Pity those of us who monitor the ups and downs of China’s popular microblog platform, Sina Weibo. For every story its users spread in defiance of local censorship, there follows a clampdown.

Whether it’s the latest strike against rumors, or real name registration, or newly banned keywords, there’s always another restriction in the works as the service struggles to keep a lid on sensitive conversations without driving away its user base. “China tightens grip on social media,” we might report, as the Financial Times did in April. And last October. (The U.K.-based newspaper also noted China’s grip tightening on lawyers in March.) It’s not that these headlines are misleading. They simply show how difficult it is to illustrate the grip that always tightens, but never quite suffocates.

View post:
Blog: Chinese microblog regulates, suspends users–again

News of blind legal activist Chen Guangcheng has been censored for months. International news reports of his escape last week from incarceration in his home in Linyi, Shandong–apparently to U.S. protection, although his whereabouts remain unclear–has only intensified that censorship. That is unlikely to stop discussion among those familiar with Chen’s case.

Visit link:
Blog: Blind lawyer spurs news blackout in China

Voice of America: Tibetan sources say a mother of four has died after setting herself on fire to protest government policies in Tibetan areas of China

Radio Free Asia: Two Female Tibetans Burn to Death

While National Public Radio reports that Buddhist monks in Tibet listen secretly to Voice of America (VOA) Tibetan shortwave radio broadcasts every night, the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) has announced recently that it plans to end these broadcasts. “Tibet and China are crucial target audiences for BBG news and information content. But where there are two BBG broadcasters in the same language, we must seek economies,” a BBG spokeswoman said. Anything less, she said, would be irresponsible in a time of tight federal budgets. She did not address the issue of the constantly growing BBG bureaucracy, hiring new highly paid BBG officials, their $10,000 bonuses, and a new multi-year $50,000,000 contract with the Gallup Organization to conduct audience research in countries like China where getting accurate audience data is close to impossible because of fear of government repression.

This is how BBG spokeswoman Ms. Letitia King explained the plan to end VOA radio broadcasts in Tibetan:

“Under the FY 2013 budget request, Radio Free Asia would continue its service to Tibet in three dialects via shortwave and satellite audio while the Voice of America would focus on satellite TV and drop radio broadcasts in Tibetan. As part of this media redistribution, RFA would assume VOA’s prime radio transmission hours, ensuring that the people of Tibet continue to have access to U.S. international broadcast news. This decision was informed by field research showing that Tibetan audiences more often access VOA’s news and information via television rather than radio”

Edite Lynch who comments on this decision by the BBG lives in Canada. Her parents were refugees from totalitarianism.

Broadcasting Board of Governors Needs Sensitivity Training on Tibet

by Edite Lynch

The Broadcasting Board of Governors’ (BBG) plan to end Voice of America (VOA) radio news broadcasts in Tibetan to Tibet is an extremely worrying prospect that will affect everyone who lives there. The Chinese regime wants to commit a cultural genocide in Tibet and slowly rid Tibet of its language, faith and culture. They want create a Chinese enclave. This is a horrifying vision of what can happen to Tibet and its leader, the Dalai Lama.

The members that compose the group called the BBG seem unwilling to listen to many voices reaching out to them to let them know how greatly the basic human rights of Tibetans are being violated.

The members of the Broadcasting Board of Governors require a sensitivity training that would outline for them in very graphic terms exactly what will happen to Tibet and its people, as well as to many millions of others, whose hope for any kind of future at all lies with the American model of democracy, its human rights, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of the press, and freedom of assembly.

It is incredibly incomprehensible that persons who serve on the BBG should present themselves as the exact opposite of what people around the world who live under dictatorships want from America.
Victims of oppression cannot comprehend or accept the false budget restraints on the very issues that give rise to their hope, light and humanity.

The lady who self-immolated herself did not do this to act to be a martyr to a cause and leave her four children to be raised by strangers or God-willing by relatives.

Despair is a powerful reason why human beings self-immolate.

They see no hope, no future for themselves or their children. Has any member or family member or extended family, even a friend of any of these Board members ever been victims of genocide, experienced loss of all and any human rights, even a right to life itself?

Their actions, and their disinterest in the very real issues of truncating the VOA to anywhere where it is vitally needed are extremely worrisome. It is not something that should be undertaken without the most seriousness of thought. These actions are not based on any knowledge of what the end result will be. There is no consideration in these decisions for the humanity of those who will suffer their consequences.

To pretend and actually put forth a claim that the internet is a good alternative is in direct contrast to what every smart government agency knows. The internet is unwieldy and not a reliable tool for broadcasting anything that won’t be subject to local censorship, blocking, cyber crime and hacking by host countries who do not want American news and culture to be heard and thus depriving the people of what they should in all honesty be able to access if they so desire.

Considering the number of decades devoted by America and Americans to the Voice of America, Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty, and learning about how important an asset these radio broadcasts were and continue to be, should play a very large part in any decision making process for the BBG.

It is not humane to deprive of something so essential people who exist and live in far worse conditions than any of us.

So why then, would a Potemkin type illusion be put forth in this instance? Why declare that all of this foolishness is money driven, which in reality is not true.

It is being driven by political machinations, which in and of itself is downright deceitful and not worthy of American justice and liberty.

Justice and liberty is what the American flag has represented to millions around the world and now without a shred of logic or comprehension, this Board, this BBG, wants to decimate and annihilate something that has worked successfully for decades and helped millions.

Shame on the BBG and those who are inciting their actions.

Almost every weekday morning, the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) sends out “BBG in the Media,” a digest of news and commentaries about U.S. international broadcasting, also referred to as “Media Highlights.” But as in the Soviet newspaper Pravda, some U.S. and international stories just don’t make it into the BBG Media Highlights. They can be classified as “bad propaganda” and as such they must be banned, just as Soviet Pravda ignored any news story that did not meet the Party’s standard of what was “good news” about the USSR and “bad news” about the capitalist world.

For example, the National Public Radio (NPR) reported yesterday that “The [Buddhist] monks [in Tibet] listen secretly to Voice of America’s Tibetan service news every night, despite feeling almost physical pain at the bleak news.” “Protests, Self-Immolation Signs Of A Desperate Tibet,” by NPR’s Louisa Lim.

Good news for VOA? Not really.

You might think that the Broadcasting Board of Governors would highlight this NPR report about the effectiveness and the need for the VOA Tibetan radio broadcasts in Tibet, perhaps even issue a special press release. But you would be wrong.

The BBG has proposed in its FY2013 budget to eliminate Voice of America Tibetan radio programs. Calling attention to the desperate need for these VOA radio broadcasts among Tibetan Buddhist monks and other Tibetans would not be good public relations for this mismanaged federal agency.

The NPR story from Tibet did not make it into the BBG Media Highlights. BBG has gone Pravda, and it’s not the first time. And it’s not just the BBG. In Pravda-like approach to journalism, the Voice of America English website ignored a story about a fake interview with a Russian opposition figure posted by the VOA’s own Russian Service.

But why ignore a story about Voice of America’s success in Tibet? Perhaps images of Tibetan monks hovering around a radio and listening secretly to VOA reminded slick BBG bureaucrats too much of the Cold War. They want everyone to think that U.S. international broadcasting is about modern technology and straightforward reporting using new media for iPhone using consumers. Tibetan monks don’t fall into this category. Any associations with the Cold War and radio broadcasts are “bad news.” Anything that contradicts BBG executives’ thinking and decisions is “bad propaganda.”

Some propaganda, however, merits inclusion into the BBG Media Highlights. It helps if it’s propaganda not of American origin and includes attacks on America, such as those by Putin supporters in Russia or a North Korean tourist guide spewing Pyongyang’s propaganda claims. Then it is not really propaganda, it is a necessary part of “balanced reporting.” Since VOA was criticizing Mr. Putin’s old employer, the KGB, for years and years during the Cold War, it’s time to give the other side a chance to respond.

When a top level Voice of America manager, became impressed a few months ago with a VOA video report from North Korea, he insisted on issuing a BBG/VOA press release. The report consisted mostly of North Korean propaganda, but he thought it was cool to have a VOA reporter in Pyongyang, so it was highlighted by the PR team. The Tibetan Buddhist monks apparently did not meet the standards of what passes at the BBG for “good propaganda.”

Another story that did not make it into the BBG Media Highlights was PRI’s The World report by Mary Kay Magistad “Growing Rift Between Hong Kong and Mainland China” over the use of the Cantonese language. Why? The Broadcasting Board of Governors has proposed in its FY2013 budget to eliminate the Voice of America Cantonese Service. Again, one should not call attention to the fact that both Chinese communist regime officials, and the Obama Administration acting through the BBG, are undermining the Cantonese language and the young people’s movement in Southern China to defend their local culture and democracy.

Yet another report that did not make it into the BBG Media Highlights was RadioWorld story “CUSIB ‘Outraged’ at BBG Budget Proposal.” RadioWorld reported that the nongovernmental Committee for U.S. International Broadcasting was outraged by the Broadcasting Board of Governors’ Budget for FY2013 that proposes to cut and reduce Voice of America English and foreign language programs and positions, as well as programs and positions at Radio Free Asia (RFA) and at other U.S. government-funded international broadcasting entities managed by the BBG.

The BBG Media Highlights also ignored Ted Lipien’s op-eds in The Washington Times, “VOA Harms Putin Opposition in Russia,” and The Washington Examiner, “US Taxpayers Funding Pro-Putin Programs.” They could not ignore, however, an NPR report, “Russian Accuses Voice of America Of Fake Interview,” because it included statements from VOA director David Ensor.

Even during the Soviet times, Politburo and Central Committee members would receive a secretly-prepared digest with real news from the West, including transcripts of reports by Radio Liberty, Voice of America, and BBC. One would hope that in addition to preparing their “BBG in the Media” digest for the less sophisticated general public, the BBG Public Relations Office also provides presidentially-appointed BBG members with a politburo-type secret media digest that includes not just “good news” but also “bad news.” That may not be the case, however, considering the Board’s decision to cancel VOA Tibetan radio programs. BBG members apparently did not know about media reports of a protest by Tibetan Buddhist monks on Capitol Hill in 2007 that forced BBG bureaucrats to drop their earlier plan to reduce radio broadcasts to Tibet.

If BBG executives can put out a press release about a North Korean propaganda video, they should be able to put out a press release about Tibetan Buddhist monks listening secretly to VOA radio. We dare them to do it and then explain to Congress why they want to shut down the VOA Tibetan Radio Service. Perhaps Lynne Weil, the newly-hired Director of Communications and External Affairs who has extensive experience on Capitol Hill and with the State Department’s public diplomacy outreach, can explain to BBG members how to turn a Pravda-like public relations strategy of the current BBG management team into something that might actually work.

Here is another old Soviet-era joke for you that went something like this: Every morning a man would pick up a copy of Pravda at a newspaper stand, look at the front page and then throw the paper with disgust into a trash can. Intrigued by this unusual behavior, the newspaper stand seller asked the man, “Why do you buy Pravda just to glance at the front page and throw it away without even opening it.” “I’m only interested in the front page news,” replied the man. “I’m looking out for a death notice.” “But death notices are not on the front page,” said the seller. “I assure you, the death notice I’m looking for will be on the front page,” answered the man.

