or resigned in protest: “Such methods and style of management – bragging about a new multimedia concept and firing people who succeeded in its implementation and increased RFE/RL Russian Service web audience tenfold; dismissing all journalists, who throughout the last twenty years have become a part of RFE/RL’s brand – all this looks like the worst kind of mismanagement and a gross violation of moral and ethical values.”

Even though the statement of support for RFE/RL President Korn and his leadership was removed, the BBG Governors — with the exception of Governor Ashe, who did express his reservations, and Under Secretary of State Sonenshine, who did not attend the meeting — did not in any way acknowledge these protests, letters and petitions. That shows a lot of arrogance and clear contempt for some very important Russian democratic leaders. The assumption is, therefore, that — with some exceptions — the BBG believes that Mr. Korn knows Russia — its history, culture, politics, and media — far better than any of these Russian opposition leaders, human rights activists, scholars, journalists, media personalities, Radio Liberty listeners and users of its website. The idea that these prominent Russians do not know what they are talking about and Mr. Korn and his American closest advisors do defies reason.

As one young Russian opposition politician Vladimir Milov said to his American friends, “Support Radio Liberty. That’s very simple, easy, and really worth the effort. You’ve completely ignored and disregarded the wise piece of advice. So don’t ask anymore. You’ve seemingly done all you could so far, demonstrating instead a stunning example of desperate political idiocy. Thanks for making Putin’s life easier, and ours much harder.”

How did he know that most BBG members would not even bother to acknowledge his and other protests.

No wonder that the image of arrogant and ugly Americans keeps growing in Russia, even among America’s best friends. Public Diplomacy 101, Anyone?

And if words are not enough, take a look at these photos:

Kirill Filimonov protesting at U.S. Embassy Moscow

Protesters at US Embassy Moscow Demanding the Return of Fired Radio Liberty Journalists

Official BBG Press Release (Original Version)

###

BBG Condemns Jamming, Intimidation As Threats To Media Freedom

Michael Lynton

The Broadcasting Board of Governors today expressed its enduring outrage over persistent attempts to stifle the free flow of news and information through satellite jamming, intimidation and the detention of journalists in Iran, Syria, Cambodia, Ethiopia and elsewhere.

During the BBG’s Oct. 11 meeting, Presiding Governor Michael Lynton condemned the jamming of BBG satellite signals in Iran and said BBG journalists are encountering new impediments to free reporting almost daily.

“Just yesterday, Radio Free Asia and Voice of America reporters were summoned to a meeting with officials in a blatant attempt to discourage objective reporting on the Cambodian government,” Lynton said. As reported by Reuters, AFP and others, RFA and VOA…are among the few radio stations in Cambodia considered free of government influence.”

The Board also expressed concern about the cases of Marthe van der Wolf, a VOA reporter in Ethiopia who was forced by local police to erase recordings of a protest rally, and Gulnur Raqifqizi Kazimova, a Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) freelancer who was prohibited from taking pictures in Azerbaijan.

Members of the Board renewed their condemnation of recent illegal jamming of BBG Persian broadcasts to Iran that also affected many other BBG radio and TV programs around the globe, including broadcasts in Arabic, Georgian, Armenian, Bosnian, and Korean.

“The Board calls on Iran to cease disrupting broadcast signals, and to respect the well-established international agreements that prohibit jamming,” Lynton said.

The Board also noted that Monday marked 50 days since the capture of Alhurra TV journalist Bashar Fahmi and his cameraman Cüneyt Ünal in Syria, and renewed its demand that the pair be released.

Fahmi and Ünal were last heard from on August 20, when they were reporting from Aleppo, Syria. On August 26th, Ünal appeared on Syrian television, but the Syrian government said it has no information on Fahmi.

Lynton spoke at length of recent Russian legislative steps that have imposed restrictions on freedom of expression, including a law that is forcing RFE/RL programs off of the organization’s last AM affiliate in Moscow. He noted, “This board strongly objects to the tightening stranglehold on the free flow of information taking place today in Russia.” Lynton reiterated Governors’ support for Steve Korn’s leadership of RFE/RL in its efforts throughout the region.

The BBG recognized the David Burke Distinguished Journalism Awards winners. This year’s winners are: Mukarram Khan Aatif of the VOA’s Deewa Radio; Karen Caballero of Radio and TV Martí; Sailab Mahsud of RFE/RL’s Radio Mashaal; RFA’s Korean Service; and Mohamed Moawad and Lamia Rezgui Bourogaa of the Middle East Broadcasting Networks’ Radio Sawa.

Several events at the meeting honored the legacy and ongoing work of the Voice of America.

Gov. Susan McCue honors Leo Sarkisian, standing

Board members enjoyed a presentation honoring VOA Ethnomusicologist Leo Sarkisian, the creator of Music Time in Africa, VOA’s oldest English-language music program.  They presented a resolution expressing the agency’s appreciation to Sarkisian, who retired recently after a career that spanned more than half a century and took him to every country in Africa.

The Board also recognized the 20^th anniversary of VOA’s Kurdish Service and the 50^th anniversary of its Swahili Service.

Discussion at the meeting included the BBG’s expanded broadcasting reach in China via the Telstar satellite and other developments intended to modernize and extend the reach of the agency and its media worldwide.

Public documents related to this meeting will be posted here, and video of this meeting will be available on-demand shortly.

For more information, please call the BBG’s Office of Public Affairs at 202-203-4400, or e-mail publicaffairs@bbg.gov.

The Broadcasting Board of Governors is an independent federal agency, supervising all U.S. government-supported, civilian international broadcasting, whose mission is inform, engage, and connect people around the world in support of freedom and democracy. BBG broadcasts reach an audience of 187 million in 100 countries. BBG networks include the Voice of America, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, the Middle East Broadcasting Networks (Alhurra TV and Radio Sawa), Radio Free Asia, and the Office of Cuba Broadcasting (Radio and TV Marti).

Broadcasting Board of Governors – Just How Bad It Is, And How Much Worse It Will Be, Part One

Broadcasting Board of Governors – Just How Bad It Is, And How Much Worse It Will Be, Part One

by The Federalist

If the press releases by the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) were Christmas presents, we’d have a closet full – stacked floor to ceiling.

These guys are the perfect combination of arrogance and incompetence – a combination that has led to a failed agency with a failed mission.

Let’s consider the latest press release from the BBG’s Public Affairs Office (the Office of Propaganda, as we like to call it) dated October 11, 2012: “BBG Condemns Jamming, Intimidation as Threats to Media Freedom.”

Part One of this commentary addresses the fiasco perpetrated by the BBG regarding the Russian Service of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) – Radio Liberty (Radio Svoboda).

The BBG has neutered US Government international broadcasting to Russia. This started in 2008 when the BBG ended Voice of America (VOA) Russian Service radio broadcasts, right before the Russians invaded the Republic of Georgia.

Now, in 2012, the BBG has totally eviscerated its Radio Liberty Russian Service Moscow bureau staff, firing about 40 employees (five of them resigned on their own in protest against the brutal treatment of their colleagues) at the bureau and, according to sources, another 17 being lined up for similar treatment at the RFE/RL facilities in Prague.

As part of its disinformation campaign regarding this fiasco, the BBG is saying that it offered these employees a “buyout.” Baloney. This was no buyout. They were fired. They were given a choice between a cash severance payment or to be fired with nothing – if they wanted to fight the dismissals in Russian court. This is standard operating procedure by the BBG and its International Broadcasting Bureau (IBB) senior staff. Legal and administrative law proceedings can take a long time and cost a lot of money. Consider the recent decision by the Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA) regarding the illegal reduction-in-force (RIF) at Radio/TV Marti and the landmark Hartman court decision in a class action lawsuit against the agency which cost the American taxpayers half a BILLION dollars.

These RFE/RL fired employees exercised the only rational decision available to them under the circumstances and with no notice.

The agency has used the term “buyout” because that is the impression it wants to sell to Members of Congress and others. In the Federal Government, “buyouts” have been used most often as an incentive to get employees to voluntarily retire from the Federal Service. The tactic used at RFE/RL with its Russian Service employees was under conditions best described as brutal, coercive and under duress.

BBG Federal employees take note: don’t think you’re safe and secure back there in the Cohen Building. These guys want to de-Federalize you and rob you of civil service rights and protections. They would be more than happy to use tactics on you similar to those used against the RFE/RL employees.

In place of these RFE/RL employees will be newer and fewer employees – but costing as much in salary and benefits as the more numerous employees being let go! That blows any “efficiency” argument by the BBG/IBB right out of the water.

In addition, the Moscow bureau will be headed by an individual known in Russia for being something of a media gadfly. In short, the chief will be the story rather than a nose-to-the-grindstone journalist or manager. She is also well known for interviews that put her at odds with the traditional values of Russian culture and the Russian Orthodox Church.

These are not the ingredients that augur well for a successful RFE/RL presence in Russia.

Add to that, the Russian government has taken steps to put in place more effective controls over news media in Russia. On top of that RFE/RL has lost its AM radio station/frequency/license in Moscow.

How is this looking so far?

But wait, there’s more!

The BBG is talking about new facilities in Moscow. So the questions are:

Who owns the building?

Who are the other tenants in the building?

If the bureau will contract out technical services, who owns the company providing those services?

Are new employees subject to security clearances to be working for an agency of the US Government?

Our sources tell us that the building may be partly owned or at least occupied by Vladimir Posner, a well known Russian media figure with ties to the government – and back in the old days he was the chief Soviet propaganda master appearing on American TV.

We know the Russians very well. You can be assured that the Russian security services will keep the RFE/RL Moscow bureau on a short leash, using various tactics at their disposal to make sure the new staff does not go “off the script” as determined by the Russian government. The journalists who were highly respected by the democratic opposition have shown that they have the courage to criticize the Kremlin and expose human rights abuses and corruption are gone.

And there’s even more!

As the BBG press release states:

“(Presiding Board Member Michael) Lynton spoke at length of recent Russian legislative steps that have imposed restrictions on freedom of expression, including a law that is forcing RFE/RL programs off of the organization’s last AM affiliate in Moscow. He noted, “This board strongly objects to the tightening stranglehold on the free flow of information taking place today in Russia.” Lynton reiterated Governors’ support for Steve Korn’s leadership of RFE/RL in its efforts throughout the region.”

What?!?

The agency just got clocked by the Russian government and these guys added to the fiasco by hammering their own employees in the RFE/RL Moscow bureau!!!

Lynton admits to getting clocked and then turns around and says the equivalent of, “You’re doing a great job, Stevie!”

Our editors report this ringing endorsement has been removed. It’s not on the website anymore. But it is the press release of record that was send out to the entire world. To the best of our knowledge, no one has not been advised that the endorsement of Mr. Korn had been revised or the statement removed.

This is yet another perfect example of the hypocrisy of the BBG.

Our sources tell us that Mr. Korn, the RFE/RL president, is saying this will all blow over.

More baloney.

With all the negatives surrounding the decision regarding the RFE/RL Russian Service Moscow bureau: the firings, the new service chief, the protests from well known Russian opposition figures — former President Gorbachev, former Prime Minister Kasyanov, former Deputy Prime Minister Nemtsov, legendary human rights leader Lyudmila Alexeeva — and their opposition political parties and organizations, what Korn is doing is poking the Russian public in the eye every day with the mere existence of the “new” bureau. It has become a monument to stupidity and a reminder to people that the agency being co-opted by the Russian government.

And you can take it to the house: the Russian public won’t forget, especially when the BBG blows off criticisms of its actions with dismissive statements.

You can take the “L” out of RFE/RL and just label it: dead-on-arrival.

We have to say it:

US Government international broadcasting is in the hands of the wrong kind of people. On any level, the only things they do consistently well are enable and facilitate (a) the failure of US Government international broadcasting and (b) effective countermeasures by those opposed to the agency’s mission.

Whose side are these guys on?

Regimes large and small that want nothing of US Government international broadcasting, websites and the like are following a very successful playbook in how to defeat the US Government in its outreach programs.

This leads to the question:

Why are we spending close to a billion dollars a year to subsidize a brain-dead, failed mission led by venal, self-aggrandizing officials who only care about the size of their annual bonuses on top of their six-figure salaries?

This is commonly referred to as:

Waste, fraud and abuse.

Forget the trash talk from the BBG about “supporting freedom and democracy.”

Actions by the BBG would appear to indicate that they may well be the purveyors of intimidation and threat to media freedom.

The Federalist
October 2012

Broadcasting Board of Governors – Just How Bad It Is, And How Much Worse It Will Be, Part One

by The Federalist

If the press releases by the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) were Christmas presents, we’d have a closet full – stacked floor to ceiling.

These guys are the perfect combination of arrogance and incompetence – a combination that has led to a failed agency with a failed mission.

Let’s consider the latest press release from the BBG’s Public Affairs Office (the Office of Propaganda, as we like to call it) dated October 11, 2012: “BBG Condemns Jamming, Intimidation as Threats to Media Freedom.”

Part One of this commentary addresses the fiasco perpetrated by the BBG regarding the Russian Service of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) – Radio Liberty (Radio Svoboda).

The BBG has neutered US Government international broadcasting to Russia. This started in 2008 when the BBG ended Voice of America (VOA) Russian Service radio broadcasts, right before the Russians invaded the Republic of Georgia.

Now, in 2012, the BBG has totally eviscerated its Radio Liberty Russian Service Moscow bureau staff, firing about 40 employees (five of them resigned on their own in protest against the brutal treatment of their colleagues) at the bureau and, according to sources, another 17 being lined up for similar treatment at the RFE/RL facilities in Prague.

As part of its disinformation campaign regarding this fiasco, the BBG is saying that it offered these employees a “buyout.” Baloney. This was no buyout. They were fired. They were given a choice between a cash severance payment or to be fired with nothing – if they wanted to fight the dismissals in Russian court. This is standard operating procedure by the BBG and its International Broadcasting Bureau (IBB) senior staff. Legal and administrative law proceedings can take a long time and cost a lot of money. Consider the recent decision by the Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA) regarding the illegal reduction-in-force (RIF) at Radio/TV Marti and the landmark Hartman court decision in a class action lawsuit against the agency which cost the American taxpayers half a BILLION dollars.

These RFE/RL fired employees exercised the only rational decision available to them under the circumstances and with no notice.

