Dr. Helle Dale, the Heritage Foundation

BBG Watch had reported earlier on the self-censorship by the Voice of America Russian Service to comply with restrictive media laws in Russia with regard to pre-election news coverage. This was done to keep rebroadcasting on a local AM transmitter in Moscow controlled by the Russian government. Helle Dale of the Heritage Foundation has just published an article on the same problem.

Russian Roulette at Voice of America – Helle Dale, Heritage Foundation

Depending on Russian government-funded media to broadcast news from Voice of America (VOA) is about as brain-dead as depending on Russian spaceships to send American astronauts into space or depending on Russian fuel supply for the U.S. ground and air forces in Afghanistan. The outcome will surely not be in America’s interest.

And yet, the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) has contracted with Voice of Russia for rebroadcasting VOA programs in English. The BBG has closed down most of its own radio transmitters around the world and even closed down VOA’s Russian-language broadcasting in 2008. The board’s reasons are, firstly, to cut costs and, secondly, to move away from radio toward other more glamorous media, like satellite television and the Internet. The fact remains, however, that most of the BBG’s global audience are still radio listeners, and the way U.S. radio programming now gets on the air is through contracts with local broadcasters. Unfortunately, relying on others for rebroadcasting U.S. programs gives them de facto control of programming content and leads to self-censorship.

Helle C. Dale is the Heritage Foundations Senior Fellow in Public Diplomacy studies.

BBG Watch Commentary

The Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG), which makes these decisions, ended all direct shortwave radio broadcasts by the VOA Russian Service in 2008. But the problem goes even deeper. Media freedom activists and independent journalists in Russia have accused the VOA Russian Service of having a “pro-Putin bias” and downplaying of reporting on human rights issues.

New media scholar Nikolay Rudenskiy is author of ‘pro-Putin Bias in VOA’ study

The BBG fired and pushed out experienced VOA Russian journalists, many longtime US citizens, and replaced them with poorly-paid and untrained contractors hired directly in Russia or shortly after they arrived in the United States, some of them only on temporary visas.

Some of these full-time contractors, whom the BBG executive staff shamelessly exploits by denying them basic employment rights and benefits, posted on the VOA Russian Service website a fake interview with a Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny.

Russian Accuses Voice Of America Of Fake Interview – NPR

The interview, designed to embarrass Navalny, was probably crafted and passed on to these contract employees by the Russian secret services or their agents. The new VOA Director David Ensor has taken some actions to prevent similar missteps in the future, but he or anybody else at VOA can do only so much against the BBG and IBB bureaucracy and their policies and plans, which are killing U.S. international broadcasting and sound journalism.

Some of the most recent plans of the Broadcasting Board of Governors and its International Broadcasting Bureau (IBB) executive staff have included terminating all Voice of America radio and television broadcasts in Mandarin and Cantonese to China, ending VOA Tibetan radio broadcasts and creating a CEO position which would not be subject to presidential appointment and confirmation by the U.S. Senate. Some of these plans of BBG and IBB executives (China and Tibet) were killed by Congress and by BBG members themselves, but others designed to limit Congressional and public scrutiny of the incompetent BBG staff are still on the table.

by The Federalist
 
 
 

Venture Capitalist - Sign at the Office of Digital Design and Innovation at the Broadcasting Board of Governors

The gift that keeps on giving:
 
By now, readers of BBG Watch have seen the photo of a hand-printed piece of paper taped to a door in the Cohen Building containing declarations not unlike what one would find in public declarations by IBB staff most responsible for the “flim flam strategic plan.”
 
But if you haven’t seen it yet, here is the text:
 
“We are an internal venture capitalist team for US international media.  We provide best in class support, guidance + development for all digital + design products.  We do this by rethinking + leading on everything that touches mobile/social/digital for serving current + future audiences.”
 
Do you know what this means?
 
Absolutely nothing.  It is a self-serving sales pitch, gibberish right up there with the oxymorons that emanate from the Third Floor of the Cohen Building.
 
In our view, venture capitalism is synonymous with risk.  A lot of risk.  It can be like gambling.  But these individuals, whoever they are, aren’t rolling the dice with their own money.  The money they use is American taxpayer dollars.
 
How much taxpayer money is being used to support this escapade?
 