Perhaps a perestroika in the ranks of the Broadcasting Board of Governors executives and managers is in order.

New York, February 16, 2012–The Committee to Protect Journalists is deeply saddened by the death of New York Times foreign correspondent Anthony Shadid, a towering figure in international crisis reporting. Shadid perished following an apparent asthma attack while on assignment in Syria.

Continued here:
CPJ mourns the death of journalist Anthony Shadid

The Russian blogosphere erupted with comments today following an announcement
that the board of directors of the iconic radio station, Ekho Moskvy, will be changed. The timing of the development–weeks before presidential elections–and the potential consequences for Ekho’s editorial policy threw listeners into a frenzy of worry and speculation.

Original post:
Blog: Ekho Moskvy board shuffled ahead of Russian election

Follow this link:
Kazakhstan – Make rights key to good relations, says Human Rights Watch

Read more:
Kazakhstan – Twenty-nine IFEX members call for release of independent newspaper editor

Continued here:
Russia – Office of opposition newspaper destroyed in firebomb attack

Read more:
Russia – Independent newspaper suspends publication in response to pressure

New York, January 13, 2012–The Committee to Protect Journalists condemns Thursday’s attack in Moscow on Dododzhon Atovulloyev, exiled publisher and editor-in-chief of the Tajik pro-opposition newspaper Charogi Ruz.

The rest is here:
In Russia, unknown attacker stabs exiled Tajik journalist

Cute High School Intern

Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) officials have gotten so used to running their small federal agency like their own private country club that they still frequently forget that at least some of their meetings can now be viewed online.

While the video from the last BBG meeting was streamed live, the on demand link to the video has not worked since then.

Last Friday, the American public got a taste of the new corporate culture emerging at the agency in charge of U.S. international broadcasting even prior to the implementation of the current restructuring plan to remove the BBG as much as possible from the government and public sphere.

While the American people might not begrudge a little bit of humor in public meetings, because of its history of discrimination against various groups of employees, the BBG is not exactly the place where joking about young women seems appropriate.

At the BBG meeting on Janurary 13, Radio and TV Marti which broadcast to Cuba and are managed by the BBG, showed a short video of their recent broadcasting achievements. The video was narrated by a young female intern.

After the presentation of the video, which apparently impressed everyone in the room, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty President Steven Korn said that he was planning to hire a cute high school intern to narrate his organization’s next promotional video. People laughed.

While the remark at the BBG meeting was greeted by most in the room as funny, some of those present, perhaps including BBG Chairman Walter Isaacson himself, might have felt just a little bit uncomfortable. Recently hired BBG officials, many of whom happen to be former CNN employees, are known to be prone to making socially awkward comments. We’re not talking here about Isaacson and VOA director David Ensor. But some of the others are apparently not as familiar with the etiquette of working for a public institution.

Old White Guys

As we have reported earlier, one top BBG official wrote not too long ago about “old white guys” in discussing his personnel decisions. BBG Watch sources identified the person as a former CNN associate of Chairman Isaacson. Anonymous sources also told us that some BBG members wanted to have the official fired but the majority decided to let him stay after first reversing some of his personnel actions and reaffirming their commitment to opposing discrimination.

BBG Watch wonders who it might have been.

First Amendment at the Broadcasting Board of Governors

In light of our disclosures of this and other scandals, it’s not surprising that some BBG members and members of their executive staff don’t like BBG Watch.

We have received a credible report that a presidentially-appointed member of the Broadcasting Board of Governors has urged other BBG members to take an unspecified action against BBG Watch for publishing anonymous posts and comments which this member found highly objectionable. Our sources did not report on the nature of the action sought by the BBG member.

There are also no reports that BBG Chairman Walter Isaacson or any other BBG member responded positively to this request. Our sources tell us that the BBG member was particularly incensed that BBG Watch has anonymous sources within the agency. Credible sources told us that this particular BBG member called us “cowards.” (Or was it Prime Minister Putin speaking about his political opponents in Russia? We’re not absolutely sure.)

Another source speculated that some BBG members can be more easily influenced than others by BBG bureaucrats who want to create panic to divert attention from their own mistakes.

Anonymous Speech

We take very seriously any report that a high level U.S. Government official questions the right of free speech, including anonymous speech, or any implication that our media activities may be countered by government action. We have already taken additional measures to protect the BBG Watch website, including creating mirror sites.

We also want to assure all our readers and contributors that we will not be intimidated and plan to continue our investigative reporting and commentary in the same manner as before.

The irony of a Broadcasting Board of Governors member questioning the right of using anonymous sources and anonymous speech to expose bad judgement mismanagement on the part of U.S. government officials is that the BBG’s stated mission is “to inform, engage and connect people around the world in support of freedom and democracy.”

The BBG website also states that U.S. international broadcasting serves “as a trustworthy source of news and as an example of a free, professional press in countries that lack independent media.”

The BBG website also states that “BBG broadcasters engage with audiences and promote dialogue through interactive programs and social networking.”

Questioning the First Amendment protections of free speech would not be good public diplomacy for an agency that is still part of the U.S. foreign policy establishment and is also a journalistic institution.

This particular BBG member perhaps also does not realize that much of the social media content on the BBG websites is in fact anonymous and the BBG has no idea who originates most of the comments. The BBG is in fact engaging in promoting anonymous criticism of autocratic foreign governments by investing heavily in Internet censorship circumvention technologies. In fact, the U.S. Congress gave the BBG $10 million for the project to enable anonymous Internet users overcome cyber censorship in countries like China.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation points out that “anonymous communications have an important place in our political and social discourse. The Supreme Court has ruled repeatedly that the right to anonymous free speech is protected by the First Amendment.” A much-cited 1995 Supreme Court ruling in McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission reads:

Protections for anonymous speech are vital to democratic discourse. Allowing dissenters to shield their identities frees them to express critical minority views . . . Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority. . . . It thus exemplifies the purpose behind the Bill of Rights and of the First Amendment in particular: to protect unpopular individuals from retaliation . . . at the hand of an intolerant society.

Culture of Fear versus Transparency

BBG Watch anonymous contributors do not particularly like using anonymous sources, but reporting from and about a federal agency where top officials freely use phrases such as “old white guys,” “cute high school interns,” and “cowards,” leaves little room for maneuver. We are satisfied that BBG Watch reporting has already produced important reforms at the BBG.

We are also pleased that BBG Chairman Isaacson and senior Republican member Victor Ashe are supportive of greater transparency within the BBG as exemplified by their efforts to expand public access to BBG meetings. We hope that other BBG members will follow their example if they don’t already. But the culture of fear at the BBG is still extremely strong despite Governor Ashe’s efforts to improve employee morale.

About BBG Watch

BBG Watch is an independent website run by former and current BBG employees and other volunteers. It is sponsored by Free Media Online, a media freedom nonprofit NGO registered as a 501(c)3 public institution. BBG Watch reporting has contributed to a number of reforms at the BBG and saving jobs of journalists specializing in human rights reporting.

We have criticized the BBG decision to end Voice of America broadcasting to China, which was subsequently blocked through bipartisan action in Congress. We have also reported on discrimination against foreign journalists at the BBG-managed Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and exploitation of Voice of America contract employees, including long delays in the payment of their salaries. After our reports were published, some of the contractors received their long-delayed payments.

Last week, President Obama signed into law a bill that expands sanctions against Belarus, whose authoritarian leader Aleksandr Lukashenko continues to imprison his opponents and critics. Lukashenko unleashed the latest crackdown hours after the flawed December 2010 presidential vote, which declared him winner of a fourth term. Repression in Belarus is ongoing. Last week, authorities further tightened their grip on the media by restricting access to blacklisted websites. On Monday, a district court in Minsk jailed an independent reporter for filming a one-man protest vigil in front of the KGB headquarters.

See the article here:
Blog: What US can’t accept in Belarus, it supports in Uzbekistan

New York, December 23, 2011 — The Committee to Protect Journalists condemns China’s harsh sentencing of online journalist and activist Chen Wei, who was handed a nine-year prison term on Friday for “inciting
subversion.”

Excerpt from:
Chinese writer-dissident given nine years for online posts

Follow this link:
‘Old white guys’ – National Review links to BBG Watch discrimination and mismanagement story

In the next three months, users of China’s microblog weibo.com — “weibo” is the generic Chinese term for Twitter-like platforms — run by the huge sina.com (the English site is here) news portal, entertainment and blogging site, will have to start providing their real-world identities to the site, instead of simply being able to register. It seems likely the users of competitor tencent.com (English here) will have to do the same, though the government
hasn’t made that clear in recent announcements, dating back to December 16.

See the article here:
Blog: In China, real people vs. Internet minders

Women’s Rights Without Frontiers is a broad-based, international coalition that opposes forced abortion and sexual slavery in China. According to BBG Watch, an independent media freedom website, CUSIB supports radio and television broadcasting to China by the Voice of America (VOA) and radio broadcasting by Radio Free Asia (RFA) so that news such as this one are not blocked by the Chinese Internet censors and those in China who want to receive uncensored news do not risk being monitored by the cyber police.

“Batman” star Christian Bale traveled nine hours from Beijing to visit blind forced abortion opponent Chen Guangcheng. Bale said, “What I really wanted to do was shake the man’s hand and say ‘thank you,’ and tell him what an inspiration he is.”

Bale never got the chance. He was roughed up and forced away from Chen’s village, according to a CNN report.

Bale was in Beijing China for the premier of “The Flowers of War,” a drama about the 1937 Rape of Nanjing. About his attempt to visit Chen, Bale stated, “I’m not brave doing this . . . This was just a situation – I can’t look the other way.”

Congressman Chris Smith with CUSIB Advisory Board Member Reggie Littlejohn in front of a large image of Chen Guangcheng created to support the Chen Guangcheng Sunglasses Campaign to win his freedom

Littlejohn contrasted Bale’s actions with those of Relativity Media. “Christian Bale has used his star power to shine a light on the unjust treatment of Chen Guangcheng. In contrast, Relativity Media filmed “21 and Over” in Linyi, where Chen is languishing under house arrest. They did nothing to help Chen. I hope that moviegoers will demonstrate their concern for Chen Guangcheng at the box office. We encourage people to boycott “21 and Over,” said Reggie Littlejohn.

Christian Bale is not the only one who has focused attention on Chen Guangcheng. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and U.S. Ambassador to China Gary Locke have both recently spoken on his behalf. “We urge Ambassador Locke to visit Chen Guangcheng,” stated Littlejohn.

The flow of Chinese citizens to visit Chen despite the risk of beatings and detention, and the Chinese and international “Sunglasses” campaigns, have raised the visibility of Chen’s case as well. These campaigns can be found here and here.

Chen Guangcheng exposed the systematic use of forced abortion and sterilization in Linyi City in 2005. For four years, three months, he was jailed, tortured and denied medical treatment. Since his release he has languished under strict house arrest.