The agency has used the term “buyout” because that is the impression it wants to sell to Members of Congress and others. In the Federal Government, “buyouts” have been used most often as an incentive to get employees to voluntarily retire from the Federal Service. The tactic used at RFE/RL with its Russian Service employees was under conditions best described as brutal, coercive and under duress.

BBG Federal employees take note: don’t think you’re safe and secure back there in the Cohen Building. These guys want to de-Federalize you and rob you of civil service rights and protections. They would be more than happy to use tactics on you similar to those used against the RFE/RL employees.

In place of these RFE/RL employees will be newer and fewer employees – but costing as much in salary and benefits as the more numerous employees being let go! That blows any “efficiency” argument by the BBG/IBB right out of the water.

In addition, the Moscow bureau will be headed by an individual known in Russia for being something of a media gadfly. In short, the chief will be the story rather than a nose-to-the-grindstone journalist or manager. She is also well known for interviews that put her at odds with the traditional values of Russian culture and the Russian Orthodox Church.

These are not the ingredients that augur well for a successful RFE/RL presence in Russia.

Add to that, the Russian government has taken steps to put in place more effective controls over news media in Russia. On top of that RFE/RL has lost its AM radio station/frequency/license in Moscow.

How is this looking so far?

But wait, there’s more!

The BBG is talking about new facilities in Moscow. So the questions are:

Who owns the building?

Who are the other tenants in the building?

If the bureau will contract out technical services, who owns the company providing those services?

Are new employees subject to security clearances to be working for an agency of the US Government?

Our sources tell us that the building may be partly owned or at least occupied by Vladimir Posner, a well known Russian media figure with ties to the government – and back in the old days he was the chief Soviet propaganda master appearing on American TV.

We know the Russians very well. You can be assured that the Russian security services will keep the RFE/RL Moscow bureau on a short leash, using various tactics at their disposal to make sure the new staff does not go “off the script” as determined by the Russian government. The journalists who were highly respected by the democratic opposition have shown that they have the courage to criticize the Kremlin and expose human rights abuses and corruption are gone.

And there’s even more!

As the BBG press release states:

“(Presiding Board Member Michael) Lynton spoke at length of recent Russian legislative steps that have imposed restrictions on freedom of expression, including a law that is forcing RFE/RL programs off of the organization’s last AM affiliate in Moscow. He noted, “This board strongly objects to the tightening stranglehold on the free flow of information taking place today in Russia.” Lynton reiterated Governors’ support for Steve Korn’s leadership of RFE/RL in its efforts throughout the region.”

What?!?

The agency just got clocked by the Russian government and these guys added to the fiasco by hammering their own employees in the RFE/RL Moscow bureau!!!

Lynton admits to getting clocked and then turns around and says the equivalent of, “You’re doing a great job, Stevie!”

Our editors report this ringing endorsement has been removed. It’s not on the website anymore. But it is the press release of record that was send out to the entire world. To the best of our knowledge, no one has not been advised that the endorsement of Mr. Korn had been revised or the statement removed.

This is yet another perfect example of the hypocrisy of the BBG.

Our sources tell us that Mr. Korn, the RFE/RL president, is saying this will all blow over.

More baloney.

With all the negatives surrounding the decision regarding the RFE/RL Russian Service Moscow bureau: the firings, the new service chief, the protests from well known Russian opposition figures — former President Gorbachev, former Prime Minister Kasyanov, former Deputy Prime Minister Nemtsov, legendary human rights leader Lyudmila Alexeeva — and their opposition political parties and organizations, what Korn is doing is poking the Russian public in the eye every day with the mere existence of the “new” bureau. It has become a monument to stupidity and a reminder to people that the agency being co-opted by the Russian government.

And you can take it to the house: the Russian public won’t forget, especially when the BBG blows off criticisms of its actions with dismissive statements.

You can take the “L” out of RFE/RL and just label it: dead-on-arrival.

We have to say it:

US Government international broadcasting is in the hands of the wrong kind of people. On any level, the only things they do consistently well are enable and facilitate (a) the failure of US Government international broadcasting and (b) effective countermeasures by those opposed to the agency’s mission.

Whose side are these guys on?

Regimes large and small that want nothing of US Government international broadcasting, websites and the like are following a very successful playbook in how to defeat the US Government in its outreach programs.

This leads to the question:

Why are we spending close to a billion dollars a year to subsidize a brain-dead, failed mission led by venal, self-aggrandizing officials who only care about the size of their annual bonuses on top of their six-figure salaries?

This is commonly referred to as:

Waste, fraud and abuse.

Forget the trash talk from the BBG about “supporting freedom and democracy.”

Actions by the BBG would appear to indicate that they may well be the purveyors of intimidation and threat to media freedom.

The Federalist
October 2012

by The Federalist

They’re at it again. The gift that keeps on giving.

The Broadcasting Board of Governors/International Broadcasting Bureau (BBG/IBB) is whining about effective countermeasures by the Iranian government, blocking its programming going into Iran.

And the Iranians are doing it quite well. As an October 4, 2012 BBG press release notes, the jamming is effective “across several continents.”

Wow!

These guys are good at what they do! Really good! They are trained professionals.

And then again, there is the BBG/IBB.

According to the press release:

“International Broadcasting Bureau Director Richard M. Lobo called the most recent interference “an outrage (and) a deplorable violation of well-established international agreements” in a statement issued when the incident started.”

Okay. So much for what Mr. Lobo thinks.

Let’s do a reality check:

First. The Iranians don’t care what Mr. Lobo says or thinks. At times the Iranians don’t care what anyone thinks. This is one of those times. As much as we may not like it, their perspective is to protect their national interests as they see fit.

Second. The BBG/IBB is into denial. We already know that the BBG/IBB has firmly established itself as “The Voice of Hypocrisy;” namely, “supporting freedom and democracy.” The Iranians have had their own experience with this agency. Several years ago, the Iranians took to the streets and engaged in what became deadly protests against their government. They were out there on their own. They learned that they could not count on the West for substantive support. All they got were a lot of words, symbolic support. In short, the Iranian opposition felt betrayed. The Iranians don’t forget things like that. Whatever they are doing in these latest events, they know they are out there doing it for themselves, by themselves.

Third. We want to congratulate Mr. Lobo and the BBG/IBB for verifying for the Iranian government the effectiveness of their jamming operations. The folks in Tehran must be feeling pretty good. They poked the BBG/IBB good – someplace where they can feel it. To all outward appearances, Mr. Lobo – as the Chief Executive Whiner of the IBB – hasn’t learned that the best thing to do in certain circumstances is keep a lid on things. In short, Mr. Lobo just told the Iranians that the BBG/IBB doesn’t have effective countermeasures to get its direct broadcasts into the country. Sometimes, you need to take your medicine, shut up and move on, instead of flailing away in a futile, almost juvenile temper tantrum.

Fourth. And then there is the Internet. The Iranians are savvy users of the Internet and other technologies. What one can be sure of is that the Iranian government knows its people very well. They will take steps to block access to foreign Internet sites particularly those of the BBG/IBB. And here’s another thing, the Iranian government – like the Chinese (who may be providing the Iranians material/developmental support) – are well on their way to creating their own Internet. They see what the Chinese have done, they like the concept and the execution and they are following suit.

And lest we forget, we haven’t seen the Iranian Cyber Army weigh in with a demonstration of its latest capabilities.

Fifth. We should also remember that this is the agency that canned one of its supposedly popular programs to Iran. It’s “Parazit” satire program. The BBG/IBB has never come clean as to why the show got yanked off the air. And they won’t. The BBG/IBB isn’t about coming clean: with the Congress, the American taxpayers or its audiences. That’s three strikes and they contribute to our view that if the BBG/IBB is taking the United States Government out of the business of international broadcasting, then the Congress can save the American people a ton of money by getting rid of the agency – because that’s where we are at – an agency that has no message, no credibility and no mission resonance. An across-the-board total failure.

And this doesn’t even include its other debacles-in-progress.

The Iranians have put a lot on their plate. They have been ratcheting up their hostile rhetoric toward the Israelis. Unlike the BBG/IBB, the Israelis have a whole lot of credibility and share one thing in common with the Iranians: protecting their national interests. For their part, the Iranians haven’t figured it out that you can’t have it both ways: saying that their nuclear program has peaceful objectives and at the same time talking about annihilating the state of Israel.

To put it mildly, things are getting tense. The Iranians and Israelis have put themselves in a place where it is very difficult for each other to back down without losing their international credibility over the issue of Iran’s nuclear program and its potential weapons-making capabilities. Instead of talking with each other, they are talking at each other and not being very nice about it. Psychologically, they are preparing their people for war.

In the past, serious hostilities have broken out in the Middle East during the month of October. We should be wary.

And that’s on top of what’s going on elsewhere in the Middle East, for all you “Arab Springers” out there who still desperately want to believe that kumbaya baloney.

In the meantime, as far as this latest whining from the BBG/IBB is concerned: it doesn’t mean much – except to the sycophants and self-promoters on the Third Floor of the Cohen Building. If it has any meaning at all, it is yet another example of the inept and incompetent state of US Government international broadcasting (or whatever these guys think they are up to these days).

There are far more important events taking place in the Middle East. And as those events have demonstrated, the BBG/IBB losers of the information war have no material effect on any of them.

And you can be sure the Iranians aren’t afraid of Mr. Lobo or the BBG/IBB. They’ve demonstrated they know how to deal with them: programs blocked resulting in no BBG/IBB interference in Iranian internal affairs, from the Iranian point of view.

The Federalist
October 2012

###

Official BBG Press Release

Iranian Jamming Disrupts U.S. International Broadcasting Across Several Continents

Washington, D.C. — Iranian jamming of U.S. government-sponsored news and information programs disrupted broadcasts from Morocco to Eastern Europe to Indonesia, the Broadcasting Board of Governors has found.

Satellite operator Eutelsat confirmed that the intermittent jamming was coming from inside Iran. This most recent episode of interference with broadcasts began on Oct. 3 and is in clear violation of international agreements.

In addition to Voice of America’s (VOA) Persian Service and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty’s (RFE/RL) Radio Farda, both of which offer programs for Iranian audiences, the jamming also has affected dozens of satellite broadcasts of BBG radio and TV programs.

One of the BBG’s Internet anti-censorship vendors is reporting that traffic from Iran using its software and servers has increased substantially since the jamming began.  This suggests that Iranian listeners and viewers are shifting to the Internet to receive news and information.

Jamming is prohibited under rules of the International Telecommunications Union.  The recent jamming affected not only U.S.-supported programming, but also the British Broadcasting Corporation.

International Broadcasting Bureau Director Richard M. Lobo called the most recent interference “an outrage (and) a deplorable violation of well-established international agreements” in a statement issued when the incident started.

The jamming coincided with reports of street demonstrations and mass arrests of Iranians protesting falling currency exchange rates. Both VOA and RFE/RL report that in some instances, interference starts just before newscasts, and ends just afterwards.

Three satellite transponders operated by Eutelsat and those most popular among Iranian viewers have been affected: HotBird 13B, Eutelsat 25A and Eutelsat 7A. Viewers said the signals reappear intermittently.

The interference has diminished or altogether blocked other U.S.-supported programs on the Eutelsat satellites, including Georgian, Armenian, Bosnian, Korean and many other language broadcasts.

VOA and RFE/RL programs continue to be broadcast on diverse media platforms, including digital audio and video streams on other satellite paths and on the Internet.

In February, the ITU called upon the world’s nations to take “necessary actions” to stop intentional interference with satellite transmissions. Earlier, the BBG and other international broadcasters called for action against jamming.

]]> http://freemediaonline.org/freemediaonlineblog/2012/10/06/broadcasting-board-of-governors-information-war-lost-iran/feed/ 1 http://freemediaonline.org/freemediaonlineblog/2012/09/17/broadcasting-board-of-governors-information-war-lost-press-releases-and-other-pronouncements/ http://freemediaonline.org/freemediaonlineblog/2012/09/17/broadcasting-board-of-governors-information-war-lost-press-releases-and-other-pronouncements/#comments Mon, 17 Sep 2012 20:17:20 +0000 The Federalist http://www.usgbroadcasts.com/bbgwatch/?p=16530

Broadcasting Board of Governors – Information War Lost – Press Releases and Other Pronouncements

by The Federalist
 
 
 
Here, we consider the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) press release of Thursday, September 13, 2012 and other pronouncements.
 
The press release features a photo of Secretary Clinton, Under-Secretary Sonenshine, members of the BBG and Richard Lobo, representing the International Broadcasting Bureau (IBB).

Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) members and International Broadcasting Bureau (IBB) Director Richard Lobo meeting with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs Tara Sonenshine, Sept. 13, 2012.

 
The first thing that struck us is: why are these people smiling?  
 
This was a very bad week for the United States: an ambassador and staff members killed in Libya, US embassies assaulted, breached, and torched, riots and demonstrations in 20 countries from North Africa to Southeast Asia.
 
This picture just leaves us perplexed.  Where is the look of resolve and determination commensurate with the seriousness of surrounding events?
 
With the deaths of four US diplomats, including American ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens and with violence directed against US missions throughout the Arab and Muslim world, smiling is the last thing you would expect from any of the people in this photograph.  It’s just plain incongruous to events. The week of September 10, 2012 was a catastrophic disaster for US diplomacy, US public diplomacy and US Government international broadcasting in the Arab and Muslim world.
 
In its September 15, 2012 edition, the New York Times published a map of where the riots and demonstrations have taken place: from North Africa all the way to Pakistan and beyond.  It’s a map that should be of concern.  It cuts the world virtually in half, right through some of the most populous places on the planet.
 
According to the press release, the Secretary “encouraged the Board in their strategic efforts to restructure and increase the impact of U.S. international broadcasting.”
 
Perhaps this is the spin we have come to expect from the BBG/IBB, since the agency has now fully embraced the notion of itself as a domestic US propaganda ministry and has engaged in acts of deception vis-vis Americans relating to its programming. In their press releases, they were telling their own bipartisan Board, other Americans and the world that the popular Voice of America (VOA) satirical television program “Parazit” was very much being broadcast to Iran when in fact the TV show was off the air for nine months, with no prospects of being resumed. BBG members found out about this deception only recently from the BBG Watch website and a report by Elizabeth Flock in U.S. News & World Report. They were surprised, as was –we were told — Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, an ex officio BBG member, and Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs Tara Sonenshine who represents the Secretary of State at BBG meetings.

And while the popular television show to Iran was off the air at a critical time in U.S.-Iranian relations, a top VOA official responsible for programs to Iran was writing an email to the United Nations with a request to revoke the UN press accreditation of Matthew Russell Lee, independent American journalist who engaged in a private dispute with a VOA correspondent and annoyed the official with his emails.
 
Message to adversaries: lack of focus, deception and business as usual, still chasing a flawed strategic plan that has no resonance around the world.  In public pronouncements, Secretary Clinton tried to distance the US Government from the makers of the film that set off the Arab and Muslim world.  After the statement, the violence continued to ratchet up.  That isn’t an encouraging development.  And it should be a strong indication that whatever the BBG/IBB is doing, it isn’t working.  In terms of impact, it is rather evident that US Government international broadcasting is having less – not more – of an impact on global publics.
 
BBG “Presiding Governor” (i.e., no BBG chairman at present) Michael Lynton noted that “during a discussion in June 2011, the Board shared with the Secretary its intention to undertake a wholesale transformation of U.S. international broadcasting and had since adopted a five-year strategic plan.”
 
Over a year has passed.  We have our own view of this “wholesale transformation of U.S. international broadcasting.”  We call it a demolition operation.  Where is the United States now?  Answer: No message, no resonance, no credibility.
 
And as to that “five-year strategic plan,” as a source noted, now the BBG/IBB is talking like the Soviets used to.  Five year plans didn’t work for the Soviets and they aren’t working for the BBG/IBB.
 
Is anyone listening to the nonsense coming from these guys?
 
Last but not least, Mr. Lynton reiterated that BBG/IBB mantra of, “to inform, engage and connect with people around the world in support of freedom and democracy.”
 
We have to say it again: this is a crock.
 
This is a BBG/IBB statement.  It is not the agency’s mission statement.  For the Voice of America (VOA), it is the VOA Charter.  For the grantees, it is the language found in legislation creating them.
 
As far as the Arab and Muslim world is concerned, it is quite apparent that they want nothing to do with the US concepts of “freedom and democracy.”
 
Here’s another thing that deeply disturbs us:
 
During its September 2012 meetings, the Board, via its Public Affairs office, issued a statement noting the “passing” of Ambassador Chris Stevens.
 
The what?!?
 
Ambassador Victor Ashe, the only member of the BBG to consistently demonstrate fortitude (for which he is loathed by the deceptive, self-aggrandizing IBB senior staff), stepped up and objected to the terminology of the statement.  Ambassador Ashe gets it and we agree: tell it like it is: Ambassador Stevens and other US Embassy personnel were killed, murdered.  They were killed by a mob of Libyans, perhaps infiltrated by or covering for hardcore jihadists.
 
We were incredulous when reading of this latest bit of BBG/IBB nonsense. Figuratively speaking, the impression rendered is as if the ambassador was 100 years old and died peacefully in his sleep – yet another example of the agency’s inability to deal with truth and reality.
 
As we said in a previous commentary, there is a sense of things inside the Cohen Building, the BBG headquarters in Washington, DC, that the place has gone “soft in the head” with regard to the Arab and Muslim world reflected in agency programming and now pronouncements of the BBG.
 
What’s going on?
 
Is someone inside that building afraid of offending people in that part of the world after killing fellow Americans?  We would really not want to conclude that the Cohen Building is now populated with apologists for the “it’s America’s fault” world view.
 
Bottom line: you can’t make lovey-dovey with cold-blooded killers.
 
What Is Past Is Prologue
 
Let us put current events into some form of historical context and why they should be viewed with trepidation.
 
The events of this past week are likely to be seen as a great jihadist victory.
 
To the jihadists, storming American embassies and burning American flags is analogous to the Muslim armies of bin Saladin storming the walls of Jerusalem in the Middle Ages.  Indeed, looking at American embassies in this part of the world, they look like mini-fortresses.  You can be assured that this historical parallel is not lost on the jihadist leadership.  They have demonstrated that symbols of the US presence in the region are not invulnerable and can be overrun and assaulted by the faithful.
 
In the mind of the jihadist, the general population is the equivalent of a standing army.  They proved that this week in 20 COUNTRIES across North Africa, the Near and Middle East and Asia.  All it takes is militant clerics calling upon the faithful to rise up and defend the faith.  That is what they did.  And more than likely they will believe and instruct the faithful to believe that the Will of the Prophet has spoken – a powerful sentiment in the world of true believers.
 
So much for the millions of dollars spent on US Government broadcasting to the Arab and Muslim world.  It doesn’t mean a thing.  It hasn’t delivered. As we noted, the time to penetrate the Arab/Muslim mindset was the decade after 9/11 with a consistent authoritative intellectual message.  That decade is over.  The window of opportunity has been slammed shut and braced with iron shutters.  There has been a momentum shift and it is in the direction of fundamentalism.
 
An article in the September 16, 2012 edition of The New York Times was headlined: “U.S. Preparing for a Long Siege of Arab Unrest.”  That’s how we see, if you understand the mindset of the “Arab/Muslim street.”
 
The spin makers and con artists inside the Cohen Building are not up to the task.  The IBB in particular is wallowing in arrogance, venality and self-aggrandizement.  It traffics in a lot of – baloney.
 
You don’t hear the jihadists talking about “design and innovation” or “five-year plans.”
 
For them, the attitude is, “Whatever it takes.  As long as it takes.”
 
The Federalist
September 2012

###

Broadcasting Board of Governors press release:

Thursday, September 13, 2012
 
BBG Meets With Secretary of State Clinton

In a meeting today with the Broadcasting Board of Governors, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton encouraged the Board in their strategic efforts to restructure and increase the impact of U.S. international broadcasting.

BBG Presiding Governor Michael Lynton led the Board’s delegation to the State Department, which included Governors Victor Ashe, Dennis Mulhaupt, Susan McCue, and Michael Meehan, as well as Richard M. Lobo, Director of the International Broadcasting Bureau. Under Secretary of State Tara Sonenshine, the Secretary’s representative to the BBG, took a leading role in framing the discussion.

Lynton noted that during a discussion in June 2011, the Board shared with the Secretary its intention to undertake a wholesale transformation of U.S. international broadcasting, and had since adopted a five-year strategic plan.

“Change will not happen overnight,” Lynton said. “But the reforms we are enacting will strengthen the agency’s ability to deliver on its mission in support of U.S. national interests: to inform, engage and connect with people around the world in support of freedom and democracy.”

Lynton and his colleagues on the Board also discussed with Secretary Clinton their efforts to improve the BBG’s digital outreach, which have included launching programs on new platforms, creating an office focused on innovation, and forming an outside advisory group of leading innovators in social media and other fields.

And they expressed their condolences over the loss this week of four diplomats serving in Libya, including the new U.S. ambassador, Christopher Stevens.

Secretary Clinton serves on the BBG ex-officio. She’s the only Secretary of State to have met with the Board.
 

BBG | 330 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington DC 20237
 

 

]]> http://freemediaonline.org/freemediaonlineblog/2012/09/17/broadcasting-board-of-governors-information-war-lost-press-releases-and-other-pronouncements/feed/ 0 http://freemediaonline.org/freemediaonlineblog/2012/09/14/broadcasting-board-of-governors-information-war-lost-the-arab-and-muslim-world/ http://freemediaonline.org/freemediaonlineblog/2012/09/14/broadcasting-board-of-governors-information-war-lost-the-arab-and-muslim-world/#comments Fri, 14 Sep 2012 18:02:00 +0000 The Federalist http://www.usgbroadcasts.com/bbgwatch/?p=16484

Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) members and International Broadcasting Bureau (IBB) Director Richard Lobo meeting with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs Tara Sonenshine, Sept. 13, 2012.

Broadcasting Board of Governors
Information War Lost: The Arab and Muslim World

A commentary by The Federalist
 
 
 
This is going to be tough, so take your antacid now.
 
What does it take?
 
What does it take to understand that this Western media concocted “Arab Spring” is a fantasy?
 
It is important for the American people to see things for what they are: two American embassies (Egypt and Yemen) and consulate (Libya) breached, anti-American demonstrations from the Middle East to Indonesia.  Four Americans killed, including the American ambassador to Libya, Chris Stevens.
 
The American people are not always strong on history, including (and perhaps especially) Middle East history.  We’re talking about two millennia of bloodletting in the region, broken down by tribal and religious affiliations, loyalties and zealotry.  That’s TWO-THOUSAND YEARS.  Do you see anything in events across the region that suggest this paradigm has been broken and that they are on a new path toward “freedom and democracy?”
 
No way.
 
What we are witness to is a changing of the guard – one form of repression being exchanged for another.
 
Vast numbers don’t like us and they are not about to like us any time soon.  They’ve taken a hard turn toward more – not less – fundamentalism.  It’s what they know.  It’s what these extremists are comfortable with – fundamentalism and intolerance.
 
And killing.  

U.S. Government-funded broadcasting, other forms of communications and public diplomacy in the Arab and Muslim world should consider and respond to these realities.

They do not.
 
As events have demonstrated, these extremists will kill anyone not in conformance with their world view, anyone seen as a threat to their world view.  Libya, Egypt, Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Indonesia – do you see any positives going on across the breadth of the Arab and Muslim world?
 
And have you taken note how these demonstrations are well organized?  It’s not a couple of people standing on a street corner.  That indicates a variety of things, one of which is an underlying hatred toward the United States and people who know how to lead and focus anger and discontent.
 
And they were armed.
 
And that black flag seen being raised over the American embassy in Cairo.  That’s a jihadist flag, similar to one seen in al-Qaeda videos.
 
We are not going to sugarcoat things.  This is the reality.
 
How do you tell the families of the slain Americans that they didn’t die in vain?  You can’t.  They were casualties.  They were specifically targeted.  They are victims.  They were murdered — they did not “pass away” as the initial sympathy and condemnation statement drafted by the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) international communications staff read. These senior executives need a major reality check.

The recent murders of U.S. diplomats represent the ultimate expression of a rejection of American ideals and principals. Of all the former journalists, international communications experts, public relations and public diplomacy specialists present at the Broadcasting Board of Governors open meeting in Washington, DC on September 13, 2020 — shortly after BBG members and International Broadcasting Bureau (IBB) Director Richard Lobo had met with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs Tara Sonenshine — only BBG Governor Ambassador Victor Ashe had the presence of mind to speak up and insist that “passing” in the BBG resolution be changed to “murder” — to call a spade a spade in reference to the horrific killing of Ambassador Stevens.

Most of the participants in the BBG meeting are responsible for the direction, the tone and to a large degree the content of U.S. international broadcasting. The Voice of America (VOA), the most important broadcasting entity managed by the BBG, reported recently that the Taliban in Afghanistan killed a dozen or so partying civilians because because the Taliban “disapproves” of dancing and singing. Another curious choice of words.

That kind of communications strategy is not encouraging news for Americans at home and abroad and U.S. international broadcasting audiences in the Arab and Muslim world. It sends a confusing message and emboldens extremists.

We’re not suggesting using inflammatory language in BBG resolutions — much less in Voice of America (VOA), Radio Sawa or Alhurra news — but “Passing” and “Disapproval”? Such expressions are more appropriate for describing the death of a grandmother or voicing parental concern over teenage behavior.

What we do know is that BBG senior executives who collect large bonuses are also responsible for laying off dozens of experienced VOA journalists who would have known how to communicate with audiences in the Middle East.

U.S. communications failures are compounded by security failures. News reports we’ve read did not mention the normal Marine guard detachment protecting the Libyan consulate.  We contacted sources familiar with the situation. The State Department, under its own budgetary pressures, is relying upon contractor security detachments, some of which use local personnel.  It appears the assailants knew the location of the secure room in the consulate, possibly an indication of an inside job.  Seemingly, they knew who they were after and they knew where to look.  

Not good.  

Sending a Marine special operations detachment to secure the site after the fact is no consolation for the families of the lost American diplomatic personnel.
 
And by the way, these weren’t the only attacks against a Western diplomatic mission in Libya.  Recently, a convoy containing the British ambassador to Libya was targeted in an attack.  The ambassador escaped unharmed.  It didn’t make news – perhaps because the Western media wants to perpetuate the myth of the “Arab Spring.”  Wear some flowers in your hair and do your kumbaya dance.
 
There are those who say that the vast majority of Arab and Muslim people in the region would not condone these attacks.  Maybe that’s true.  Maybe it’s not.  We really don’t know.  What we do know is that history is replete with examples of motivated and disciplined extremists taking control of countries and societies and bringing even greater nightmares.  This scenario is far from over and may be rising to a new level of intensity.
 
And let’s not forget the people who produced the film that has flamed this violence.  They must have known that their project would trigger a reaction in the Middle East.  Perhaps that was an intended outcome.  They are maintaining the cycle of hate.
 
No Message – No Resonance – No Credibility
 
Secretary of State Clinton now confronts the reality of the words of her Congressional testimony: “We are losing the information war.”  She was talking about the Middle East.  But as we have noted in previous commentaries, it really applies to the world as a whole.  She will now have to preside over memorial services for the slain members of her diplomatic staff.  That brings home the reality of events painfully and very fast.
 
As we see it, the situation now is: information war lost.  And the people responsible for losing that information war sit fat and cozy collecting nice bonuses for their failures: the senior staff of the International Broadcasting Bureau (IBB) at the U.S. federal international broadcasting agency.  The Broadcasting Board of Governors has been played like a bunch of naïve dreamers by the IBB staff with their “flim flam strategic plan.”
 
Since September 11, 2001 the BBG/IBB has had well over a decade to get its act together and formulate an effective broadcasting strategy to Arab publics.
 
As events have demonstrated, the agency has fallen flat on its face.
 
Here’s a brief rundown of that nose-dive trajectory:
 
Following the horrific events of September 11, 2001 the BBG/IBB decided to reinvent its broadcasts to the Middle East.  The main event was to terminate the Voice of America (VOA) Arabic Service and replace it with Radio Sawa and Alhurra television, two grantee operations.
 
The ploy with Radio Sawa is to use pop music as a “hook,” an attempt to entice Arab publics, particularly Arab youth, to buy into the American world view.  In short, the thinking was that by playing pop music to Arab youth, they would influence change to the existing paradigm.  While not heavy with pop music, Alhurra television follows the same track – to change the dynamics on the “Arab street” and move the needle toward something more pro-American.
 