Watch the 3-minute Free Chen video here.

Sign a petition to free Chen here.

Stop Forced Abortion – China’s War on Women! Video (4 mins)

The Committee for U.S. International Broadcasting (CUSIB) is an independent, nongovernmental organization which supports free flow of uncensored news from the United States to countries without free media. CUSIB supports Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) radio broadcasts to China as the only effective and safe way of news delivery that can defeat censorship of the Internet and the monitoring of pro-democracy activists by the Chinese secret police.

New York,
December 15, 2011–Today’s murder of Gadzhimurad Kamalov, founder of the independent newspaper Chernovik in the southern Russian republic of Dagestan today is a lethal blow to press freedom, said the Committee to Protect Journalists.

Here is the original post:
Killing of Chernovik founder in Dagestan must be investigated

Follow this link:
Ukraine – Former president must be prosecuted in Gongadze murder, says CPJ

See the rest here:
Russia – Global journalists’ community joins IFJ to mark memorial day for dead colleagues

Link to the video of the Chairman of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, congratulating the Voice of America (VOA) on the 70th anniversary of VOA broadcasting to China

On Dec. 6, 2011, Congressman Dana Rohrabacher hosted a large reception on Capitol Hill to mark the 70th anniversary of VOA broadcasting to China. He had earlier introduced an amendment that saved VOA radio and TV programs to China. Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen also attended the reception as did Congressman Chris Smith, also a strong supporter of VOA and an outspoken critic of human rights abuses by the Chinese communist regime. Ros-Lehtinen, Rohrabacher, and Smith thanked VOA China Branch employees for their work.

No current BBG member attended the reception, although all of them had been invited. A former Republican BBG member, Blanquita Cullum, who had published an op-ed in The Washington Times critical of the decision to end VOA broadcasts to China, spoke at the reception about the importance of VOA radio for the victims of human rights abuses in nations governed by dictatorial and authoritarian regimes and for those who experience severe economic hardships and political upheavals.

Sources have told BBG Watch that BBG’s Republican member Ambassador Victor Ashe was planning to attend the Capitol Hill reception but was travelling to Greenville, North Carolina, to visit the BBG radio transmitting station, which BBG executives and some of the other BBG members want to close down as part of their plan to privatize the Voice of America and Radio and TV Marti and to merge Radio Free Asia (RFA), Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL), Radio Sawa and Alhurra TV into a large corporate bureaucracy.

Critics point out that this large bureaucracy would still be funded by American taxpayers but run by some of the current BBG executives with less oversight from Congress and less independence for the so-called “surrogate broadcasters” such as RFA and RFE/RL than under the current arrangement. VOA and Radio and TV Marti would lose their semi-official status, which is feared by authoritarian regimes such as the one in Cuba, but would also continue to be funded by American taxpayers.

Ashe was quoted as saying that his trip to Greenville was very productive and that the transmitting facility is performing a “valuable service.” BBG executives had tried to discourage him from going on this trip. The executive staff had advised BBG Chairman Walter Isaacson, a former CNN executive and author of the best selling biography of Steve Jobs, that Congress would not object to the plan to end VOA broadcasting to China. BBG members seem now split on the wisdom of the advice they have been getting from their staffers.

Ambassador Ashe has been lately critical of BBG plans to reduce VOA radio and television broadcasting to countries without free media. He has been meeting also with groups of employees and raising employee morale issues.

Sources also told BBG Watch that Michael Meehan, one of BBG’s Democratic members, was also planning to attend the reception. The BBG was represented by Jeff Trimble, the Deputy Director of the International Broadcasting Bureau (IBB), who — according to BBG Watch sources — had earlier advised BBG members to end VOA radio and TV transmissions to China, as well as to Russia in 2008. VOA broadcasts to Russia were terminated and never resumed. Sources also told BBG Watch that VOA Director David Ensor was travelling abroad and could not attend the Capitol Hill reception. Neither VOA nor BBG has issued a press release to mark the 70th anniversary of broadcasting to China or to highlight the unprecedented expression of support for VOA Chinese radio and TV programs from the Chairman of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs and other members of Congress.

Visit link:
Chairman of House Committee on Foreign Affairs says Chinese people need Voice of America broadcasts

If it were not for Congressman Rohrabacher and other members of Congress, both Republicans and Democrats, VOA would not be able to celebrate this anniversary. The Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG), the federal agency which manages VOA, wanted to terminate all VOA radio and television broadcasts in Mandarin and Cantonese as of October 1, 2011, which happened to be the anniversary of the founding of communist China. On this year’s Valentine’s Day, BBG managers informed 45 VOA China Branch journalists and broadcasters, most of whom specialize in human rights reporting, that their programs and their jobs would be eliminated. This announcement caused an outrage among human rights activists, free media advocates, and members of Congress. An amendment to save VOA broadcasts to China, introduced by Congressman Rohrabacher, received broad bipartisan support and blocked BBG from implementing its plan. Both Democrats and Republicans criticized the bipartisan members of the BBG for lacking transparency and for exercising poor judgement.

BBG members, who are both new and inexperienced and work only part time, followed the advice of their executive staff and were surprised by the strength of the opposition to their plan. Some BBG members are now beginning to question the wisdom of another plan, also developed by the BBG executive staff, that proposes to merge Radio Free Asia (RFA), Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL), and Alhurra Television and Radio Sawa into a large corporate entity. BBG officials also proposed to de-federalize and privatize Voice of America and Radio and TV Marti. Under the chairmanship of Walter Isaacson, a former CNN executive and author of the best selling biography of Steve Jobs, several top BBG positions have already been filled by former CNN employees, one of who bragged in an email to a BBG member about displacing “old white guys,” sources say.

These plans are likely to encounter strong opposition in Congress. Critics claim that the proposal would destroy the traditional dual arrangement of the Voice of America and the surrogate broadcasters having different roles and missions. This arrangement, supported by Congress and numerous U.S. administrations, has been very successful due to the independence and specialization of the surrogate broadcasters and the semi-official status of the Voice of America. Centralization and privatization being proposed by the BBG executive staff would undermine both elements on which the effectiveness of U.S. international broadcasting depends and would create a huge, costly, and unaccountable corporate bureaucracy, critics charge.

Members of the BBG were invited to the Tuesday reception on Capitol Hill despite their earlier vote to end VOA radio and TV programs to China.

As these BBG bureaucrats undermine critical programs, weaken U.S. public diplomacy media outreach abroad and eliminate American jobs, they collect large salaries and pay themselves hefty bonuses. BBG official claim that countries like Croatia, a NATO member, do not need U.S. information programs provided by VOA, but they have also tried to cut or reduce such programs to countries ruled by authoritarian regimes, including Russia and China.

BBG Watch wants to thank one of our supporters who provided us with information how American taxpayers can easily check on the salaries and bonuses of BBG officials.

Link to salaries of federal employees, including BBG officials.

“If you go to the website datauniverse.com, then to Federal Employees in the Public Payroll section, then to the Broadcasting Board of Governors, you can see the salary of every employee and, more importantly, if they received bonuses. Nearly every manager on the 3rd floor (that is where most BBG executive offices are located in Washington, D.C.) received a large cash award for FY2010. Seriously, some of these guys make $170,000 a year and then take a 10-thousand dollar bonus! It is shameful.”

BBG executives close down Voice of America broadcasting services, pay themselves hefty bonuses

The Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) executives, who have closed down the Voice of America (VOA) Croatian radio, TV, and Internet broadcasting service the day before Thanksgiving, have paid themselves tens of thousands of dollars in bonuses over the last two years and are expected to receive more such payouts this year. The BBG has also asked OPM for approval to hire a public relations guru at a salary of about $150,000. The BBG already has a well-staffed public and Congressional relations department.

BBG Watch has also learned that one of the main architects of the closures of foreign language broadcasting services at VOA is to receive soon a $10,000 pay raise. He is a member of the team of executives responsible for an unprecedented bipartisan rebuke to the BBG in the U.S. Congress. Congressional committees blocked the plan to terminate VOA radio and TV broadcasts to China and charged that the BBG lacks good judgement and transparency.

But the Voice of America’s Croatian Service, which did not receive similar attention in Congress, signed for the last time Wednesday, after 19 years of broadcast history that began during the bloody breakup of the former Yugoslavia. Rather than to keep broadcasting to Croatia even at a reduced level to serve U.S. public diplomacy needs, BBG officials closed down the service. VOA Director David Ensor is new to his job and may not yet fully realize that this latest move is part of a strategy of undermining Voice of America’s special role as a news and public diplomacy channel for the United States. One of the BBG’s earliest moves after the 9/11 terror attacks was to eliminate all Voice of America programs in Arabic.

While VOA has each year fewer and fewer broadcasts to be managed, not a single highly-paid VOA or BBG manager has been asked to leave or to take a pay cut. Instead, their numbers keep growing with the money for their salaries and bonuses generated by cutting essential programs and eliminating broadcasting positions within the organization.

A VOA press release states that “VOA Croatian’s five-minute TV NewsFlash was broadcast daily on eight affiliate stations and focused on American news of relevance to Croatian audiences, including business, science, American culture, and politics. The popular Breakfast Show, a roundup of US, Croatian and world news, aired on radio for 19 years, without a single day of interruption. An evening radio show aired on shortwave and ten affiliate FM stations in Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina.”

Executives who ordered the termination of VOA radio and TV broadcasts to China and Croatia have been rated in government-wide employee surveys among the worst managers in the federal workforce. They chose Valentine’s Day to inform VOA Chinese language service journalists that 45 of them will lose their jobs and picked the day before Thanksgiving to close down the Croatian service. They are well known for their holiday surprises for Voice of America employees

Called “VOA Silencers” for trying to fire 45 VOA journalists specializing in human rights reporting at the time of intensified Chinese government crackdown of freedom of expression, BBG executives are likely to collect yet another round of bonuses on top of their large salaries. One of the chief policy planners, who is paid over $150,000 a year, will be getting a $10,000 on top of $2,500 bonus received in FY2010. However, due partly to the fiasco in Congress over the China proposal, he is rumored to be asked to essentially do nothing but to collect his salary. Another official received $160,000 in salary and a $7,500 bonus in FY2010. A marketing specialist made over $165,000 and received an $7,500 bonus. Their boss, whose salary in FY2010 was $170,000, received a $10,000 bonus in addition to all the usual generous benefits that come with federal employment, including subsidized health insurance, vacation, and retirement.

The same officials are denying basic employment benefits to full time contract employees who now constitute 45 percent of VOA workforce. Because some of these executives switch jobs between the BBG, which is a federal agency, and private broadcasting 501(c)3 entities managed by the BBG, some collect hundreds of thousands of dollars each year in combined salary and retirement benefits, all paid for by U.S. taxpayers.

At the time when the U.S. economy is struggling, millions of Americans are unemployed, and millions more could only wish to be making even a small portion of what the Broadcasting Board of Governors executives are making, these officials have been eliminating American jobs and giving money to Internet companies that outsource their work overseas. They are also signing contracts with foreign advertising agencies in countries like Russia to help drive visitors to their websites while firing broadcast journalists and engineers employees by the BBG in the United States. They are planning to shut down the BBG Transmitting Station in Greenville, North Carolina, and to put dozens of Americans out of work at this and at other broadcasting facilities and units.