Neither has nor appears close to accomplishing their intended outcomes.  Neither dominates the Arab/Middle East media.  And neither has moved the needle of the “Arab street” toward a world view more in line with the United States.  What do we see on the “Arab street?”  Answer: more of the same old, same old – violence, bloodshed, the killing of Americans.
 
We’ve studied the photographs and video from Libya.  It’s a scene that has repeated itself throughout the Middle East – a mob of Arab males assaulting American diplomatic facilities.  Do you know what this represents?
 
Answer: it’s a form of a rite of passage and indoctrination for young Arab males.  It’s called “Hate America 101,” a primer for similar acts or worse, a training ground for future jihadists and terrorists.
 
Let’s move over to Syria.
 
We need to make it plain – Syria is in the grip of sectarian violence and civil war.  Forget all the talk about a “pro-democracy movement.”  In simple terms, it is fundamentally an attempt to overthrow the existing power structure and replace it with another.  Recently, the United Nations warned of possible war crimes by the Syrian opposition.  That makes them no different than the Assad regime in Damascus.  If you understand TWO THOUSAND YEARS of Middle East history, you should not be surprised.
 
Meanwhile, in Iraq – the Iraqi government is allowing an air bridge by the Iranian government to Syria (in support of the Assad government) overflying Iraqi airspace.  The United States has made a (likely futile) gesture in the form of a request to the Iraqi government to inspect the cargo of Iranian aircraft.  We see that request as going nowhere.  Iraq is likely to be an Iranian satellite for the foreseeable future, and Iraqis have jumped on the bandwagon of recent anti-American demonstrations.
 
So let’s get down to the nitty-gritty:
 
American foreign policy in the Middle East is a debacle.  American diplomatic posts have been overrun and sacked.  Americans have been killed.  
 
And last, but certainly not least, a costly U.S. Government broadcasting effort in the Middle East is largely ineffective as events demonstrate on a daily basis.
 
But the bad news doesn’t stop there.
 
One of the things the BBG/IBB has done is taken a giant step in a very wrong direction.
 
The BBG/IBB has moved toward advocacy.  It has created a website devoted to “Middle East Voices” and a “faces of the fallen” feature, the latter devoted to people killed in sectarian violence.
 
The question is: whose side is the BBG/IBB on?  Is the agency supporting Sunni or Shiite?  Some people may not grasp the significance but you can best believe it is most certainly a big deal in the Middle East as would be the perceptions in that part of the world as to whose side the United States is on.
 
At the end of the day, the first consideration by American citizens – the people who pay for the salaries of the IBB and the rest of the U.S. Government international broadcasting infrastructure – is how many Americans are being killed by thugs, insurgents or terrorists?  In our view, this feature wouldn’t have a whole lot of resonance with Americans after watching video from Libya showing the body of Ambassador Chris Stevens being carried out of the American consulate like a trophy to anti-Americanism.  It’s been done before – along with videos of beheadings, hangings and other acts of gruesome Middle East atrocities.
 
What does it take?
 
Our sources inside the Cohen Building, the Washington headquarters of the Broadcasting Board of Governors, express a concern that senior agency executives responsible for broadcast program content to the Arab and Muslim world have gone “soft in the head” (our term), as demonstrated by their initial description of the brutal killing of Ambassador Stevens as “passing” rather than murder.
 
We recall what Senator John Kerry (D-MA) said shortly after the uprisings in Egypt began: “It is too early to do a democracy victory lap in the Middle East.”
 
We agree.  We more than agree.  We strongly agree.  Events have made Senator Kerry’s observations clear and correct.
 
The United States Government cannot go “soft in the head” in the Middle East or elsewhere, whether it be in general policy or the broadcasts of the BBG/IBB.  
 
There is a consequence for this approach – desperately trying to make the Arab and Muslim world like us.  It is too easily interpreted as a sign of weakness.  As we’ve said, TWO-THOUSAND YEARS of bloodletting and intolerance.    
 
Finally,
 
There is no substitute for American resolve in the face of violent extremism directed against American diplomats and citizens.
 
The White House says, “Make no mistake.  Justice will be done.”  Fine.  But that requires action.  These extremist elements aren’t deterred by words.  They think they have the White House in a chokehold.  A nuanced use of force is the order of the day.  And it is the American people who will determine whether the White House lives up to the declaration that “Justice will be done.”
 
Too much of what we see and/or hear coming out of the BBG/IBB is conciliatory or weak-minded toward the extremists.  Wrong messages create perceptions that now is the time to strike against U.S. overseas interests, that the United States is weak or ineffective in dealing with external threats.  That has to change.  

With regard to U.S. Government international broadcasting, the change that is required won’t come from within the BBG’s Cohen Building.  In our view, senior agency officials have compromised the effectiveness of the agency’s mission and the national interests of the United States and its people.  It’s time for the Congress and the administration to step up and reformulate U.S. Government international broadcasting –
 
Or end it and put American resources to better use in other ways.
 
The Federalist
September 2012
 
 
 

 by The Federalist

For the employees inside the Cohen Building contending with the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) and its International Broadcasting Bureau (IBB)  or BBG/IBB, the nightmare continues to roll, even as the summer of 2012 drifts away.  Let’s briefly examine some of the things going on as we head into the month of September:

Twits and Tweets:

It seems that the Office of Propaganda (the agency’s Public Affairs office) is tinkering with a “proposal” to use the personal Twitter accounts of agency employees – particularly those in the Voice of America (VOA) Newsroom – as a pass-through for its press releases and other bombast.  These employees have name recognition and contacts.  Thus perhaps the idea to exploit these accounts for the agency’s use.

It’s what we’ve commented on before: an angle to propagandize the American people.  One would suspect that this might raise some privacy issues (although with the arrogant, beyond the law attitude that has infected the Third Floor of the Cohen Building, that doesn’t seem to be a concern).  And, there may be many Twitter contacts among the employees who don’t want to see these kinds of messages from the agency showing up in their personal accounts.  But when you are desperate to get some traction from somewhere, this is what agency officials do – kind of the agency becoming a social media spam engine.

We can see agency employees getting “re-tweets” from people on their Twitter mailing list: “Why are you sending me this?  I don’t want to see this.  Don’t send me more of this – stuff.”

It remains to be seen how much pressure or coercion the agency will put on its employees with Twitter accounts to “allow” the agency to exploit personal data bases for its own purposes. Of course, if agency officials take the coercive route, the Federalist and BBG Watch want to know about it.

Like much of what comes out of the Third Floor these days, this scheme is just another crock.

A Gallup, A Gallop and On We Go:

The Gallup research organization has gotten tangled up with the US Government over its research and polling practices.  We don’t know all the particulars of the broader issues.  However, we can make some comment on our view of the situation as relates to the BBG/IBB:

$50-million dollars is a lot of money to be spending on what we already know: the agency has lost its audience.  And since it has lost its audience – and intends to lose more by ending direct radio broadcasts – it now tries to engage in diversionary tactics – as in polling about mobile phone use in Nigeria, to cite one example.  The intention of this tactic appears to be to sell the Congress on providing the agency with funding for mobile phone apps.

As we’ve said: trust no one and nothing coming out of the Third Floor of the Cohen Building.  Someone needs to be asking questions like:

How affordable is a mobile phone for the average Nigerian?

How many Nigerians live at or below the poverty level?

What is the status of the electricity infrastructure in Nigeria (you have to be able to transmit, receive and be able to charge the batteries for those mobile phones)?

What do the Nigerians with these phones use them for?

How does the average Nigerian get news and information?

We take technology for granted.  The halls and offices of Congress are awash with technology.

The rest of the world isn’t quite like that, especially when getting down to the level of the average individual.  Remember, at least 2-BILLION people around the globe are at or below the poverty level.  The BBG/IBB “flim flam strategic plan” eliminates these global publics right out of the equation of US international broadcasting by its heavy, unbalanced and one-sided reliance on the Internet and related technologies.  But when the BBG/IBB makes forays up to the Hill, the approach to selling its flim flam appears to be on the basis of what folks on the Hill have at their disposal, not what is at the disposal at the receiving end of BBG/IBB programs, nor in what proportion to the overall global population.

The Man on the Moon

On Saturday, August 25, 2012 at 2:45pm, Neil Armstrong, the famous American astronaut and first man to step on the surface of the moon, died as a result of complications following heart surgery.  He was 82.

This was a banner news headline around the world.  We went to check out the VOA English website to see the agency’s write-up.

We couldn’t find it.

It got to the point that we had to contact our sources to see if they could find it.  Same problem – they had to search the site.  Eventually, the news showed up more prominently displayed.  We can’t say that the report wasn’t somewhere on the site before becoming a lead banner.  But we can say that initially it wasn’t easy to find.

Instead of a staff error, we see this as the consequence of the direction the agency has taken with the Newsroom and how it is intended to function (which we see as “Mode Dysfunction”).

Agency officials have been redirecting Newsroom “priorities” to the point that confusion more often than not probably influences how the Newsroom reacts to events.

David Ensor, the VOA director, has made it plain that the agency and the Newsroom in particular are not going to operate as it has traditionally.  It is going to do and be something different.

Congratulations.  You can now label both: lost.

We also see this in the context of a deeper malaise that has infected the agency.

To our thinking, the Third Floor of the Cohen Building appears to be populated by apologists for American greatness.  They seem to be embarrassed by achievements that define the American Experience to the rest of the world.  We are not talking about being arrogant or jingoistic about who we are and what we have done as a country and people.  We are talking about what we have done that brings definition, vision and elevates to a higher standard the capabilities of mankind and civilization.

The way we see it, how the BBG/IBB goes about diminishing the American Experience lessens the meaning of the dedication, sacrifice – the outright courage – of Americans who distinguish themselves and the country in extraordinary achievements.

This is what is worrisome in this new direction: the manner in which the agency has failed in its mission, ignores the VOA Charter and has made failure an acceptable standard of the agency’s performance.

We need to write more about the VOA Newsroom.  You learn a lot about what is wrong with the agency as a whole from studying how agency officials have taken it out of effective news coverage and in-depth analysis.

Last But Not Least

If you thought the story of the Persian News Network (PNN) and its “Parazit” program had run its course…

You are mistaken!

Part of the spin coming out of the Third Floor and/or its surrogates over the disappearance of “Parazit” from the PNN program line-up is that the agency is not obligated to tell Congress about changes to its program schedule.

Here we go.

To review, “Parazit” has been off the air since the beginning of 2012.  We learned that it is off the air not from the BBG/IBB but from Iranian websites asking what happened and making note of the program’s absence.  Keep in mind that the agency made it appear as if the show was still up and running, or – as the Propaganda Office (aka, the agency Public Affairs office), claimed that the program was on “hiatus” and continues to hold onto that claim to this day.

In the real world, this kind of “hiatus” often is referred as something else, like cancellation.  What is clear is that the agency does not want to come clean as to why the show is somewhere other than on the air.

This is another one of those “gifts” we get from the Third Floor of the Cohen Building.  It is very revealing of the mindset prevalent among the Third Floor dwellers.

We know these folks very well.  They have a taste for arrogance – and have a knack for choosing the wrong time, the wrong place and the wrong people to put their arrogance on public display.

Consider this:

Congress appropriates and authorizes the agency’s funding.  Congressional funding (that’s your money and mine, American taxpayers) equates with Congressional intent as to how public money is to be spent, including in support of VOA programs like “Parazit.”

Next: the agency has made a very big deal about the “Parazit” program, including outside media exposure.  The agency put this program under a spotlight – and now that spotlight is focused on – nothing?!?

To make matters worse, agency officials sat on the situation for eight months and counting.  And, we find out that the program is off the air from external sources in the Iranian community via websites.

This keeps getting worse by the moment.

There are Members of Congress who are very aware of how dysfunctional the agency has become.  The smart play would have been to go to congressional staff and brief them that there has been a problem (whatever the problem is and we still don’t know – officially).

That would satisfy transparency and demonstrate cooperation between the agency and the Congress.

But no.  We get the agency practicing its version of bureaucratic voodoo and surrogates being disingenuous.  Instead of being proactive with the Congress, these guys decided to engage in obfuscation.  They are the antithesis of good government.  They don’t even know what that means.  And they never will.  In a manner of speaking, they have become so tightly wrapped in their self-interest and deception that they are figuratively strangling themselves – the lack of oxygen manifesting itself in lack of good judgment, something not in great abundance on the Third Floor of the Cohen Building to begin with.

The agency has put itself between a rock and a hard place on the “Parazit affair.”  It tried to cover-up the disappearance of the program and surrounding circumstances.  As we often say, trust no one on the Third Floor of the Cohen Building, this being one of the more flagrant examples.

Along with this comes the added irony that the spin-makers in the agency also like to make unilateral declarations dismissing the often-heard allegation that PNN is the “Voice of Tehran.”

Here’s the deal:

Some of the individuals making these declarations don’t speak Farsi.  Without fluency in the language, these individuals rely on others to tell them what they think is going out over the air.  And as we already know, the Iranian-American community comes at PNN from a variety of political directions as to what they think is going out over PNN.  This makes for a perfect storm of dysfunction: everyone has an agenda, from the factions in the Iranian-American community, the staff inside PNN and the bureaucratic hacks on the Third Floor of the Cohen Building.

And let’s not forget, back in Tehran, who knows how “The Great Parazit Disappearing Act” is being interpreted.  And you wonder if the folks in Tehran might be better informed than the Congress or the rest of us!

As the Iranian people must already know, absent consistency and coherency from PNN or Washington, they will have to chart their own path to the future.

Last but not least, the IBB staff failed to alert the BBG about the disappearance of “Parazit.”  That says a lot about the contempt the IBB staff has for the BBG.

This kind of stuff is not going to end anytime soon with the cast of characters involved.  So, stay tuned for more from the nightmare on a continuous loop:

The worst organization in the Federal Government, run by the worst managers in the Federal Government.

The Federalist

September 2012

A commentary by The Federalist

“The integrity of any organization depends on the character and honesty of its employees and especially its leaders.”

(From a John F. Hein article on the  FedSmith.com website, August 23, 2012)

The U.S. Congress and the White House would be well served to heed the words of Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) who not too long ago labeled the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG)  and its executives in the International Broadcasting Bureau (IBB) as “the most worthless organization in the Federal Government.”

It was true then and the situation is worse now.

By far, the example of the worst of the worst inside the Cohen Building, the BBG headquarters in Washington, DC,  is  how these BBG/IBB executives have managed the agency’s Farsi language Persian News Network (PNN) which broadcasts to Iran.  See “Staffers: Voice Of America Left Lawmakers in The Dark About Loss Of Prominent Show ‘Parazit’” by Elizabeth Flock – Washington Whispers, U.S. News & World Report.

The service is a hotbed of controversy, division and rivalries.  Service chiefs come in and go out the door on a regular basis: some go elsewhere in the Federal Government, some to retirement and some to other assignments in the agency (either to get away from the service or to escape some imbroglio they got caught up in).  Employees and contractors reflect the conflicted nature of the larger Iranian-American community.  Some support the former monarchy.  Some support an aggressive US posture toward the existing regime.  Some want a more accommodating stance with Tehran.

Not long ago, a popular PNN television anchor  was taken off-the-air and detailed to the agency’s Worldwide English operation ostensibly to develop an interview program.

But more recently, Iranian websites such as  Iranian.com  and  VOAPNNWatchdog.com  reported that the much-ballyhooed PNN satire program “Parazit” and one of the program’s co-hosts have gone “missing-in-action.”

Because of the factionalism that is part of the day-to-day politics in the Iranian community, we read the materials on these sites with care.  But, they do merit attention, especially when juxtaposed with actions by the agency’s senior officials.  In this case, the websites were on to something.

We already know that the  IBB bureaucrats do not believe in transparency.  We know that they will go to extraordinary lengths to block information and threaten employees and political appointees alike with reprisals for releasing information out to the general public that would cause them great difficulty in protecting their self-interest and bonus-mongering.  Thus, it becomes necessary for external outlets, like but not limited to BBG Watch, to get information out to the general public and Members of Congress because:

The American people are being ripped off by these Cohen Building executives.  They are protecting themselves from getting a deserved boot out the door for being the perpetrators of a failed agency mission.

Thus, we learn that:

The PNN program “Parazit” has been off the air for months even though the agency has tried to concoct the notion that it is still part of the regular PNN program schedule.

One of the program hosts is nowhere to be found in the PNN programming, absent for reasons not being publicly discussed.

The agency relocated “Parazit” to the agency’s New York City bureau, with unknown costs to the American taxpayer connected with set construction, equipment purchases and the like – and now, no “Parazit.”

And the topper:

We learn that senior agency officials “neglected” (our word) to inform members of the BBG as to what has been going on for the past eight months.

Supposedly, the BBG has a “PNN subcommittee.”  Where was it on this?

Was the subcommittee “OTL” (“out to lunch,” in essence, not aware of what was going on, and if not, why not)?  Or, knowing how the IBB likes to avoid bad news, did someone from the IBB executive director down through the IBB and VOA executive staffing pattern make the decision to keep a lid on the situation, in essence engage in a cover-up?  Was it a group decision?

This stuff never stops because:

It is the worst organization in the Federal Government – run by the worst managers in the Federal Government.

Keep in mind that the BBG/IBB and its Office of Propaganda (the agency’s Public Affairs Office) made a big deal out of an award that was given the “Parazit” program and kept issuing press release after press release implying that the program was very much on the air long after it ceased to exist. It looks awkward at best when one of your showpiece programs disappears into the BBG/IBB “Bermuda Triangle.”

Another thing – did the IBB apparatchiks somehow think that no one in the Iranian community here or back in the homeland would notice “Parazit” doing its disappearing act?

The regime back in Tehran has got to be feeling mighty good that “Parazit” delivered some kind of self-inflicted wound to take it off the air.  Not only that, the regime in Tehran must be feeling even better that the alleged supporters of “freedom and democracy” (the BBG/IBB senior executives) have been engaged in a body of lies and deceit about the non-existing  program.

The agency did attempt to clone a Parazit-like program, but  it doesn’t seem to have generated the same resonance as the original.

And, in the category of “Just Being Plain Stupid:”

We note the concocted PNN idea called “Weapons of Mouse Destruction.”  We understand that this is a parody on the term “weapons of mass destruction.”  There’s really not much that’s funny about the latter.  However, we do understand that the core subject has to do with freedom of expression.  The approach to a legitimate issue was clearly bungled.  You can read previous BBG Watch posts on this subject.  There are many more substantive ways to get at the issue of freedom of expression, whether artistic, political or in terms of other lifestyle choices.  This “idea” doesn’t elevate itself to that level.  Not surprisingly, it has fizzled.  Another nose-dive for PNN.  Was this an intentional diversion to take the focus off the missing “Parazit” program?

Whose Side Are These Guys On?

And there’s more…

There is a certain sentiment among Iranian expatriates in the West and dissidents in Iran that PNN is “the Voice of Tehran.”  Once again, the ideological divide among the PNN staff seems to be making its way into PNN programs.

Why is this bad?

The most obvious answer is that it does not serve U.S. interests very well to be seen as cowed by or a toady for the Iranian regime.  But there is a deeper, much more substantive issue.  Following the mass and bloody demonstrations in Iran a couple of years ago, the opposition movement appears to have developed a sense that the West cannot be relied upon for support.  The opposition movement is still there, but there has been noticeable pullback on overt action.  In short, the opposition has learned the hard way to be skeptical of Washington, including programming from PNN.

And, aside from the Kool-Aid pronouncements from the agency’s Office of Propaganda, no one in Iran seems to be putting much value into the BBG/IBB hypocrisy of “supporting freedom and democracy”  after learning of their plans — some executed and some blocked in bipartisan actions by Congress — to end or reduce many broadcasts to Russia, China, Tibet and other countries without free media. The agency has done a superlative job of taking itself out of the credibility department.

The Iranian opposition need not be taking risks on behalf of the hypocrites on the Third Floor of the Cohen Building.

The Department of Broken Careers

By the way, the agency has put out not one but two vacancy announcements – for a top management position in PNN.  One announcement is for non-citizen candidates, the other for American citizens.  Please note: from a mission performance standpoint, there is no one who is survivable in that position.  If you’re interested in having a black mark on your career resume, this job has got to be high on the list: the job will get you, BBG/IBB will use you as a scapegoat for when things go bad (just about all the time), and if that isn’t enough, the Iranian community will rip you to shreds for being a toady for one faction or another for any decision not to someone’s liking.

We Know Senior Agency Officials Very Well  

We know the mindset they operate from, patterns to their behavior.  Withholding pertinent information relating to a VOA program, from the agency’s bipartisan presidential appointees, for a period of many months, is a conscious, willful and premeditated act of gross misconduct, consistent with protecting their agenda, their bonuses.

It is nowhere near enough for members of the BBG to be “appalled” by the actions of the officials involved in this cover-up.  They should be outraged and prepared to act.  There has to be a full investigation preferably and exclusively by individuals without ties to the agency.  It is wholly unacceptable for the BBG to take a pass on its accountability and oversight responsibilities to sit back and do nothing.  To all appearances, the actions of these officials were a deliberate effort to undermine the BBG authority and responsibility.  It goes a long way to show just how little respect the IBB types have for the bi-partisan board.

The American people are entitled to know who was involved and the extent of their involvement in this incident.  We should expect that those involved be held accountable – up to and including removal from the Federal Service for cause, if the facts make the case in this matter.

And consider this –

This is no trivial matter.  The officials involved in this cover-up made a conscious decision to embrace behavior putting lies and deceit ahead of transparency and truthfulness.  They have lied to the members of the BBG; they have lied to the American taxpayer and the Congress which provides funding for its programs.  They have intentionally deceived the intended audience.  They have put their agenda ahead of the national and public interest.  They have betrayed a public trust.  To outward appearances, they have done so with malice aforethought.

This is amoral behavior at its worst from inside a Federal agency.

If you think this agency has any reservoir of credibility left, you’re dreaming.

If you are someone who subscribes to the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act, here is a perfect example of what these agency officials will do – misinformation, disinformation, misrepresentations to the American public.  It’s all here and these guys are exposed.

And keep in mind that these people want one of their own to be an agency “Chief Executive Officer.”  This would be a mockery of effective accountability and oversight because – there is no effective accountability and oversight existent in this agency with these guys in charge.

If no action is taken, there is no value to the national and public interest in the operations of the BBG/IBB.

Trust no one and believe nothing from the Third Floor of the Cohen Building.

Why We Take This Incident Very Seriously

Some time ago, we wrote a piece on “Six Minutes to Armageddon,” a reference to the time it takes an Iranian ballistic missile to reach Israel.  We’ve got news for you:

The situation is worse now than when it was when we wrote the piece.

The general consensus is that the Israelis are ready to launch a pre-emptive strike against Iranian nuclear facilities.  It could come in a matter of weeks.  Both the Israelis and the Iranians have been escalating their rhetoric.  It isn’t hollow rhetoric.  These guys are not playing paintball.  They’re playing for real and the rhetoric is in line with what is at stake for both parties.  Things are rolling with a full head of steam.  There isn’t much room for a graceful backing-off.  And the rhetoric is becoming in equal doses more frequent and more resolute.

Here’s more bad news:

In addition to its long-range ordnance, the Iranians have been working diligently on developing their short and intermediate range missiles.  The Iranians know that US military assets in the Persian Gulf could pose a potential threat.  These missiles could be intended for our armed forces in the region.

There used to be a saying in US military circles during the Cold War that if a US warship were to be sunk in an engagement with the Soviets, it would go down with half its ammunition still on board.  A Soviet ship would go down with its powder magazines empty.  In other words, the Soviets would let go with everything they had on the first shot knowing that there might not be a second opportunity.

The Iranians may have the same idea.  And if they do and do not believe in a gradated use of their ordnance, things could get very bad, very quickly, for everybody in the Persian Gulf and beyond.

Some people on this side of the Atlantic Ocean may not have a realistic appreciation of the Israeli dilemma.  The Israelis are surrounded on all sides – by the Mediterranean Sea on their western coastline and a whole lot of unsettled, hostile and roiled-in-revolutionary-politics Arab neighbors north, east and south.  The Israelis don’t have the luxury of a lot of options or in making an error in judgment regarding threats to their existence.  If a threat is deemed credible, the first priority is to protect their population.  Even as this is being written, the Israelis are issuing gas masks and taking defensive measures to harden schools and hospitals against attack.

On top of that, there is the additional threat by Iranian clients – Hezbollah in Lebanon and Palestinian militants – with their own supplies of rockets for use in any engagement with the Israelis, on their own or in conjunction with Iran.

Without question, the Israelis have run through computer war game simulations of the different scenarios they are likely to encounter with the Iranians.  They most likely run these simulations in real time.  They likely know the numbers – including casualty figures – if they make the right move or the wrong one.

The Iranians are not stupid either.  More than likely, they have run their own simulations examining the results of scenarios seen from their perspective.

In short, for either party there is nothing to be gained by making a wrong decision.  This is a potential conflict that has mutually assured destruction (“MAD,” usually thought of in the context of mutual deterrent, though not in this case) written all over it, with either conventional or nuclear weapons in the mix.

And you can best believe that if the Israelis and Iranians engage in hostilities, the Iranian Cyber Army will be ready to act to take out all BBG/VOA Internet operations.  They’ve done it before and only the flim flam artists in the Cohen Building would believe that they couldn’t or wouldn’t do it again.  They’ve had plenty of time to refine their techniques since their last attack.

Something else that weaves its way in a subtext to all this is that the Iranians also see themselves as fulfilling their historic manifest destiny – and that includes establishing hegemony over their Arab neighbors.  In short, whether it is admitted publicly or not, a whole lot of people in the region, not just the Israelis, have very big worries concerning an Iran with nuclear capability.

Without question, the Iranians monitor PNN programs, as they do all U.S. Government actions.  In a situation with this degree of volatility, it is dangerous to send mixed, confused or otherwise irrational signals to the Iranians which would lead them to conclude that this is an optimum moment to take this situation to the tipping point between rhetoric and actual hostilities.  The actions of the BBG/IBB with regard to its PNN programming can have the effect of creating the perception that the U.S. Government is out of focus.

Put this all together and you have more than enough reason to lose sleep at night, with the Broadcasting Board of Governors and its International Broadcasting Bureau (BBG/IBB) making its contribution to the nightmare.

The Federalist

August 2012

Government official - BBG CEO - almost a god

Broadcasting Board of Governors – Shorts

by The Federalist

Well, it is August after all and even the Federalist needs some vacation time. The Broadcasting Board of Governors and its International Broadcasting Bureau (BBG/IBB) is the non-stop gift that keeps on giving – when it comes to one misstep after another. In turn, this means we have plenty of material to work with, even when we are on vacation.

And we’ll be taking notes, phone calls and emails in between vacation pursuits.

Thus, before Labor Day gets here, some quick thoughts to ponder:

Most often, we are on the same page with our editors. But now and then, we take a slightly alternative look at things to add some flavor to the BBG Watch perspective. Here are some:

The CEO Proposal:

One of the things coming out of the Cohen Building is the idea of a “chief executive officer” for US international broadcasting. It may be a “silly” proposal, so to speak, but let’s expand the perspective a bit.

As we often like to say, we know these IBB types very well. Once they decide they want something, they will continue to go after it. They will obsess over it. They are most likely laying the groundwork for the next phase of this battle, continuing with their proposals and entrees with Members of Congress to get support for the idea.

In short, the only way this obsession will go away is when the people advocating it are no longer on the agency’s staffing pattern.

The idea is a bad one for a number of reasons:

Let’s look at this agency for the reputation its senior management has assiduously constructed for over a decade. It is the worst organization in the Federal Government. It is that way because these guys want it that way. It goes beyond the horrid reputation these individuals have established in the annual Federal employee surveys. It speaks to their arrogance, their sense of being beyond the normal reach of oversight, accountability, checks and balances, along with their brazen defiance of congressional intent.

What these individuals want is someone in this position to represent or protect their interests – not the national or public interest, mind you, but rather their own self-interest which manifests itself in not only their group dynamic noted above, but also in keeping that gravy train of big bonuses rolling. Greed in the Federal government is very much at home on the Third Floor of the Cohen Building.

And, if it comes to pass that someone already situated on the Third Floor winds up in this position, that would solidify perpetuating the miserable record these people have set for themselves: all of the above and being chiefly responsible for the United States “losing the information war” with global publics.

What the American people do not need is a “CEO for Life” in this position and that is precisely what these folks would be angling for.