BBG officials have also signed a contract with the giant consulting firm Deloitte, potentially worth $1.3 million. The contract is designed to give a blessing for their strategic plan, which they had already gotten BBG members to approve. It includes $150,000 in travel expenses. They also want to privatize the Voice of America and Radio and TV Marti. This action would put them in charge of yet another bureaucracy which would operate with fewer government restrictions and less oversight from Congress. Radio and TV Marti broadcast news to Cuba. The Cuban regime would welcome their privatization as a sign of the Obama Administration’s diminished support for democracy in Cuba.

BBG executives’ more immediate plan is to eliminate some of the journalistic and administrative independence that made U.S. government-funded stations like Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty successful in delivering highly-targeted news and defending human rights abroad. The merger plan would create a large corporate bureaucracy that would manage the BBG’s surrogate broadcasters: Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Radio Free Asia, Alhurra TV, and Radio Sawa. A top-ranking BBG official referred to some of the architects of RFE/RL’s surrogate radio operations as “old white guys” and wished for their quick departure.

Some of the members serving on the bipartisan Board, however, have begun to question the advice they are getting from the BBG executive staff. A senior Republican member, Ambassador Victor Ashe, expressed his opposition to extravagant spending by BBG bureaucrats while critical broadcasting operations are being eliminated or reduced and employees are denied basic benefits. During open BBG meetings, he received some support from a Democratic member Michael Meehan. Ashe announced that he plans to visit the Greenville transmitting station despite the objections of BBG officials who want to close it down.

BBG Chairman and former CNN executive Walter Isaacson, who was busy writing a biography of Steve Jobs, has allowed BBG bureaucrats to run the show without much supervision from the part-time Board. They developed a strategic plan to reflect Isaacson’s vision of privatizing the BBG and turning it into a CNN-like news agency. Critics say that the centralization of news gathering proposed under this plan would destroy the independence and the human rights focus of surrogate broadcasters like RFE/RL and Radio Free Asia (RFA).

Critics also say that privatization of the Voice of America and Radio and TV Marti would destroy their effectiveness as authoritative voices of the American government and the American people. American taxpayers would still have to pay for this new NPR-like structure, since the BBG staff wants to ask Congress to repeal the Smith-Mundt Act’s restrictions on the domestic distribution of BBG programs while still relying entirely for funding on Congressional appropriations. This is likely to cost U.S. taxpayers even more money than the current arrangement. Critics say that the BBG plan will weaken overseas broadcasts in support of democracy and human rights which are considered one of the essential non-military contributions to the war on terror and to countering anti-American propaganda.

###

VOA/BBG Press Release:

VOA Ends Croatian Broadcasts

Washington, D.C., November 23, 2011 — Voice of America’s Croatian Service signs off for the last time Wednesday, after 19 years of broadcast history that began during the bloody breakup of the former Yugoslavia, and ends with Croatia’s emergence as a democratic member of the European community.

VOA Director David Ensor called the service “a model of journalistic integrity that provided the people of Croatia with fair and impartial news during the dark days of civil war in the Balkans.” Ensor commended the service, which he said, “served as a vital source of independent reporting and insight into American policy.”

Voice of America established its Croatian Language Service on February 20, 1992, a time when the most brutal war since World War II was raging in the Balkans. Spun off from the former Yugoslav Service which had been broadcasting to the area since 1943, VOA Croatian broadcasts began on radio, but were quickly expanded into television. The service was one of VOA’s first to establish an online presence.

VOA Croatian’s five-minute TV NewsFlash was broadcast daily on eight affiliate stations and focused on American news of relevance to Croatian audiences, including business, science, American culture, and politics. The popular Breakfast Show, a roundup of US, Croatian and world news, aired on radio for 19 years, without a single day of interruption. An evening radio show aired on shortwave and ten affiliate FM stations in Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina.

In addition to news coverage, VOA Croatian served as a source of entertainment and cultural programming for more than a decade. Nearly 700 episodes of Saturday’s American Cultural Magazine were aired, with stories on leading entertainers, from blues guitar legend B.B. King, to Los Lobos, the Grammy-winning Los Angeles band that performed in Zagreb in 2010.

VOA Croatian Service Chief Zorz Crmaric called going off the air a “bittersweet moment” that comes as the country begins a new chapter in European integration. He noted Croatia is now a NATO member and is scheduled to join the European Union in 2013.

Follow this link to read the original article:
BBG executives close down Voice of America broadcasting services, pay themselves hefty bonuses

“If VOA constitutes communications essential to national security, privatization may not be feasible,” – Deloitte

“If VOA constitutes communications essential to national security, privatization may not be feasible,” is a conclusion of a consolidation study done by Deloitte, but the consulting firm recommends a quick action on the BBG plan to merge grantee broadcasters. Free Media Online has obtained a copy of the Grantee Consolidation Assessment done for the Broadcasting Board of Governors by Deloitte. It was announced at today’s BBG open meeting that the report will be posted on the BBG Strategy website. The report makes references to “language duplication” between VOA and the Grantees, which implies that there are no differences in mission between VOA and the Grantees. If VOA and the Grantees have different missions, then “language duplication” is a non-issue. If they have the same mission — which evidently they do not — then the logical step would be to combine VOA and the Grantees. Deloitte, however, did discover that VOA broadcasts may have a national security and foreign policy mission and is advocating a further study of the BBG’s de-Federalization proposal.

Here are some of the main elements of the report:

Key Findings:

Today RFE/RL, RFA and MBN are three separate private 501(c)(3) organizations with combined resources of approximately $240 million and approximately 2,000 full time employees and contractors. All have a common mission to act as a surrogate media outlet in countries that do not have an open media environment; additionally, unlike RFE/RL and RFA, MBN is charged with providing context about America, its people, and policies.

Aside from Arabic services to Iraq, there is no overlap in language services among the Grantees, or in bureau locations. With just a merger of the Grantees, there is no potential to eliminate duplication of language services beyond that already planned. A combined entity framework can set the foundation for achieving substantial synergies with respect to the large overlap with VOA language services, which is unanimously supported by all Grantee Presidents.

There are several potential benefits of a merger of the three grantee corporations:

- It would serve as a first step in the execution of the Board’s Strategic Plan that calls for consolidating and streamlining management and administrative infrastructure. A merger would create a single grantee management team which would facilitate
coordination with the BBG in pursuit of its strategic objectives.

- It creates more financial transparency and demonstrates to stakeholders that BBG leadership is committed to allocating resources as efficiently as possible and eliminating waste – potentially garnering support and trust.

- It creates an enforceable structure for more formalized content sharing, advancing the Board’s strategy to harness original reporting from across the language services to create a global news service with rich programming.

- It creates resource savings over time with the elimination of duplicative administrative and technical infrastructures and pooled purchasing power (e.g., for equipment, services, and insurance). This is a key benefit in our current economic environment.

- Positive reaction from Congress if new services, technologies and broadcast medium can be achieved without an increase to the top line.

- Annual run rate savings of $9M, or about 10% can be achieved on approximately $90M of addressable spend which is approximately 38% of the aggregate Grantee budget.

Savings could expand to nearly $14M annually with aggressive facilities consolidation.

Risks of integrating the Grantee corporations include:

- Possible negative reaction from Congress if a merger of the Grantees impedes the flow of content to audiences.

- Uncertain result of merging a partially unionized workforce with non-unionized staff.

- A potentially broader impact of digital and physical security threats in a merged environment if not mitigated.

- Potential disruption to current foreign business licenses and relationships in host countries.

Over five years, the cumulative net savings from merging the Grantee organizations is estimated to be approximately $30M to $40M. There are cumulative savings of $35M to $50M available with one-time costs of $8M to $12M. The savings result from a small headcount reduction of approximately 45-50 resources, plus non-headcount savings related to sourcing efficiencies, and facilities and technology infrastructure consolidation. Longer term, there are opportunities for additional headcount reduction if facilities are more aggressively consolidated.

Conclusions:

Deloitte believes that the merging of the Grantees does have merit, and does make sense strategically and economically. We heard in numerous discussions with leaders across the Grantees that current structure is a product of the evolution of the Agency, is not ideal, and would not be the logical approach if one were starting fresh. We agree with that perspective. The current siloed structure is not an optimal foundation for the new strategic direction envisioned by the Board.

From an operational perspective, we see no roadblocks that cannot be overcome. The vast majority (around 75%) of the resources of the Grantees are devoted to content and programming, so their day to day roles will not change. Merging the administrative processes, policies, and supporting systems will be no more complicated here than in any other merger of a similar scale.

In the current economic environment, continuing to operate three separate organizations with redundant executive management teams, administrative infrastructures, audits, etc. seems to be an
inefficient use of taxpayer resources. The potential annual savings of $9M to $14M could be redeployed toward journalistic initiatives that advance the Board strategic vision.

As with any merger there are risks associated with the potential decline in employee morale. These can be mitigated by swift decision-making and a strong change management program.

Delaying a decision about the path forward will create uncertainty which can dampen employee morale. In addition, delays will stall the advancement of the Board’s strategic plan and cause the organization to miss out on significant potential savings.

Recommendations and Next Steps:

We recommend that the Board approve the merger of the Grantees, and proceed with the design of the new organization and the implementation planning. Based on a typical merger timeframe of about 6 months from a decision, we believe that the Board should target a “Day 1” in July 2012.

To pursue the larger savings available by reducing duplication of language services, as noted earlier and broadly supported by Grantee leadership, we recommend commencing a study on the feasibility, benefits and costs of VOA/OCB de-federalization, reportable at the Board’s March 2012 meeting to explore 3 items:

1. The “quick hit” opportunities available from partially integrating some VOA/OCB operations into the Grantee structure without de-federalization. The objective of this study would be to identify initiatives that could be implemented in parallel with the Day
1 of the Grantee merger in July 2012.

2. The next tranche of opportunities that would become feasible in FY13 without de-federalization.

3. The feasibility of VOA/OCB de-federalization, including benefits, risks, and financial implications.

Key Principles:

There were several key principles that were consistently articulated throughout the visioning discussions with the Grantees. These are things that all believed should be the ‘guard rails’ of any potential integration.

There should be no change in the journalistic mission of the organizations – the current markets and audiences should continue to be served with the content appropriate for them.

The existing market-facing brands should remain intact as they are critical to success. The relationship between the brands and the grantee entity is different across the three organizations. For MBN, the brands (Alhurra, Radio Sawa, Afia Darfur) are the externally known identities, while for Radio Free Asia the brand and the organization are one in the same across its market. RFE/RL has individual brands by service that will be critical to maintain.

The new organization should maintain an entrepreneurial spirit and ability to remain nimble; avoiding bureaucracy.

Risks:

There are five primary potential risks that were identified from discussions with the Grantees.

Congressional reaction:

There is uncertainty as to reaction from Congress. The proposed merger has positive actions in doing more with less, but has the potential to disrupt content if not managed carefully.