That much power residing in one individual propping up a regime that is costing the American taxpayers millions in a failed mission is wholly unacceptable. And the Congress should show the wisdom of not letting it happen because of the damage to US international broadcasting that has been done and which would likely be perpetuated if left unchecked.

And here’s another thing:

Keep in mind that if this position were to be encumbered by a person the Third Floor gang doesn’t like, they will do everything they possibly can to make that person’s life miserable. We know they can be a vicious, arrogant and insubordinate lot. They would go out of their way to undermine any directive or initiative not to their liking. They’re doing it right now. That is what US international broadcasting has become in this regime of lifetime careerists protecting their self-interest.

What is really needed is a major house-cleaning on the Third Floor. Big time. These people think they have a job for life and are untouchable. Well maybe not so. They can always be detailed to some obscure Federal office building out beyond Dulles Airport. Imagine that commute. In winter. Imagine it anytime with the way Washington traffic is. Do to them what the British did to Napoleon (to better effect the second time around):

Exile. Deep exile. Exile of the worst kind for them: political exile. Career exile. Working on some esoteric paper project destined for some file cabinet.

They would still be collecting their six-figure salaries. But getting them OUT of US international broadcasting and perhaps cutting them off from their bonus-mongering would be a major victory for the American people, the national and public interest and foreign publics who might still want to rely upon the United States for news and information.

The ONLY acceptable way a CEO position in this agency can be handled is through the tried and true process: nomination by the president, confirmation by the Senate. And like every other political appointee, this person would submit his/her resignation when the administration changes. That gives a new administration some breathing space, particularly as is needed now in an agency that is long overdue for a course correction – as opposed to the crash-and-burn process that is currently underway.

Smith-Mundt Modernization:

As with the CEO maneuver, this is something the IBB wants and they will obsess over it until they get it or are put in their place and told to forget it.

The underlying agenda here is to propagandize the American people – the only audience spared the agonizing disintegration of the agency and its mission. As we see it, the IBB would use the revision to the Smith-Mundt Act to bombard the American people with an endless stream of nonsense about what a great and wonderful job they are doing. Of course, all you have to do is read a newspaper, watch the news on television or listen to the radio to know that the real world bears no resemblance to the prattle from the agency’s Public Affairs office. The American people don’t need to be targeted in such a manner – and that is what they would be: a target, a demographic to be manipulated, exploited and worst of all: deceived.

The Mono-Blog:

Last but not least –

Kind of a precursor to what would happen if the Smith-Mundt Act were to be “modernized,” we have the agency “blog” under the name of Richard Lobo, a senior agency official.

We call this a “mono-blog” because that’s what it is: a one-way monologue from Mr. Lobo.

To all outward appearance, Mr. Lobo isn’t interested in your comments or observations regarding his views about US international broadcasting. It appears that Mr. Lobo wants to tell you what a great job they are doing in the Cohen Building and how marvelously imaginative and innovative they are. They might have the “imaginative” part down.

It’s called fiction.

The reality is that US international broadcasting is a travesty and becoming more of a hollow shell by the day at the hands of the IBB and its “flim flam strategic plan.”

But again, the name of the game now is to perpetrate that fiction on the American people, in any way possible. Apparently, senior agency officials believe that the American people are dummied down enough to be gullible in believing this one-way blah-blah-blah from the Third Floor of the Cohen Building.

However, when you are now in the business of propaganda, manipulation and exploitation (as we see the intended outcome of a change to Smith-Mundt in the hands of the IBB), the mono-blog is a perfect fit.

And don’t be thinking that these guys are interested in “transparency.” They are not. They are doing everything they possibly can to bury their agenda in secrecy and concoct diversions such as the laughable “global news network.” Indeed, these people would be very happy with a firewall to prevent serious public scrutiny, churning out an endless stream of fictions concocted at will.

Vacation or not, this is why we’re here: to show you how an agency of the Federal Government is being destroyed from within and the consequences of that destruction for American strategic interests and our place in the international community.

If you want a sure sign of American prestige in world in serious decline, you need not look further than the Cohen Building.

If we know it, you can be sure our “Big Three” (the Chinese, the Russians and the Iranians) know it, too.

One must remain ever vigilant in the face of the machinations of the IBB bonus-mongers. Don’t think for one moment that they have given up the pursuit of these and other things they want: the CEO position, the “modernization” of Smith-Mundt, the destruction of US international broadcasting.

Trust no one on the Third Floor of the Cohen Building, the great pontificators of hypocrisy.

The Federalist
August 2012

Broadcasting Board of Governors Being Unnoticed

A commentary by The Federalist

You know where we’re coming from: we are not part of the fan club for the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG), its International Broadcasting Bureau (IBB) and their “flim flam strategic plan.” We see it as taking the United States Government out of the business of serious international broadcasting.

And you can forget about their slippery sales pitch about creating a “Global News Network.” That is a BBG/IBB smoke and mirrors tactic intended for congressional appropriations and authorization staffers. Senior agency officials can’t manage the robust news-gathering assets they already have among their various broadcasting entities.

Instead, the real BBG/IBB agenda is to be a social media website, something far removed from the international broadcasting operations that have defined the character of the agency to the rest of the world for over seventy years.

They may have “succeeded,” as you will read below, but perhaps with unintended consequences and results. It is not a good thing.

The BBG/IBB makes a very big deal about Internet penetration. Keep in mind that it is their weakest media component – way behind its radio and television audiences: around 10 million compared to about 100-million apiece for radio and television. Now, these cumulative numbers are certainly not “burning down the house” with a global population of 7-BILLION. But, the IBB in particular is desperate to generate resonance for its Internet effort because it is the key to their strategy: destroy the direct broadcasting operations and become solely an Internet operation for audio, video and text.

We also know how much the BBG/IBB likes spending American taxpayer money on surveys.

So, with these issues hovering in the background comes free data from the Pew Research organization showing that Russia Today (RT) is the top of the “top news organization producers on YouTube.”

News organization producers.

RT – the Russians! One of our “Big Three” international broadcasters (China and Iran being the other two)!

Over the period January 2011 through March 2012 as a percent of “Top Five videos each week,” the percentages look like this:

[easychart type="pie" height="600" width="1200" title="Top News Organization Producers on YouTube from Pew Research" groupnames="Russia Today,Fox News,BBC,ABC/AP/KCNA/White House,BFM TV/C-SPAN/CNN/NHK/Sky" group1values="8.5" group2values="3.5" group3values="3.1" group4values="1.5" group5values="1.2" chartfadecolor="FFFFFF"]

• Russia Today: 8.5%
• Fox News: 3.5%
• BBC: 3.1%
• ABC News, Associated Press, KCNA (North Korea), the White House: 1.5%
• BFM TV (France), C-SPAN, CNN, NHK (Japan) and Sky News (UK): 1.2%

Do you see BBG/IBB in the hunt? Do you see BBG/IBB anywhere?

Nope.

The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) is there, but even they have a bit of work to do to catch up to Russia Today.

KCNA (North Korea) is on the radar, albeit back in the pack. But, hey! North Korean state television has been running video of Kim Jong-un with a woman identified as his wife. Perhaps this new revelation will give KCNA a bump in their YouTube presence!

But no BBG/IBB. Nothing.

Let’s also note that the upper levels of the agency management structure is populated by former CNN executives. Where is CNN in this data? Back – way back – in the pack. Does that inspire confidence in what the agency is doing with these guys running the operation?

Don’t think so.

We are always watchful of what is going on in the VOA Central Newsroom. This data is not encouraging for whatever is being cranked out for Internet use, both with regard to agency websites and also content posted to YouTube. Perhaps the stuff isn’t timely. Perhaps it is inferior to other stuff. Maybe it lacks depth and substance. Whatever the reason, the VOA news content is not registering.

We seem to recall VOA director David Ensor saying at one time that the agency can do television on the cheap. This data may suggest that the truth of the matter is that the agency is doing what we have suspected: cheap television (or video) done badly.

This is what happens when an organization stops playing to its strengths (the VOA Charter and its core radio operation) and tries to reinvent itself into a “global news network” (aka, social media nothing) and loses its core audience, its identity, its relevance and its credibility.

Remember what we said in “Messages:” trust, reliability, commitment – they’re gone, lost, missing.

One of our sources sent us a VOA “press release,” trumpeting a letter from the President of Somalia, congratulating the agency’s Somali Service for a telephone survey that asked Somali interviewees how they feel about a draft constitution being considered for the country.

Constitutions. Serious business with serious consequences. But what is the story here? It is the Somali constitution and the country’s future, not the VOA survey per se or the VOA press release which we see as an attempt at making the agency the story.

And, for those of you following the debate over legislation to revise the Smith-Mundt Act, here’s a perfect example of the agency attempting to propagandize the American people by giving itself a pat on the back and promoting itself.

This also reveals another angle to what the agency wants to do: get in the business of being a source of survey data.

As we’ve said before: it’s not what members of the BBG/IBB say, it’s what they do. It’s all there if you scope it out and connect the blocks.

Further, whether directly or indirectly, this YouTube data compiled by Pew Research is another manifestation of “losing the information war” that Secretary Clinton has described in congressional testimony. The only thing the careerists of the agency are capable of doing is closing the book on US international broadcasting and giving it the title: “Information War Lost.”

They seem to be well on their way – and seemingly proud of where they are and what they’re doing, which is perhaps the most contemptible thing of all.

As we recall, Mr. Ensor also observed that there will be no turning back from where the agency is headed – sort of symbolic of the mindset that might have been present on the bridge of the Titanic – plowing ahead with a false sense of confidence.

Whichever way you look at it, what the American taxpayer is being stuck with is a losing proposition: a skewed BBG/IBB vision of the future that is costing millions of dollars, losing audiences and not getting the job done to attract new audiences for those it is losing or abandoning largely through its own decision making processes that include cutting key audience constituencies (radio).

The BBG/IBB talks a big game. This agency pays big money to contractors and others for “marketing,” “innovation,” and support services such as that big, 50-million dollar contract with the Gallup organization.

They don’t have a whole lot to show for any of it.

What these guys of the BBG/IBB really need to be doing is learning from others, and that includes the Russians, the Chinese and the Iranians. Of course, in the learning, it just might be found out that the BBG/IBB “strategy” is a bust – and that is something that can’t be allowed to happen or to be acknowledged particularly when Members of Congress are becoming increasingly irritated with the antics on the Third Floor of the Cohen Building and the way these officials have spent taxpayer money.

These guys are taking the agency and fading it into the deep shadows of serious news efforts, particularly for international audiences that the United States needs to reach. The Russians and Chinese mean business, as do the Iranians. They have a message and an agenda. Clearly, they intend to be global news and information heavyweights and are bringing their “A” game.

The BBG/IBB doesn’t have an “A” game.

Or a “B” or “C” game.

The BBG/IBB is right in the crosshairs of public scrutiny. You know it. We know it. And they know it. They are desperately trying to get out of view or engage in diversionary tactics to make it appear that they are doing something that is miraculously innovative, to somehow justify the mangling of US international broadcasting they are in the process of doing.

Innovation and effectiveness exist only in the fantasy world on the Third Floor of the Cohen Building.

Face it: things are going badly and turning things around is beyond the reach of these people. They have no depth. They have no leadership skills and don’t feel their “corporate” mindset requires them to motivate or be responsive to the needs or concerns of their employees.

And of course mission effectiveness is completely off the radar.

Russia Today has put a twist on the BBG/IBB “flim flam strategic plan.” They have exposed it for what it is: a lot of hype, no depth and no substance.

Most importantly: no audience.

The Federalist
July 2012

From Russia Today website – Corporate profile:

“RT’s total view count on YouTube exceeds half a billion, making RT a world record setter. No other news TV channel boasts such reach on the world’s biggest online video platform. YouTube Trends analysts estimate RT viewing figures are growing at an average rate of 850 thousand per day. RT was watched more than VEVO in March 2011, which is again, a first for any news channel on YouTube. RT on YouTube was nominated for a Global Communication Award in 2011. RT delivers stories often missed by mainstream to create news with an edge for the world’s biggest online video audience. Described by YouTube as ‘astonishing’ and‘one of the, if not the biggest news provider on YouTube worldwide’ (YouTube’s director of video partnerships Patrick Walker about RT during YouTube Presentation on MIPCOM 2010), RT’s YouTube platform is core to the ongoing emphasis on multi-media news-delivery across the RT family.”

“With first channel launched in December 2005, the RT network now consists of three global news channels broadcasting in English, Spanish and Arabic, RT America broadcasting from RT’s Washington studio and a documentary Channel RTDoc. With a global reach of over 430 million people, or 22% of all cable subscribers worldwide, RT news covers the major issues of our time for viewers wishing to question more. The best of our broadcast can be found at RT’s YouTube channel, where the number of views has already exceeded half a billion, making RT the first TV news channel to break this record in YouTube’s history.

Now RT has 21 bureaus in 16 states, with a presence in Washington, New York, London, Paris, Delhi, Cairo, Baghdad, Kiev and other cities and employs over 2,000 media professionals around the globe.”

by The Federalist

David Ensor, the Voice of America (VOA) director, made another swing through the Newsroom on Thursday, July 19 with a small entourage of other senior agency officials.

Let’s examine some of the remarks coming out of that meeting.

One of the first things Ensor got to was a defense of what we see as the chaos the Central Newsroom has become.  He believes the mosh pit of co-mingled content from the different US international broadcasting entities and the various language services is a form of “rising to challenges.”  He suggests that anyone who feels otherwise should be told they are wrong.

Well, here we are!  We believe otherwise and would like to suggest that Mr. Ensor reconsider his position.  We think he’s the one getting it wrong.

You want to know why?  The answer is simple: it isn’t working.  Perhaps Mr. Ensor doesn’t know it is not working.  Perhaps he is trying to bolster the managers of the Newsroom.  Perhaps he is trying to convince the staff that it’s working.  That’s three strikes.  

And there may also be a fourth strike: there wasn’t a whole lot coming from the staff praising what Mr. Ensor and his Newsroom managers are doing.  That should tell you something, if Mr. Ensor is paying attention.

Wasn’t it Mr. Ensor who said there was no turning back from where the agency was going with the Newsroom when he first came on board as VOA director?  He may be right – which also means that the agency is stuck with something that is a never-ending calamity.

That is the kind of thing that resonates with the staff and those who follow what’s going on.

Successful execution of the agency’s mission is predicated upon how well the VOA Central Newsroom carries out the provisions of the VOA Charter.  This is an important subject in its own right, worthy of further comment.  For the moment, Mr. Ensor and his senior Newsroom managers get an Unsatisfactory performance evaluation in covering the principles of the Charter.  Why?

Senior officials of the agency go out of their way to virtually deny the existence of the Charter.  Instead, they prefer to talk about “supporting freedom and democracy.”  This is replacing the principles of the Charter with one of various potential outcomes. We completely agree that free, uncensored news helps freedom and democracy, but right off the bat, this leads to an important question:

How do BBG and IBB executives define “supporting freedom and democracy?”

Here’s another one: How do they define “freedom” and “democracy?”

Want another one?  What happens when their interpretation of “supporting freedom and democracy” collides with self-determination, local cultural values, sectarian violence or civil war?

And here’s the real kicker: What if the intended audience doesn’t understand or want their style of “freedom and democracy?”  

In turn, this leads to the entire issue of the agency being a shill for propaganda: either its own propaganda or that of others.

Back to the meeting:

A question was raised as to whether or not the agency heard the message from the Congress concerning cuts to the VOA Newsroom and other agency operations (the Congress being opposed to such cuts).

The response from one of Mr. Ensor’s entourage was that the message was heard “loud and clear.”

These folks up on the Third Floor may have heard the message.  They may acknowledge hearing the message.  However, that does not mean – nor should it be interpreted to mean – that they agree with the message, are happy to get the message or intend to conform their behavior to the message.

With these IBB types, it’s not what they say, it’s what they do.

We subscribe to the view alluded to in the letter from Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) that much of what the agency is up to in its so-called “consolidation” is an end-run around Congressional intent.  We see it as that and more: a power grab to obstruct Congressional intent and defeat the system of checks and balances between the Executive and Legislative branches of government.

And, if you pay attention to what Ensor remarked in follow-up, it is clear that the careerists are not backing off the potential for a reduction-in-force for FY2014.  We know these careerists very well.  They are determined to have it their way – at the expense of the agency’s mission and it’s employees.

Finally, Mr. Ensor made it plain that he supports the idea of a Chief Executive Officer (CEO).  As far as that manifestation of power-grabbing goes, here’s a thought:

To our point of view, EVERYONE on the Third Floor of the Cohen Building is tainted by the still-unfolding debacle they have perpetrated with their ironclad commitment to demolishing US international broadcasting with their “flim flam strategic plan.”  

For example, after numerous attempts to cut broadcasts to Tibet, do you really believe that these careerists believe in “supporting freedom and democracy” in Tibet?  We know they made a BIG production of saying so with Michael Meehan of the BBG front and center to make a statement of agency commitment to broadcasts to the Tibetan people.  However, with all respect to Governor Meehan, we look at the track record and that track record has required a substantial commitment of Tibetan activists to turn back repeated attempts by the BBG/IBB effort to silence VOA Tibetan broadcasts.  Without that commitment, supported by “Congressional intent,” those broadcasts to Tibet would be long gone.

The never-ending hypocrisy of the BBG/IBB.

The image you want to have in your mind’s eye is one we used previously: a bunch of North Korean generals.  Are the IBB functionaries your pals?  Is “We Can Work It Out” their mantra?

Forget it.

You have to watch every move they make.

Think about the global audiences that have wanted to put trust in VOA broadcasts only to see the agency cut broadcast frequencies, cut and/or eliminate broadcasts altogether.  Do you trust these guys who year after year threaten to cut or eliminate more broadcasts?

In addition to the trust issue comes another one: lack of reliability.  These bureaucrats, with their penchant for bonuses, have contributed mightily to losing the information war by making it plain that the United States is unreliable.  This adds a broader and much deeper issue: commitment.  Really, the only sense of commitment these guys have is to another round of bonuses.

Trust, reliability, commitment?

Save it for another day and someone else.

The BBG/IBB score big fat zeros on all three counts.

The Federalist
July 2012

A commentary by The Federalist

“During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.”
~ George Orwell

Tyranny – that great weakness within a bureaucracy and those who manage it.  And the Broadcasting Board of Governors and its International Broadcasting Bureau (BBG/IBB) are not immune to this disease.

This goes beyond the “culture of secrecy” referred to by Helle Dale of the Heritage Foundation in her recent blog post about the BBG/IBB – The BBG’s Culture of Secrecy.

Secrecy is a manifestation of something that goes far deeper into the organizational mindset of the agency’s senior bureaucrats.  And that’s when we start talking about how this bureaucracy goes about embracing tyranny and pursuing hostility toward its employees and others.

To all outward appearances, the goal of agency bureaucrats is to perpetuate their agenda, their status quo.  Interference with that agenda is viewed as a threat.  They will resist and lash out using any tactic they deem expedient to further their cause against anyone who has the audacity to challenge them and what they are doing.  These people have established failure as their gold standard.  They expect to be praised for it and rewarded for it (like a $10-thousand dollar bonus).  And they want to protect themselves from all forms of unwanted scrutiny.
Let’s try to connect the dots so that our readers get a better understanding of the situation.

This is an agency correctly labeled as “the worst organization in the Federal Government.”  That label was applied by Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) a couple of years ago.  It was true then.

It is much more the case now.

Senior agency officials have earned this label by their actions.  But what is more important is the actions demonstrate they are comfortable with being the creators and perpetuators of a hostile environment in pursuing an agenda set by themselves.

There are ways they go about it:

Most recently, the agency issued a memorandum dealing with the subject of “confidentiality,” or more to the point the penalties for breaching “confidentiality.”

The agency has become a fountain of information, much of which reflects badly upon it.  Senior officials of the agency want to stem the flow and control the dissemination of information – their form of domestic propaganda: the propagation of misinformation, disinformation and partial information to protect their interests.

In so many words, the memorandum was not issued as an advisory to employees to protect them against unintended violations.  It was intended as a threat, a big difference.  In issuing this memorandum, it is one more thing that further cements the agency’s deserved reputation for being “the worst organization in the Federal Government,” with a management philosophy fully committed to hostility toward its employees.

This would be consistent with another longstanding feature of the management culture of the IBB: its performance ranking in the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) employee survey.  The agency has consistently ranked at or near the bottom of this survey – each year and every year the survey has been conducted.

What does that tell you?  The answer is simple:

Agency officials want it that way – and they don’t care.  The results demonstrate what has become an intended outcome of the senior bureaucracy: the establishment of a climate of fear, retaliation and retribution and an institutionalized negative leadership model: these officials seek to accrete power as a means of maximizing control and retaliating against threats to their agenda.  Since they don’t care what happens to agency employees, they don’t care about the results of the survey – a fair straightforward conclusion one can draw from the results.

Here’s another example”

The Obama administration – much like the Clinton administration – has established a labor-management process in which agency officials and employees are supposed to meet, discuss and resolve issues.

Is that what is being accomplished at this agency?

No way – particularly with the big issues impacting on agency employees brought about by the IBB attempt to consolidate US international broadcasting.

The largest of the agency’s unions, Local 1812 of the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), has withdrawn from these meetings – and rightly so.  Why?  As we have discussed previously, these meetings are a testament to “motion without movement.”  The agency representatives are not empowered to reach agreements on key, critical issues.  They are there to extract concessions or engage in endless discussion of minutiae, such as the creation of a “wellness room.”  They are not there to share crucial information.  In our view, it is like sitting across the table from a group of North Korean generals.  They are not there to be your pals.  If you know that and you understand the management strategy and objectives, it’s time to move in a different direction and engage in more productive activities and counter-strategies elsewhere.

The same applies to contract negotiations with AFGE.  The agency has used this process as a weapon – a punitive process, dragged out over many months – with the seeming intention of not resolving issues but rather to extract concessions from the union that would have an adverse impact on the employees the union represents.

Agency officials conducting these meetings have no authority to do anything other than that.  Any deviation from the script must be approved by senior agency officials – and that isn’t coming.  The Third Floor is quite content with pursuing its hostile work environment agenda and philosophy.  They consider it “normal.”  Thus, “normal” equates with hostile.

Keep in mind that the agency’s “flim flam strategic plan” has as an intended outcome the elimination or substantial reduction of 14 of 43 Voice of America (VOA) language services and roughly 200 employee positions in FY2013, as the IBB moves to eliminate direct radio broadcasts.  This is not the time to be sitting around a table doing kumbaya with the agency.  Along with this objective is the goal to de-Federalize the agency’s workforce.  If that happens, American taxpayers need to know right now, right up front, that your last line of defense against the excesses, waste and mismanagement tendencies of “the worst organization in the Federal Government” will be gone and your tax dollars wasted – in part on those big bonuses the IBB bureaucrats like to hand out to themselves.

Senior agency management is not in the business of fixing problems.  They create problems.  The exacerbate problems.  They compound problems.  They can’t and they won’t back off because to do so would be an acknowledgement of their failings and responsibility for problems.  They are moving full speed ahead toward the abyss – the complete destruction of the agency’s mission and effectiveness.

Let’s ask a question:

Do you think these senior agency officials believe in transparency?

No way.

To be certain, the bureaucrats will pay lip service to transparency as a concept, perhaps; but in their day-today-running of the agency, it is one of the furthest things from their minds; hence, another reason for issuing the “confidentiality” memorandum, reinforcing the real agenda.

Remember what we said – these guys want a one-way monologue about what they are doing – or more correctly, they want you to think they are doing great and wonderful things, which they are not.  Their strategic plan is pretty much a bust.  It has been overtaken and surpassed by events – particularly by the Russians, the Chinese and – those pesky Iranians.

That’s because their “strategic plan” is the strategy for losing the information war with the Big Three above and with the world in general.

This leads to the question of: where is the Broadcasting Board of Governors in all this?

That’s a really good question.

To outward appearances, as a group, the political appointees to the Board seem to have taken a pass on reining in the excesses of the careerists on the IBB who are running “the worst organization in the Federal Government.”  At the very least, as a group, they aren’t seemingly exercising oversight and accountability in any effective way.  They should be and the absence of that particular aspect of LEADERSHIP is felt every day.

In this scenario, we can see agency officials refusing requests for information from members of the Board.  We can imagine scenarios in which senior officials instruct other agency officials – or contractors – not to provide information requested by Board members as part of the regular course of their business in managing the agency.

Perhaps what we “imagine” may have already crossed into reality.

This is all part of a scenario for insubordinate behavior – the kind of thing that could get someone removed from the Federal Service for cause.  And if this is what’s happening – and the careerists aren’t being called on it – makes it part of the larger problem beyond the “culture of secrecy,” trademark behavior of a pattern of IBB arrogance and defiance.

It follows that a question that should be asked is: secrecy to what purpose and to what end?

Believe me – it has nothing to do with national security.  That is an IBB-created myth.

The next question that develops from these scenarios is: just how bad are things inside this agency that senior staff would even possibly consider such behavior?

That’s another good question.

Want another one?  What is being protected or hidden from scrutiny?

Of late, it appears that certain members of Congress have had just about enough of the antics inside the Cohen Building.  We consider a recent letter from Congressman Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) to the BBG in which he made particular note of the BBG being “tone deaf to Congressional priorities.”

And there is also the letter from Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren (D-CA) who notes that the BBG/IBB attempt to consolidate the grantee broadcasters of US international broadcasting to be contrary to Congressional intent.

This is getting close to the heart of the matter.

Seen in this context, the reorganization looks more like a power grab by the IBB and a whole lot less as an action to improve efficiency.  In essence, the IBB would seek to nullify the effects of checks and balances between the executive and legislative branches of government.  To be certain, the IBB wants the Congress to be as an extension of the American taxpayer – an ATM machine to hand over money to run its fantasyland operation inside the Cohen Building.  But the really important objective is the absolute absence of serious congressional oversight as to the latest scheming to cloak the clear and obvious destruction of effective US international broadcasting.

Members of Congress are right to cut through the babble from the IBB hucksters and call them out on the mess they have created and seek to perpetuate.

Finally, a word for the employees caught up in this unending fiasco:

Your participation in the annual employee survey is important.  What the agency is counting on is employees giving up.  Participation in this year’s survey – around 48% – is testing the lows of participation.  You can’t do that and expect the pressure to be maintained on the characters who are running things.  You cannot turn over employee discussion of what is wrong with the place to shills, sycophants and misguided do-gooders who desperately want to believe that there mere act of talking to these people is going to build up good will.  It isn’t.  You’re up against an agenda.  Remember what we said – it’s like sitting across the table from a group of North Korean generals.  What can you possibly have in common with these people?  Their priorities are entirely different from that of the employees.

And you can best believe that they think of themselves first – ahead of any employee, ahead of any negative consequences to any employee, ahead of the agency’s mission and ahead of their responsibilities to the American taxpayers and their elected representatives.

Give in or give up and you lose, when you are dealing with these people.

Don’t do that.

Agency officials don’t have that in their game book and neither should you.

Take a page from those pesky Iranians when it comes to news and information: trust no one beyond a certain point and question everything.

And remember – the agency’s problems are on a long list of national problems.  The country has gotten itself into a tight spot.  If you expect your problems to be addressed in some meaningful way, your first order of business is to turn up the volume and be heard.  Low participation in the survey doesn’t get it done, even if the results continue to be the same.  More participation equates with more attention – and makes it harder for senior agency officials to double-talk their way around it.

One last thing –

What this agency has become is an exercise in hypocrisy.

These senior officials claim that the agency acts “in support of freedom and democracy.”  Perhaps it does on the level of its line employees who believe in the mission – the same employees that these senior officials are trying to get rid of.

However, at the senior levels, this agency only deals in self-interest.  Their only interest “in support of freedom and democracy” is that it serves as a means to an end – those BIG bonuses that these guys like to hand out to themselves.

Whatever good is being done at the employee level is being nullified by the behavior at the senior levels of management.

Remember what these guys said: they want a new identity that is more corporate in nature.  What we see in the behavior of the senior management echelons is just that – the kind of corporate behavior that makes the agency look like the Enron of US international broadcasting and also as an insinuation of that kind of mentality into an agency of the Federal Government.

Is that a good thing?

Not by a long shot.

What is that line from a movie about Wall Street?  “Greed is good.”  This is the same kind of thing.  And adding to the “greed” (those bonuses again) come the oppressive, retaliatory and hostile policies toward the Federal and contractor workforces employed by the agency and others who get in the way of their self-interest-based agenda.

If you are looking for a true representation “in support of freedom and democracy” look elsewhere and not to the BBG/IBB.