Cultural differences:

The three organizations have cultural differences. MBN is a primarily a television focused entity and produces content in a single language , Arabic. RFE/RL and RFA are primarily radio entities (though expanding into other media) and produce content in many languages. Because RFA is much smaller in employee count and budget, it sees itself as a more tightly knit community than the others. It also operates with the least sophisticated resources of the three (e.g. production facilities, technical resources). Bringing together the cultures of these three organizations will require a focused change management effort. Mergers bring uncertainty and change, so there is a possibility that employee morale could suffer resulting in an increased risk of employee turnover. Decision-making delays can exacerbate this situation; employees who are uncertain of the path forward and their role (or lack thereof) in the new organization may be more likely to seek other opportunities.

Unions:

A significant portion of RFA’s workforce is unionized, while RFE/RL has 8 unionized employees and MBN has no unions. A deliberate plan is required to ensure that all parties’ interests are represented in the planning.

Security:

Because of the nature of their work, each organization comes under threat (both physical and digital). Today, when one organization is attacked, the others are unaffected. If the organizations are combined, a threat could affect the scope of the entire operation. For example, if systems are combined and there is a digital attack inspired by RFA’s content, programming and employees in the Middle East and Europe could be affected as well. That said, there are mitigation strategies that could be employed to address this risk.

Staff Reductions:

Management Staff Reductions – Grantee consolidation could eliminate an estimated 13-14 high-level management staff positions, including two Presidents, several VPs and other management support roles. These savings could begin to be as soon as the new leadership structure is executed, and fully realized in the first full fiscal year after merging.

Finance/Admin Staff Reductions – Grantee consolidation could eliminate an estimated 14-15 finance/admin staff positions, including finance management, accounting, and procurement personnel. These savings could begin to be as soon as the new finance organization structure is executed, and fully realized in the first full fiscal year after merging.

HR Staff Reductions – Grantee consolidation is not estimated to reduce overall headcount for HR in the near term, however would likely result in a different mix of positions required -eliminating for example two Director Roles, but increasing the staff at various locations should no facility changes be assumed. The consolidation is likely to require job roles and benefits plans to be redefined and broadly, and HR policy will need to be revisited. If facilities consolidation occurs, there may be an opportunity to reduce 1-2 HR positions.

Facilities Staff Reductions – Real estate consolidation could yield approximately 3-5 facilities staff headcount reductions. In the near term for example, savings would result from offices in the Washington, DC metro area being consolidated. These savings could be realized quickly if existing space is subleased and facilities consolidation begins upon execution of the merger. If facilities consolidation is delayed until the nearest term leases expire, savings will begin to be realized in FY14 and fully realized in FY15.

Communications – Grantee consolidation could eliminate 2-3 communications positions. These savings could begin to be as soon as the new communications organization structure is executed, and fully realized in the first full fiscal year after merging.

Technology Staff Reductions – Grantee consolidation could eliminate an estimated 13 technology staff positions . These savings could begin to be realized as soon as the new technology organization structure is executed, and fully realized in the first full fiscal year after merging. The location/facilities strategy will affect the degree of opportunity in this area. On-site technical resources are required in facilities where production takes place and where there are significant groups of users. Because of the 24×7 nature of some of the operations, shifts are also required which increases overall staffing needs. With fewer locations, it may be possible to streamline the technical staff by up to 25 resources.

Costs to Achieve Staff Reductions – Estimated costs to achieve the identified headcount reduction savings is approximately $2.1M to $2.8M in severance costs. The timing of the severance costs will depend on the execution date of the merger and how aggressively the organization chooses to reduce headcount.

Observations on De-federalization of VOA/OCB and on TSI

VOA, OCB, and BBG/IBB make up approximately $500M (about 66%) of the overall spend on US International Broadcasting, or more than double the spend of the Grantee organizations combined. A full view of synergies opportunities across US International Broadcasting cannot be understood until these organizations are reviewed as well.

Throughout the assessment period, several themes emerged from the discussion regarding VOA, OCB and BBG/IBB:

While there are almost no content overlaps among the Grantees, there are significant overlaps with VOA. The Grantees believe that magnitude of the synergies available by addressing this overlap is greater than the benefits to be gained by just integrating the three Grantees.

All senior Grantee leadership indicated that the merger of the Grantees had merit if VOA was included due to the potential savings resulting from elimination of language service duplication.

It is unclear whether de-federalizing VOA is actually feasible or even desirable. Additional work is required to determine the pros and cons, and financial impact. Issues that must be included in the study are:

Potential loss of major backers:

BBG funding is for a Voice of America that could be perceived as a governmental, rather than an NGO function.

National security:

If VOA constitutes communications essential to national security,
privatization may not be feasible.

In the near term, there are opportunities to find efficiencies with VOA, such as co-location to reduce costs. These opportunities are being addressed on an ad hoc basis.

The Grantees have an interest in taking on some of the distribution functions of TSI, especially if TSI is considering outsourcing them to a 3rd party. The Grantees would like to have the opportunity to ‘bid’ on this work before it goes to a 3rd party as they believe they can offer more cost effective solutions. They also would prefer to have great control over the distribution function to ensure their market needs are met.

There is question of whether the TSI backbone transmission infrastructure could be more efficiently operated by a grantee, rather than federal, organization. A reversal of the client/provider relationship between the federal and non-federal organizations could be explored in terms of efficiencies.

Our regular contributor, The Federalist, also makes other points on the BBG’s audience size announcement.

US International Broadcasting and the BBG: The Numbers Game
by The Federalist

In its press release of November 15, 2011 the BBG claims an audience increase of 22 million to a projected total of 187 million people, based on its “audience data.”

Here is a short primer on “the numbers game.”

Everything starts with the questions asked in the survey. The BBG does not provide a breakdown of the questions asked in the press release or in its “research methodology.” This is important because no one can examine how the BBG collates the responses.

Typically, survey questions will provide a range of questions. Within that range will be responses that would collectively be categorized as positive and perhaps one or two responses that would be categorized as negative. Depending on the intended outcome that the BBG wants to demonstrate, one method used could be to lump all the positives together, particularly if collectively they represent a positive aggregate response.

Everyone inside the Cohen Building knows that surveys are an inexact process. This is especially the case when conducting surveys in authoritarian or controlled societies. A lot also has to do with how the survey is conducted, often over the telephone. If people live in a controlled society, the prudent thing to do is to be judicious in how one responds to anonymous surveys. Thus, depending on how things are going in the target area, the responses could be more or less of an accurate representation of respondent habits.

One would also need to know where surveys were conducted: were they concentrated in major urban population centers or did they include respondents in the interior regions of the countries surveyed?

All this being said, let us work with the numbers the BBG provides.

If the BBG numbers are accurate, an audience of 187 million people is not to be taken lightly (for reasons we will get to below).

At the same time, one needs to look at the big picture in the world of numbers. For example:

The total global population is put at about 7 billion.

Of that number, an estimated 2 billion are at the subsistence level.

In China, latest estimates place the population at over 1.3 billion.

In short, 187 million can get lost in the cacophony of the 7 billion.

Next, one should examine the statements made in the press release in support of its survey findings.

“…in Egypt, where Alhurra TV doubled its weekly audience to 15% in tandem with the Arab Spring…”

The question here is how does this compare to other broadcasters, including the regional leader, al-Jazeera TV? The BBG press release doesn’t say. This is a key point. If the BBG audience is fractionally less than that of al-Jazeera, public opinion has moved away from that projected by the United States. Further, in our view, the so-called “Arab Spring” is over. This number could be artificially inflated by momentary events.

Also, the BBG doesn’t say how Alhurra TV fares in the region as a whole. That would be important to see if Alhurra TV is making inroads elsewhere. Since the BBG press release is silent on the point, we can presume that it is not.

“Audience declines took place notably in Iran, where the government continues aggressive jamming of every BBG transmission platform, including satellite uplink jamming;”

Those pesky Iranians. They continue to prove themselves adept at interdiction technology.

But beyond that, another question is how much of the audience loss may be due more to lack of interest than as much to government counter-measures? Keep in mind that the BBG claims that its Farsi-language “Parazit” is widely popular in Iran. One would think that if this were indeed true, it would be reflected in its survey results. Coupled with other agency research on Iran, what may be more the case is that the programs no longer have resonance with an Iranian audience. Further, one must also consider the internal conflict with the Persian News Network (PNN) which some writers allege has become a toady for the regime in Tehran.

Also keep in mind that PNN, largely television based, represents a substantial budgetary “gas guzzler” for the BBG.

We’re saving the best for last.

“While radio remains the BBG’s number one media platform, reaching 106 million people per week, television’s growth puts it 97 million people. The Internet audience was approximately 10 million, with the largest online audiences measured in Iraq, Russia, Indonesia, Egypt and Iran.”

Bingo!

There’s no “while” about it. Radio is still king.

But most important of all is this:

Even if you take the BBG numbers at face value, when you examine them in the context of the BBG “strategic plan,” you can clearly see its disaster in the making.

If you eliminate radio broadcasting, as it is the clear intent of the BBG strategic plan, you lose over half of your audience. That 187 million becomes 81 million.

The television component is no bargain. It is the most expensive production and delivery broadcast medium, requiring more people, more production time, satellite time and fees, etc. In terms of cost, it is the least sustainable of the media choices available to the BBG. Plus, one should keep in mind, as the BBG press release points out, it is vulnerable to interdiction, both in terms of blocking satellite channels and in terms of downlink requirements at the receiving end. While people use satellite dishes around the world, the fact remains that certain regimes periodically confiscate private satellite dishes, in part just because they can. Also, in those places where the BBG relies upon placement on television stations (they are not really affiliates in the same use of the word here in the US), these stations often walk a fine line with the sitting governments. Put something on the air that someone doesn’t like and good-bye BBG programs or risk the loss of one’s license and even invite some jail time if the regime is offended enough.

Last but definitely not least, its global Internet audience is tagged at 10 million. If the BBG carries through with its plans to use the Internet as its sole platform for audio, video and text, it will have the equivalent of no audience.

About 70 years into US international broadcasting, how long will it take the BBG to move its Internet audience to a size approximating its current radio audience, particularly when one notes the ability of third parties to engage effectively in cyber warfare and/or, as in the case with China, to have well-established controls to block websites the government deems as undesirable. It is complete fiction to believe that the BBG will have at its command an impenetrable cyber defense against these attacks.

And there is another thing. The BBG has to pay to be posted to search engines. Lose the search engines and there goes the recognition and access.

“Audience declines took place notably in Iran, where the government continues aggressive jamming of every BBG transmission platform, including satellite uplink jamming; and Pakistan, where the media market is increasingly fragmented and use of radio is declining.”

This statement may not be truly representative of the situational reality. The truth of the matter is that all global media markets are increasingly fragmented. This is a significant issue when one considers the BBG claim that its intended outcome is to be “the leading global news network.”

With specific regard to Pakistan, audience loss may have more to do with over-heated anti-American sentiment and a whole lot less to do with the assertion that “use of radio is declining.” It is well known that the Taliban make considerable use of radio in the border areas between Pakistan and Afghanistan. It is well known that the Pakistanis have become increasingly uneasy with unilateral US military actions within this territory. All of these things may have a whole lot more to do with the decline in the BBG’s audience in Pakistan.

Saying that “use of radio is declining” in Pakistan also seemingly contradicts the BBG effort with its “Radio Deewa” and “Radio Aap ki Dunyaa” projects in the region.

Let’s go back to the numbers:

The BBG is laying claim that the intended goal of its “new” strategic plan is to become the world’s leading global news network. What does that mean? How much of that 7 billion in total world population puts the BBG in the hunt to validate that claim? Hovering around 200 million according to its claimed global audience numbers, it’s a long haul to reach anything approximating a reasonable suggestion that the BBG is a “leading global news network.”

And keep in mind that if the BBG carries out its intended destruction of US Government international radio broadcasting, its audience gets cut by more than half. All of those people aren’t going to run to the Internet. That lesson was learned in Russia, contrary to the outrageous claims by the BBG of Russian audience increases. The BBG’s own research showed that its audience in Russia fell off a cliff when it ended its direct VOA Russian radio broadcasts in 2008.

The BBG has set a deadline of 2016 (its Soviet-style five-year plan) to reach its intended goals. Those goals, based on the BBG’s own numbers, would actually represent a substantially diminished audience with the loss of radio broadcasting. VOA director David Ensor essentially reiterated those goals in a recent C-SPAN television interview.

How does this intended outcome benefit the United States? How does this intended outcome represent a judicious use of US taxpayer money? Unfortunately, to all appearances the answer is” it doesn’t.

In the end, audience size aside, it all comes down to effectiveness. The BBG already a sizable “global news network” through its many and varied entities. And still, with all these assets, its penetration of global publics remains challenged.

One last thing: check the numbers of the press release:

106 million radio audience.
97 million television audience.
10 million Internet audience.

Total: 213 million.

That’s more than 187 million at the opening of the press release.

Well, we’ll give the BBG the difference. It’s still not enough to be “the leading global news network.”

Far from it.

The Federalist
November 16, 2011

###

From the BBG official website:

BBG Broadcasts Reach Record Audiences
(WASHINGTON, D.C.—November 15, 2011) U.S. government funded international broadcasters reached an estimated 187 million people every week in 2011, an increase of 22 million from last year’s figure, according to new audience data being made public by the Broadcasting Board of Governors.

“We are pleased that people the world over are responding in unprecedented numbers to our high-quality journalism and active audience engagement,” said BBG Chairman Walter Isaacson. “The ability of our broadcasters to inform, engage and connect audiences through traditional and social media alike lie behind these impressive results and will be essential to driving future audience reach and impact.”

The record numbers, released in the BBG Performance and Accountability Report (PAR), measure the combined audience of the Voice of America (VOA), Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL), Radio and TV Martí, Radio Free Asia (RFA) and the Middle East Broadcasting Networks (Alhurra TV and Radio Sawa). The report details impact on audiences around the globe including people in the world’s most repressive media and political environments.

The BBG’s PAR follows on the heels of BBG’s latest strategic plan, Impact through Innovation and Integration, which sets an over-arching objective of making BBG the world’s leading international news agency working to foster freedom and democracy with the goal of reaching 216 million people weekly by 2016.

This year there were significant audience increases in Afghanistan, where RFE/RL and VOA together reach 75% of adults weekly; in Egypt, where Alhurra TV doubled its weekly audience to 15% in tandem with the Arab Spring; and in Indonesia, where VOA’s aggressive affiliate strategy has boosted weekly audiences to some 38 million adults.

Audiences in many other strategically relevant countries held strong. In Nigeria, VOA retains its position as a news source of record with 23 million weekly listeners. In Burma, VOA and RFA reach 26% and 24% of adults, respectively, amounting to a weekly audience of 10 million.

Audience declines took place notably in Iran, where the government continues aggressive jamming of every BBG transmission platform, including satellite uplink jamming; and Pakistan, where the media market is increasingly fragmented and use of radio is declining.

While radio remains the BBG’s number one media platform, reaching 106 million people per week, television’s growth puts it at 97 million people. The Internet audience was approximately 10 million, with the largest online audiences measured in Iraq, Russia, Indonesia, Egypt and Iran.

Download 2011 Performance and Accountability Report (PDF)

BBG 2011 Audience Overview (PDF)

BBG Research Methodology (PDF)

Our regular contributor, The Federalist, also makes other points on the BBG’s audience size announcement.

US International Broadcasting and the BBG: The Numbers Game
by The Federalist

In its press release of November 15, 2011 the BBG claims an audience increase of 22 million to a projected total of 187 million people, based on its “audience data.”

Here is a short primer on “the numbers game.”

Everything starts with the questions asked in the survey. The BBG does not provide a breakdown of the questions asked in the press release or in its “research methodology.” This is important because no one can examine how the BBG collates the responses.

Typically, survey questions will provide a range of questions. Within that range will be responses that would collectively be categorized as positive and perhaps one or two responses that would be categorized as negative. Depending on the intended outcome that the BBG wants to demonstrate, one method used could be to lump all the positives together, particularly if collectively they represent a positive aggregate response.

Everyone inside the Cohen Building knows that surveys are an inexact process. This is especially the case when conducting surveys in authoritarian or controlled societies. A lot also has to do with how the survey is conducted, often over the telephone. If people live in a controlled society, the prudent thing to do is to be judicious in how one responds to anonymous surveys. Thus, depending on how things are going in the target area, the responses could be more or less of an accurate representation of respondent habits.

One would also need to know where surveys were conducted: were they concentrated in major urban population centers or did they include respondents in the interior regions of the countries surveyed?

All this being said, let us work with the numbers the BBG provides.

If the BBG numbers are accurate, an audience of 187 million people is not to be taken lightly (for reasons we will get to below).

At the same time, one needs to look at the big picture in the world of numbers. For example:

The total global population is put at about 7 billion.

Of that number, an estimated 2 billion are at the subsistence level.

In China, latest estimates place the population at over 1.3 billion.

In short, 187 million can get lost in the cacophony of the 7 billion.

Next, one should examine the statements made in the press release in support of its survey findings.

“…in Egypt, where Alhurra TV doubled its weekly audience to 15% in tandem with the Arab Spring…”

The question here is how does this compare to other broadcasters, including the regional leader, al-Jazeera TV? The BBG press release doesn’t say. This is a key point. If the BBG audience is fractionally less than that of al-Jazeera, public opinion has moved away from that projected by the United States. Further, in our view, the so-called “Arab Spring” is over. This number could be artificially inflated by momentary events.

Also, the BBG doesn’t say how Alhurra TV fares in the region as a whole. That would be important to see if Alhurra TV is making inroads elsewhere. Since the BBG press release is silent on the point, we can presume that it is not.

“Audience declines took place notably in Iran, where the government continues aggressive jamming of every BBG transmission platform, including satellite uplink jamming;”

Those pesky Iranians. They continue to prove themselves adept at interdiction technology.

But beyond that, another question is how much of the audience loss may be due more to lack of interest than as much to government counter-measures? Keep in mind that the BBG claims that its Farsi-language “Parazit” is widely popular in Iran. One would think that if this were indeed true, it would be reflected in its survey results. Coupled with other agency research on Iran, what may be more the case is that the programs no longer have resonance with an Iranian audience. Further, one must also consider the internal conflict with the Persian News Network (PNN) which some writers allege has become a toady for the regime in Tehran.

Also keep in mind that PNN, largely television based, represents a substantial budgetary “gas guzzler” for the BBG.

We’re saving the best for last.

“While radio remains the BBG’s number one media platform, reaching 106 million people per week, television’s growth puts it 97 million people. The Internet audience was approximately 10 million, with the largest online audiences measured in Iraq, Russia, Indonesia, Egypt and Iran.”

Bingo!

There’s no “while” about it. Radio is still king.

But most important of all is this:

Even if you take the BBG numbers at face value, when you examine them in the context of the BBG “strategic plan,” you can clearly see its disaster in the making.

If you eliminate radio broadcasting, as it is the clear intent of the BBG strategic plan, you lose over half of your audience. That 187 million becomes 81 million.

The television component is no bargain. It is the most expensive production and delivery broadcast medium, requiring more people, more production time, satellite time and fees, etc. In terms of cost, it is the least sustainable of the media choices available to the BBG. Plus, one should keep in mind, as the BBG press release points out, it is vulnerable to interdiction, both in terms of blocking satellite channels and in terms of downlink requirements at the receiving end. While people use satellite dishes around the world, the fact remains that certain regimes periodically confiscate private satellite dishes, in part just because they can. Also, in those places where the BBG relies upon placement on television stations (they are not really affiliates in the same use of the word here in the US), these stations often walk a fine line with the sitting governments. Put something on the air that someone doesn’t like and good-bye BBG programs or risk the loss of one’s license and even invite some jail time if the regime is offended enough.

Last but definitely not least, its global Internet audience is tagged at 10 million. If the BBG carries through with its plans to use the Internet as its sole platform for audio, video and text, it will have the equivalent of no audience.

About 70 years into US international broadcasting, how long will it take the BBG to move its Internet audience to a size approximating its current radio audience, particularly when one notes the ability of third parties to engage effectively in cyber warfare and/or, as in the case with China, to have well-established controls to block websites the government deems as undesirable. It is complete fiction to believe that the BBG will have at its command an impenetrable cyber defense against these attacks.

And there is another thing. The BBG has to pay to be posted to search engines. Lose the search engines and there goes the recognition and access.

“Audience declines took place notably in Iran, where the government continues aggressive jamming of every BBG transmission platform, including satellite uplink jamming; and Pakistan, where the media market is increasingly fragmented and use of radio is declining.”

This statement may not be truly representative of the situational reality. The truth of the matter is that all global media markets are increasingly fragmented. This is a significant issue when one considers the BBG claim that its intended outcome is to be “the leading global news network.”

With specific regard to Pakistan, audience loss may have more to do with over-heated anti-American sentiment and a whole lot less to do with the assertion that “use of radio is declining.” It is well known that the Taliban make considerable use of radio in the border areas between Pakistan and Afghanistan. It is well known that the Pakistanis have become increasingly uneasy with unilateral US military actions within this territory. All of these things may have a whole lot more to do with the decline in the BBG’s audience in Pakistan.

Saying that “use of radio is declining” in Pakistan also seemingly contradicts the BBG effort with its “Radio Deewa” and “Radio Aap ki Dunyaa” projects in the region.

Let’s go back to the numbers:

The BBG is laying claim that the intended goal of its “new” strategic plan is to become the world’s leading global news network. What does that mean? How much of that 7 billion in total world population puts the BBG in the hunt to validate that claim? Hovering around 200 million according to its claimed global audience numbers, it’s a long haul to reach anything approximating a reasonable suggestion that the BBG is a “leading global news network.”

And keep in mind that if the BBG carries out its intended destruction of US Government international radio broadcasting, its audience gets cut by more than half. All of those people aren’t going to run to the Internet. That lesson was learned in Russia, contrary to the outrageous claims by the BBG of Russian audience increases. The BBG’s own research showed that its audience in Russia fell off a cliff when it ended its direct VOA Russian radio broadcasts in 2008.