The Federalist
July 2012

a commentary by The Federalist

VOA Director David Ensor

People concerned about what the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) and what its International Broadcasting Bureau (IBB) senior executive staff might do if the Smith-Mundt Act gets repealed may have gotten a taste earlier this year.

It’s a quote from David Ensor, the Voice of America (VOA) director, from the PBS “Newshour” program of February 10, 2012. Here it is, in part:

“We are a communications company, multimedia, on many platforms. We’re reaching out to various peoples around the world, and our mission is to report the news, yes, but also to explain America and American values to people around the world. What Jessica (Beinecke) is doing is going to be something that I think you’ll see more people doing here, which is reaching out to the younger generation in different countries and communicating with them.”

“We are a communications company…?”

No, Mr. Ensor, “we” are not. The Voice of America is still an agency of the United States Government funded by American taxpayers for a specific independent journalistic mission of providing uncensored news, explaining U.S. policies, offering diverse points of view on these policies, and being a window on American culture.

Period.

We don’t like the message we see conveyed in Mr. Ensor’s misrepresentation of the agency. It implies that the VOA director is unwilling to admit that VOA is a public institution that is part of the United States Government. As much as has been written about the agency he is the head of, this can’t be a mere lapse.

In a public airing (the PBS Newshour), anyone who cannot accurately and properly identify a Federal agency, anyone who would deliberately project a false identity to the agency, what it is and what it does, cannot properly or effectively serve the agency and its mission as codified under law.

Let us remember too that Mr. Ensor took an oath. That oath wasn’t to a “communications company.” It was to the United States of America. In the old days, an oath meant something; but maybe not anymore, at least as far as the officials inside the Cohen Building are concerned.

From one point of view, we do not need someone as VOA director who lacks the necessary commitment to the agency, its mission and its true identity. In that regard, we believe Mr. Ensor should resign and apply to be the BBG’s CEO, a position that the board wants to create to help de-federalize U.S. international broadcasting. We don’t expect that he will. Not yet.

But he should. And the Congress should either insist that the VOA Charter be protected, the CEO — if there should be one — nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate, or the Congress should let BBG members and their CEO run the whole enterprise as a private communications company, but on their own dime, not at U.S. taxpayers’ expense.

Next, let’s move on to the program material provided by Ms. Beinecke, the person identified in Mr. Ensor’s quote.

Ms. Beinecke does American idioms in Mandarin for a Chinese audience. No one doubts her exceptional talent, her appealing on-air personality or that she is very good at what she does — a real asset that BBG/IBB executives don’t know how to use. Included in the mix of short videos are what seem to be travelogues of Washington, DC monuments and memorials, along with some other sites. But, in general, lightweight stuff that is great to have to complement substantive programs as long as they still exist. With her talent, she could no doubt do much more.

However, what she is most remembered for is a program in which she explained to her audience the meanings of “booger, zits and snot.”

This kind of material is perfectly suited to a juvenile audience and the bodily humor that audience enjoys. It would probably play well on a comedy channel or some other media oriented toward a similar audience.

Is it the best that BBG, IBB and VOA executives can do? Should it be the only thing Voice of America does after news radio and television broadcasts to China are eliminated, as BBG/IBB senior executive staffers want to do.

No. Not by a long shot.

One can – and should – question the value of presenting crude slang to a foreign audience and how it meets the measurement of “to explain America and American values to people around the world,” as Mr. Ensor put it.

One of the favorite rubrics the purveyors of the IBB “flim flam strategic plan” would often pull out to justify its goals was to say that its programs were aimed at “societal elites.”

So, for all you societal elites out there: boogers, zits and snot!

So much for that.

When one considers all the historians, authors, academicians, scientists, teachers – people whose views on the American Experience really matter and are a natural draw for worldwide audiences – instead, the BBG/IBB gives them:

Boogers, zits and snot!

Literally.

Real “American values,” as Mr. Ensor would put it.

Someone effusively claimed that Ms. Beinecke is an “ambassador of American culture.” One would think that Ms. Beinecke is capable of doing much more than what she’s encouraged to do now and would like to be remembered as someone of more substance than:

Boogers, zits and snot!

Perhaps in the dummied down world of the BBG/IBB this is the “best” of American culture that the senior agency “brain trust” can offer.

These programs may produce a good laugh. However, in a hierarchical society that respects age, wisdom and intellect, they are not likely to have great meaning and ultimately are a dead end. No doubt, the Chinese government can ignore them and not have much to worry about. On the other hand, it’s the substantive programming that the Chinese watch or listen to very closely – anything that presents substantive discussion of American governance, policy, economics, history, science, arts and literature.

And it is the substantive programming and live news that the BBG/IBB has targeted for elimination and the Chinese people are hearing or seeing less and less of it with each passing day.

This agency has fallen off a precipice. It is a deep fall, far from the best days of Willis Conover, readings by Alexander Solzhenitsyn, or programs for the Polish shipbuilders in Gdansk during the Cold War.

But there’s even a darker side to all this, the primary issue of this commentary.

Let’s bring into the picture the attempt to repeal the Smith-Mundt Act as considered in some recent legislation still out there to supplement the appropriation/authorization process for the agency FY2013 budget.

Mr. Ensor’s comments are most revealing in this regard as well.

What end is served to identify the agency as a “communications company” on the PBS “Newshour” program, primarily viewed by an American audience?

In its effect, Mr. Ensor’s comment deceives the American people as to the true nature of the agency of which he is its most senior official. The American people are entitled to know exactly who Mr. Ensor works for. He works for us – the American people. His salary is paid for by the American taxpayer who thinks that VOA is helping to overcome news censorship in countries like China. This agency has a charter under which it is supposed to operate. No mention of that either. And nowhere in that charter does it say that the Voice of America is a “communications company.”

IF this is an intentional misrepresentation, it’s pretty bad. Really bad.

This puts the entire issue of repealing the Smith-Mundt Act front and center. It speaks to the kinds of things that people vigorously object to in the repeal legislation. It speaks to an overt attempt by the agency to sell itself in a way that is false and misleading; in effect, a form of domestic propaganda.

Look at it this way –

One of the things certain governments do – Iran being one – is to portray this agency as a front for the Central Intelligence Agency. So here you have it – the head of the agency misrepresenting its identity to the American people! One would imagine that the Iranians – among others – are having a big time with this one. This is the kind of thing that facilitates the agency’s loss of credibility with its global audiences and marginalizes its effectiveness. The purveyors of the agency’s “flim flam strategic plan” are not taking the high road. They are doing that “corporate” thing agency bureaucrats fancy themselves being – sort of like being the Enron corporatists of US international broadcasting. On its face, they’re playing a con game on the American people.

No one on the Third Floor of the Cohen Building seems to think about the consequences of the nonsense they utter. And they probably don’t care because most BBG members are not holding them accountable. They must do it so often among themselves that they forget it comes across as the jabberwocky that “Quo Vadis” wrote about in another BBG Watch commentary.

It seems fairly evident that senior officials of this agency are preparing themselves to be domestic propagandists – shilling a self-serving image of themselves that doesn’t hold up in reality.

Mr. Ensor got off on the right foot when he arrived at the agency.

In this instance, he found a pothole – one of his own making or perhaps made for him by the BBG/IBB.

The Federalist
June 2012

a commentary by The Federalist

VOA Director David Ensor

People concerned about what the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) and what its International Broadcasting Bureau (IBB) senior executive staff might do if the Smith-Mundt Act gets repealed may have gotten a taste earlier this year.

It’s a quote from David Ensor, the Voice of America (VOA) director, from the PBS “Newshour” program of February 10, 2012. Here it is, in part:

“We are a communications company, multimedia, on many platforms. We’re reaching out to various peoples around the world, and our mission is to report the news, yes, but also to explain America and American values to people around the world. What Jessica (Beinecke) is doing is going to be something that I think you’ll see more people doing here, which is reaching out to the younger generation in different countries and communicating with them.”

“We are a communications company…?”

No, Mr. Ensor, “we” are not. The Voice of America is still an agency of the United States Government funded by American taxpayers for a specific independent journalistic mission of providing uncensored news, explaining U.S. policies, offering diverse points of view on these policies, and being a window on American culture.

Period.

We don’t like the message we see conveyed in Mr. Ensor’s misrepresentation of the agency. It implies that the VOA director is unwilling to admit that VOA is a public institution that is part of the United States Government. As much as has been written about the agency he is the head of, this can’t be a mere lapse.

In a public airing (the PBS Newshour), anyone who cannot accurately and properly identify a Federal agency, anyone who would deliberately project a false identity to the agency, what it is and what it does, cannot properly or effectively serve the agency and its mission as codified under law.

Let us remember too that Mr. Ensor took an oath. That oath wasn’t to a “communications company.” It was to the United States of America. In the old days, an oath meant something; but maybe not anymore, at least as far as the officials inside the Cohen Building are concerned.

From one point of view, we do not need someone as VOA director who lacks the necessary commitment to the agency, its mission and its true identity. In that regard, we believe Mr. Ensor should resign and apply to be the BBG’s CEO, a position that the board wants to create to help de-federalize U.S. international broadcasting. We don’t expect that he will. Not yet.

But he should. And the Congress should either insist that the VOA Charter be protected, the CEO — if there should be one — nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate, or the Congress should let BBG members and their CEO run the whole enterprise as a private communications company, but on their own dime, not at U.S. taxpayers’ expense.

Next, let’s move on to the program material provided by Ms. Beinecke, the person identified in Mr. Ensor’s quote.

Ms. Beinecke does American idioms in Mandarin for a Chinese audience. No one doubts her exceptional talent, her appealing on-air personality or that she is very good at what she does — a real asset that BBG/IBB executives don’t know how to use. Included in the mix of short videos are what seem to be travelogues of Washington, DC monuments and memorials, along with some other sites. But, in general, lightweight stuff that is great to have to complement substantive programs as long as they still exist. With her talent, she could no doubt do much more.

However, what she is most remembered for is a program in which she explained to her audience the meanings of “booger, zits and snot.”

This kind of material is perfectly suited to a juvenile audience and the bodily humor that audience enjoys. It would probably play well on a comedy channel or some other media oriented toward a similar audience.

Is it the best that BBG, IBB and VOA executives can do? Should it be the only thing Voice of America does after news radio and television broadcasts to China are eliminated, as BBG/IBB senior executive staffers want to do.

No. Not by a long shot.

One can – and should – question the value of presenting crude slang to a foreign audience and how it meets the measurement of “to explain America and American values to people around the world,” as Mr. Ensor put it.

One of the favorite rubrics the purveyors of the IBB “flim flam strategic plan” would often pull out to justify its goals was to say that its programs were aimed at “societal elites.”

So, for all you societal elites out there: boogers, zits and snot!

So much for that.

When one considers all the historians, authors, academicians, scientists, teachers – people whose views on the American Experience really matter and are a natural draw for worldwide audiences – instead, the BBG/IBB gives them:

Boogers, zits and snot!

Literally.

Real “American values,” as Mr. Ensor would put it.

Someone effusively claimed that Ms. Beinecke is an “ambassador of American culture.” One would think that Ms. Beinecke is capable of doing much more than what she’s encouraged to do now and would like to be remembered as someone of more substance than:

Boogers, zits and snot!

Perhaps in the dummied down world of the BBG/IBB this is the “best” of American culture that the senior agency “brain trust” can offer.

These programs may produce a good laugh. However, in a hierarchical society that respects age, wisdom and intellect, they are not likely to have great meaning and ultimately are a dead end. No doubt, the Chinese government can ignore them and not have much to worry about. On the other hand, it’s the substantive programming that the Chinese watch or listen to very closely – anything that presents substantive discussion of American governance, policy, economics, history, science, arts and literature.

And it is the substantive programming and live news that the BBG/IBB has targeted for elimination and the Chinese people are hearing or seeing less and less of it with each passing day.

This agency has fallen off a precipice. It is a deep fall, far from the best days of Willis Conover, readings by Alexander Solzhenitsyn, or programs for the Polish shipbuilders in Gdansk during the Cold War.

But there’s even a darker side to all this, the primary issue of this commentary.

Let’s bring into the picture the attempt to repeal the Smith-Mundt Act as considered in some recent legislation still out there to supplement the appropriation/authorization process for the agency FY2013 budget.

Mr. Ensor’s comments are most revealing in this regard as well.

What end is served to identify the agency as a “communications company” on the PBS “Newshour” program, primarily viewed by an American audience?

In its effect, Mr. Ensor’s comment deceives the American people as to the true nature of the agency of which he is its most senior official. The American people are entitled to know exactly who Mr. Ensor works for. He works for us – the American people. His salary is paid for by the American taxpayer who thinks that VOA is helping to overcome news censorship in countries like China. This agency has a charter under which it is supposed to operate. No mention of that either. And nowhere in that charter does it say that the Voice of America is a “communications company.”

IF this is an intentional misrepresentation, it’s pretty bad. Really bad.

This puts the entire issue of repealing the Smith-Mundt Act front and center. It speaks to the kinds of things that people vigorously object to in the repeal legislation. It speaks to an overt attempt by the agency to sell itself in a way that is false and misleading; in effect, a form of domestic propaganda.

Look at it this way –

One of the things certain governments do – Iran being one – is to portray this agency as a front for the Central Intelligence Agency. So here you have it – the head of the agency misrepresenting its identity to the American people! One would imagine that the Iranians – among others – are having a big time with this one. This is the kind of thing that facilitates the agency’s loss of credibility with its global audiences and marginalizes its effectiveness. The purveyors of the agency’s “flim flam strategic plan” are not taking the high road. They are doing that “corporate” thing agency bureaucrats fancy themselves being – sort of like being the Enron corporatists of US international broadcasting. On its face, they’re playing a con game on the American people.

No one on the Third Floor of the Cohen Building seems to think about the consequences of the nonsense they utter. And they probably don’t care because most BBG members are not holding them accountable. They must do it so often among themselves that they forget it comes across as the jabberwocky that “Quo Vadis” wrote about in another BBG Watch commentary.

It seems fairly evident that senior officials of this agency are preparing themselves to be domestic propagandists – shilling a self-serving image of themselves that doesn’t hold up in reality.

Mr. Ensor got off on the right foot when he arrived at the agency.

In this instance, he found a pothole – one of his own making or perhaps made for him by the BBG/IBB.

The Federalist
June 2012