The BBG has set a deadline of 2016 (its Soviet-style five-year plan) to reach its intended goals. Those goals, based on the BBG’s own numbers, would actually represent a substantially diminished audience with the loss of radio broadcasting. VOA director David Ensor essentially reiterated those goals in a recent C-SPAN television interview.

How does this intended outcome benefit the United States? How does this intended outcome represent a judicious use of US taxpayer money? Unfortunately, to all appearances the answer is” it doesn’t.

In the end, audience size aside, it all comes down to effectiveness. The BBG already a sizable “global news network” through its many and varied entities. And still, with all these assets, its penetration of global publics remains challenged.

One last thing: check the numbers of the press release:

106 million radio audience.
97 million television audience.
10 million Internet audience.

Total: 213 million.

That’s more than 187 million at the opening of the press release.

Well, we’ll give the BBG the difference. It’s still not enough to be “the leading global news network.”

Far from it.

The Federalist
November 16, 2011

###

From the BBG official website:

BBG Broadcasts Reach Record Audiences
(WASHINGTON, D.C.—November 15, 2011) U.S. government funded international broadcasters reached an estimated 187 million people every week in 2011, an increase of 22 million from last year’s figure, according to new audience data being made public by the Broadcasting Board of Governors.

“We are pleased that people the world over are responding in unprecedented numbers to our high-quality journalism and active audience engagement,” said BBG Chairman Walter Isaacson. “The ability of our broadcasters to inform, engage and connect audiences through traditional and social media alike lie behind these impressive results and will be essential to driving future audience reach and impact.”

The record numbers, released in the BBG Performance and Accountability Report (PAR), measure the combined audience of the Voice of America (VOA), Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL), Radio and TV Martí, Radio Free Asia (RFA) and the Middle East Broadcasting Networks (Alhurra TV and Radio Sawa). The report details impact on audiences around the globe including people in the world’s most repressive media and political environments.

The BBG’s PAR follows on the heels of BBG’s latest strategic plan, Impact through Innovation and Integration, which sets an over-arching objective of making BBG the world’s leading international news agency working to foster freedom and democracy with the goal of reaching 216 million people weekly by 2016.

This year there were significant audience increases in Afghanistan, where RFE/RL and VOA together reach 75% of adults weekly; in Egypt, where Alhurra TV doubled its weekly audience to 15% in tandem with the Arab Spring; and in Indonesia, where VOA’s aggressive affiliate strategy has boosted weekly audiences to some 38 million adults.

Audiences in many other strategically relevant countries held strong. In Nigeria, VOA retains its position as a news source of record with 23 million weekly listeners. In Burma, VOA and RFA reach 26% and 24% of adults, respectively, amounting to a weekly audience of 10 million.

Audience declines took place notably in Iran, where the government continues aggressive jamming of every BBG transmission platform, including satellite uplink jamming; and Pakistan, where the media market is increasingly fragmented and use of radio is declining.

While radio remains the BBG’s number one media platform, reaching 106 million people per week, television’s growth puts it at 97 million people. The Internet audience was approximately 10 million, with the largest online audiences measured in Iraq, Russia, Indonesia, Egypt and Iran.

Download 2011 Performance and Accountability Report (PDF)

BBG 2011 Audience Overview (PDF)

BBG Research Methodology (PDF)

Read original article:
US International Broadcasting and the BBG: The Numbers Game

From VOA Director David Ensor’s interview with C-Span:

My feeling is that there is a very, very great need for our voice to be heard in China. And we’re going to be looking at creative ways in trying to reach more of the Chinese people with Voice of America.

I’m expecting that it will include — not so much shortwave radio, which our data shows is not reaching very many people anymore in China, though it still reaches some — but more in terms of satellite television; we’ll be doing a lot of work on the Internet. And we’ll use Internet circumvention techniques to try to make sure people are able to see what we put on the Internet, even if there are attempts made by the government to prevent them from doing so.

C-Span explained that VOA is one of five broadcast services of the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG). The BBG wanted to end all VOA radio and television broadcasts to China in Mandarin and Cantonese on October 1, 2011. Congressional committees blocked this plan and criticized the BBG for poor judgement and the lack of transparency. The BBG was proposing Internet-only news delivery to China, where online access is heavily censored by the Chinese government and VOA websites are blocked. Only very few individuals are capable of circumventing such censorship and doing this may expose them to monitoring by the secret police.

In addition to strong bipartisan criticism in Congress, the BBG plan to end all VOA radio and TV to China, which was adopted before David Ensor became VOA director, was also criticized by human rights groups in China and in the United States. Subsequently, Ensor proposed an expansion of VOA satellite television programs to China, which BBG executives initially wanted to permanently terminate in favor of online access only.

In response to the question about the Congressional criticism of the BBG China plan, David Ensor tried to calm the critics by suggesting that he is not opposed to continuing VOA radio broadcasts on shortwave, but he noted that these are his personal views. He also suggested that VOA shortwave radio audience in China is very small, at one point implying that there may be only 200 Chinese dissidents listening to VOA radio broadcasts. Even the BBG’s highly unreliable audience surveys show that the audience for VOA radio in China numbers several million.

Ensor’s point about the number of VOA radio listeners in China could have been rhetorical, but it sent a misleading message to those who are not familiar with U.S. international broadcasting. Critics of the BBG point out that often history is influenced by key individuals such as Poland’s Solidarity leader Lech Walesa, Pope John Paul II when he was still a priest and later a bishop in communist-ruled Poland, or Mikhail Gorbachev in Russia when he was imprisoned during a coup staged by Soviet hardliners. All of them at such critical moments, when other sources of news were censored or blocked, listened to Western radio broadcasts on shortwave, including the Voice of America. Chinese human rights activists point out that most ordinary Chinese would never admit to survey takers that they are listeners to VOA radio programs. The BBG relies on a company in Beijing to conduct these surveys.

From VOA Director David Ensor’s interview with C-Span:

We need to find better ways to reach China. We’re working on it. I think satellite television has promise. There is a lot of work already being done in terms of Internet reach and mobile device reach, and I think it’s promising.

Shortwave radio, however, still reaches some people in China and personally, I think, we should persist until we have a better way. But, you know, there are different views on that, frankly. Is it a waste of money, is it not a waste of money?

There are people who think that broadcasting to China on shortwave is a waste of money because the audience is so tiny. Then there are others who say that even if you reach 200 dissidents in that vast country, it’s still worth all those millions. Well, you know, reasonable people can disagree.

I pledge to Congressman Rohrabacher and the rest of those listening, we will look for ways to be more effective in China. We want to reach as many Chinese people as we can.

Link to C-Span’s interview with Voice of America Director David Ensor.

See the article here:
Vietnam – Two citizen journalists jailed for illegally broadcasting to China

The Committee for U.S. International Broadcasting (CUSIB) issued a press release on CUSIB Executive Director Ann Noonan’s speech in support of continuing Voice of America (VOA) radio and television broadcasts to China.

November 7, 2011
For Immediate Release

Women and Their Families in China Who Are Victims of Human Rights Abuses Need Voice of America Radio

On Sunday, November 6, 2011 the Committee for U.S. International Broadcasting (CUSIB) Executive Director Ann Noonan joined a panel discussion sponsored by All Girls Allowed, Inc. at New York’s Flushing Sheraton and spoke against plans to cut Voice of America (VOA) radio programs to China:

“… in China today, young fighters for democracy listen to VOA radio. … Radio listening – unlike the Internet – cannot be easily monitored or blocked. Although radio signals can be partially jammed, they can never be completely silenced – unless the U.S. Government decides to end these broadcasts, as it was proposed by the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG). Let’s hope and pray that will NEVER happen as long as there is no freedom of expression in China or as long as the Chinese people want to learn about America.”

Following a bipartisan action in the U.S. Congress to block the Broadcasting Board of Governors’ proposal, the Federal agency which runs the Voice of America has suspended the termination of VOA radio and television programs to China but is still considering reducing radio broadcasts. Ann Noonan said that these radio programs from the United States are especially needed by women and their families. They provide critical information and give hope and encouragement to the poorest and the most oppressed segments of the Chinese society, said Ms. Noonan. Prior to joining CUSIB, she founded Free Church for China, an NGO which researches and documents religious persecution in the PRC. CUSIB has been contacting BBG members to urge them to continue VOA radio and satellite television to China.

The discussion following Ms. Noonan’s presentation focused on Chai Ling’s new book A Heart for Freedom. Ms. Ling is a Tiananmen Survivor and founder of All Girls Allowed, an organization which works to end forced abortions, gendercide, and trafficking of children in China. Other panelists included Tibetan author Jianglin Li, and former New York State Assembly member Ellen Young.

The Committee for U.S. International Broadcasting (CUSIB), www.cusib.org, is a nonpartisan, nongovernmental organization working to strengthen free flow of uncensored news from the United States to countries with restricted media environments.

For further information contact CUSIB co-founder Ted Lipien (415) 793-1642.

 
Read the full text of Ann Noonan’s presentation for the discussion on Chai Ling’s book A Heart for Freedom:

In Word

In PDF

View original post here:
Women and Their Families in China Who Are Victims of Human Rights Abuses Need Voice of America Radio

Visit link:
United States – Absurd charges brought against reporters covering Occupy Wall Street movement

The Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) has released what it calls “the framework of its new strategic plan to enhance the global impact of U.S. international broadcasting through innovation and integration.” Apparently, not even BBG members have seen a copy of the full plan, which was developed by the executive staff, but what has been published Tuesday in Washington raises many doubts about the direction of U.S. international broadcasting. Here are some of Free Media Online concerns:

1. Absentee Board During the crucial time in the development of the strategic plan, most BBG members did not show up regularly for board meetings. Starting July 2010, only three BBG members (Ashe, Isaacson, Mulhaupt) have a perfect attendance record. Others were often absent, which may indicate low level of their interest and involvement in what should have been a period of close scrutiny of numerous staff reports and recommendations regarding the strategic plan.

This raises the question whether the BBG bureaucracy has received proper guidance and supervision from the absentee, part-time Board and to what extent the plan reflects the staff’s own bureaucratic interests, which may be incompatible with the expectations of Congress and the American people.

2. No Cost Estimate There is nothing in the plan that would tell Congress and the American people how much it is going to cost U.S. taxpayers. Other than making unsupported and unrealistic claims of expected gains in audience reach, there is also nothing in the plan to indicate what the United States would gain from its implementation in terms of program impact and savings, if any.

3. Failed Management Team The strategic plan was developed by the same BBG executives who proposed to terminate all Voice of America radio and satellite television transmissions to China on October 1, 2011, the anniversary of the founding of the People’s Republic of China. This proposal was criticized by human rights activists in China and in the U.S. It was rejected by Democrats and Republicans in committees both in the House and the Senate.

The same team had proposed and the previous Board had approved the termination of VOA radio and television to Russia, a decision that — despite strong objections from key members of Congress — was implemented in 2008, just 12 days before Russian armed forces invaded and occupied part of the Republic of Georgia. The team that developed the strategic plan opted for the Internet-only program delivery for VOA in China despite Beijing’s effective Internet censorship and blocking of VOA websites.

4. No One to Explain America to the World The framework of the BBG strategic plan ignores Public Law 94-350, which requires the Voice of America (VOA) “to present the policies of the United States clearly and effectively, and [also to] present responsible discussion and opinion on these policies.”

5. VOA Ignored; Its Employees Considered a Liability The BBG’s new mission statement: “To inform, engage and connect people around the world in support of freedom and democracy” also fails to reflect Public Law 94-350′s mandate that in addition to providing news, VOA “will represent America, not any single segment of American society, and will therefore present a balanced and comprehensive projection of significant American thought and institutions.”

Nor does the new mission statement confirm that “VOA news will be accurate, objective and comprehensive.” In fact, the BBG plan seems to favor de-federalizing the Voice of America, which runs the risk of giving the job of explaining America to the world to inexperienced, poorly-paid and poorly-trained contract employees. The BBG management team has been accused of exploiting contract employees and has been rated in employee surveys as one of the worst in the entire federal system. The issue of employee morale and the poor treatment of contract employees was raised last month at the BBG public meeting by BBG member Ambassador Victor Ashe.

6. News Agency Mission Incompatible with Broadcasting Mission Abroad The BBG’s strategic objective: “To become the world’s leading international news agency by 2016, focused on the agency’s mission and impact” appears highly unrealistic and has the potential of detracting from the mission of specialized news reporting and analysis for individual countries and regions.

7. Unrealistic Goals The BBG’s performance goal “To reach 216 million in global weekly audience by 2016″ also appears highly unrealistic — unless the BBG plans to include the U.S. audience in the count or to change its audience measurement methodology, and even then reaching the set goal is extremely unlikely.

8. Program Content and Program Quality Ignored The framework of the strategic plan focuses on audience reach and technology but completely ignores program content, program quality and impact issues.

9. Costs of New Media Exaggerated; TV and Radio Broadcasting Ignored While the plan rightly focuses on innovation, BBG executives tend to greatly exaggerate the costs of the Internet and new media, which are largely free and used by millions of individuals and institutional content providers, while the number of international broadcasters is limited. The BBG executive staff has been eager to eliminate satellite television and radio broadcasting to key areas of the world and has shown no concern that under their plan 750 million Chinese citizens would have no access to any VOA programs and that 45 VOA Chinese Branch journalists specializing in human rights reporting would lose their jobs.

10. Domestic Distribution A Great Danger to Mission Abroad The BBG’s call to end the legal restrictions on domestic distribution of programs runs a great risk of distracting the BBG from the mission of serving America’s interests abroad. The BBG can barely manage to fulfill its mission now. The quality of many programs is woefully poor. Music has replaced news and information because VOA and other BBG broadcasters lack proper resources. Many programs have already been eliminated, dozens upon dozens of experienced journalists have lost their jobs while the BBG bureaucracy keeps growing and is likely to expand rather than shrink under the new consolidation proposal. This proposal seems a sure way toward expanding the bureaucracy even further and to shifting the focus from international audiences to U.S. political and commercial domestic concerns. The authors of the plan are disingenuous in implying that BBG program content cannot be used in the U.S. Private individuals and commercial media outlets in the U.S. can use VOA programs. The BBG is simply prohibited from actively marketing these programs in the U.S.

Overall, the framework of the BBG strategic plan lacks a clear sense of mission. Its key components will distract journalists and broadcasters from achieving impact abroad. The part-time, absentee Board members failed to scrutinize the plan, which has all the highlights of being produced by in-house bureaucrats trying to protect their jobs and to hide their failures from Congress and the American people. The least BBG members could do is to attend all of their rather infrequent public meetings, analyze closely what their staff is proposing and pay more attention to what members of Congress, independent journalists, and human rights activists are saying.

Let’s take a moment to review the VOA Charter:

“The long-range interests of the United States are served by communicating directly with the peoples of the world by radio. To be effective, the Voice of America must win the attention and respect of listeners. These principles will therefore govern Voice of America (VOA) broadcasts:

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

2. VOA will represent America, not any single segment of American society, and will therefore present a balanced and comprehensive projection of significant American thought and institutions.

3. VOA will present the policies of the United States clearly and effectively, and will also present responsible discussion and opinion on these policies.”

Gerald R Ford
President of the United States
Signed: July 12, 1976
Public Law 94-350

There you have it: the keys to mission success for US international broadcasting, which — in addition to radio — is now also using satellite television, Internet, and digital phone technology to deliver programs to its intended audiences abroad.

On the other hand, the BBG has its own mission statement:

“To inform, engage and connect people around the world in support of freedom and democracy.”

They are not the same. Thus, there are questions:

What does the BBG statement mean? How is the BBG going to go about its mission statement?

And more pointedly, what is the intended outcome? What constitutes “support?”

If you asked individual members of the BBG to write down what its mission statement means, it wouldn’t be surprising if you came up with as many different explanations as there are BBG members.

In controlled societies where the American interpretation of “freedom and democracy” doesn’t exist, what is to be accomplished?

There’s a word missing from the BBG’s “new” mission statement:

Explain.

For example, how does the BBG explain US actions juxtaposed to the concepts of “freedom and democracy?” How does the BBG intend to explain how the world’s greatest democracy reaches agreements with non-democratic regimes, such as the agreement to base drone aircraft in Ethiopia? How does the BBG explain its agreement with the Ethiopian government to censor Ethiopian dissidents from Amharic or other VOA Horn of Africa Service programs?

How does the BBG explain that after years of US and Allied intervention and sacrifice to free Afghanistan from the stranglehold of the Taliban, the Afghan president, Hamid Karzai, says that Afghanistan would join Pakistan in a war with the United States?

Since it isn’t expressly stated, would we trust the BBG to explain any issue of consequence, in detail?

No.

The intended trajectory of the BBG’s “new” mission statement appears to be to dummy down detailed news content. Indeed, we hear that a term of art making its way around the VOA Newsroom is that the agency is going to take a “holistic” approach to news. What is that? It makes it sound as if the BBG is a repository for some kind of New Age mumbo-jumbo.

As part of this trajectory, the agency seems to intend that US international broadcasting is going to be reduced to nothing more than a social media, chit-chat website. Is that what the BBG is talking about when it says it is going to “connect” people?

This is why, as Secretary of State Clinton says, “We are losing the information war.” At the end of the day, the BBG isn’t doing the things required to maintain US credibility around the world. To all appearances, it is going down the pathway of sound-bite superficiality.

The VOA Charter is a clear articulation of what constitutes the purpose and intent of US international broadcasting, what we need to communicate to world audiences.

Here is a truism about “freedom and democracy:” these are high maintenance concepts and processes. They require constant attention. Otherwise, there can be grave consequences. The consequences can be social, economic and political. One need only pick up an American newspaper and read the variety of issues confronting American society or the democratic societies in Western Europe. You get the picture quickly of what can happen when the vigilance that freedom and democracy requires goes lax.

“Freedom and democracy” aren’t out-of-the-box, ready to work constructs. They require a plan. In the American Experience, the plan would include the Declaration of Independence, the Bill of Rights and the Constitution. How transferable are these foundation principles to societies with no history of these principles in their own historical record and experiences?

And at every step, even in the most ideal circumstances, there are obstacles and unforeseen events that test the strength of these processes.

What the BBG’s “new” mission statement does is to trivialize the complexities and come up with a superficial approach to those complexities.

When the rubber meets the road, another ultimate truism is that freedom is not free. It can come at great cost. Add up the number of American wars over three centuries and the beginning of a fourth (from the 18th through the present 21st centuries). We are presently in the beginning observances of the 150th anniversary of the American Civil War. This war was and remains a defining moment in the American Experience. How is this signal event explained in the context of the BBG’s mission statement?

Consider also the various economic cycles experienced in this country, including the Great Depression and various recession cycles. How does the BBG intend to explain that free market societies, this comes as part of the package of “freedom and democracy.”

Also consider the civil rights movement and other protest movements, including the present “Occupy Wall Street.”

What the VOA Charter does is present a comprehensive definition and plan as to what US international broadcasting is supposed to do. The BBG’s “new” mission statement does neither. It is elusive and ambiguous. By deviating from the charter and attempting to substitute its own mission statement, the BBG undermines mission effectiveness of US international broadcasting. It substantially narrows the mission to one expected outcome: freedom and democracy. If this outcome is unachievable, in its effect, the BBG will have failed and thus have no mission. It is already far along in this catastrophe in Russia, the Arab and Muslim world and as it intends, in China.

“Freedom and democracy” are often used as buzz words to elicit a response or manipulate public opinion. Of late, it is often thrown around by individuals or organizations caught up in political unrest as a way of attempting to legitimize or garner support for events that have no certain outcome.

The BBG is playing the same game. In its case, the intended audience is the US Congress. Who isn’t “in support of freedom and democracy?” It is an optimum use of a phrase intended to optimize the BBG ability to get increased funding.

For this reason, members of the Congress should be wary. The record of the BBG leaves a lot to be desired, in Russia, the Middle East and if carried out, in China. Instead of giving the BBG a free pass, members of Congress need to be asking tough questions and getting factual responses. If those responses aren’t forthcoming from the BBG (and its penchant for oxymoronic phrases and other mumbo-jumbo), it should seek out answers from third parties independent of the BBG who are subject matter proficient on US international broadcasting.

Things have changed. American taxpayers do not like to be used as ATM machines involving programs they don’t understand, don’t see as important in their daily lives and are symbolic of government waste. That is today’s environment and it is an environment that needs to be communicated clearly and unequivocally to the BBG and its IBB handlers.

Not long into the unrest in Egypt that toppled the Mubarak government, Senator John Kerry opined that, “It is too early to do a victory lap for freedom and democracy in the Middle East.” The senator is correct. The BBG needs to heed these words, get itself out of its self-inflicted fog and get down to the real business of US international broadcasting as embodied in the VOA Charter.

The Federalist
November 1, 2011

Here is the original post:
Russia – Government eager to use Net surveillance software currently in test phase

RFE/RL analyst Charles Dameron took issue with another of Putin’s claims in the same interview. Putin said that NTV’s Vladimir Kulistikov’s move to state television from Radio Svoboda is evidence of Russia’s liberalization. Kulistikov was one of the reporters asking questions.

The RFE/RL analyst pointed out that dozens of journalists in Russia have been killed during Mr. Putin’s rule because they offended the authorities.

Ted Lipien said that there was a clear purpose to Vladimir Putin’s comments linking Radio Svoboda to spying on the USSR during the Cold War. Such comments, Lipien said, are designed to intimidate both journalists and Radio Svoboda’s potential audience in Russia, in addition to reassuring Prime Minister’s Putin’s nationalistic supporters.

Read more on CUSIB:

Follow this link to BBG Watch:
Putin goes after Radio Svoboda on Russian TV — CUSIB

See original here:
Why Russia’s democrats need West’s support