How much is being paid to these “venture capitalists?”
 
What are they specifically assigned to do?
 
How much travel have these “venture capitalists” engaged in and at what cost to the American taxpayer?
 
Other than a hand-printed piece of paper, what have these “venture capitalists” produced?
 
US international broadcasting has become too bizarre for words.  We cannot make this kind of stuff up.  The House of Innovation comes by it naturally, along with its most notable by-product: oxymorons.
 
None of what is coming out of the Third Floor of the Cohen Building is the type of stuff that keeps US international broadcasting whole – focused on the mission and being effective in having resonance with audiences.
 
The one thing that the House of Innovation excels in is leading the decline of US international broadcasting with global publics by engaging in spurious mumbo-jumbo that doesn’t get the job done.
 
And here’s another thing:
 
The House of Innovation can’t play with the big boys: the Chinese, the Russians, or the Iranians.  They don’t even make the junior varsity squad.  And worst of all – the big boys know it.
 
What this agency has become is a clearinghouse for a lot of far out ideas that don’t hold up to global realities.  In some cases, the “idea” incubators are individuals we call “shortstops:” people with long resumes full of brief stays in a lot of places; people who seemingly pop out of the woodwork with a lot of jargon but not much in the way of substance.  The House of Innovation is like a magnet attracting these people.
 
These people globe trot their ideas.  That may make for a lot of nice travel, but there doesn’t seem to be a heck of a lot of traction to show for the effort.  We know the House of Innovation very well.  One of its key components is shouting about successes.  There isn’t much to shout about.  And many times, what talk there is has to do with the latest version of the “strategic flim flam plan.”  
 
New and improved!  
 
Well, not really.
 
Here is perhaps the one thing the hand-printed sign from our Cohen Building “venture capitalists” means:
 
This is indicative of the House of Innovation plan to privatize and de-Federalize US international broadcasting and go “corporate.”  We are most definitely not in favor of that scheme.
 
However, if it somehow were to come to fruition here’s the deal:
 
Cut these guys off from American taxpayer money.  Totally.  Let them try to stand on their own.
 
You know what?
 
They would fall flat on their faces.  It would be a bankrupt undertaking before barely in motion.
 
These guys want the American taxpayer to be an ATM machine for any wild, oxymoron-laced idea they can come up with.  It’s dead wrong.  It has nothing to do with the national or the public interest.
 
These guys are dead-set on their objective.  So, with that in mind, it behooves the Congress to be thinking ahead and planning to take as much of US international broadcasting out of the hands of the House of Innovation.  Transfer the vital functions and operations elsewhere in the Federal Government.
 
If the Congress and the American taxpayer want “best in class,” this represents the best alternative to the whacked out world of the Cohen Building.
 
However, if the Congress isn’t prepared to take that step, here is a short list of some other things it can do:
 
At the top of the list is meaningful oversight and accountability.  We’re not going to get to that particular objective with the current cast of characters “leading” the agency.  The name of the game in the House of Innovation is hawking damaged goods and not being held accountable for it.  These guys need something else to do and to do it far away from the Cohen Building.  
 
Next, someone at the highest levels of government has to come to the understanding that this agency is in the business of strategic communication.  It is not going to be the next CNN.  It is not going to compete with commercial media.  This agency has to be mass strategic communication that has the greatest potential to reach the most people possible, in the face of serious countermeasures by rivals and adversaries.
 
The BBG/IBB needs to be disabused of the notion that the agency is going to adopt a model that is “corporate” in nature. Given the track record established by the House of Innovation, this agency is already well on its way to being the Enron of international broadcasting.
 
Our venture capitalists and their “manifesto” are a far cry from the principles of the Voice of America (VOA) Charter.  It is no surprise to that US international broadcasting has fallen over a precipice.  It is now in the grips of people with – to all outward appearances – a calculated, exploitative agenda.  
 
People watching the situation are not stupid.  They know what they’re dealing with, especially when language service broadcasts are eliminated, programs are cut and essentially, the US international broadcasting footprint has substantially diminished.  An enterprise that is now working assiduously to be in the category of an also-ran has drained itself of a substantial amount of international credibility and respect.  
 
This is not an agency that is on the rise in its line of work.  It is not going to be reinvented as a “global news network.”  These guys can’t manage the news operations they already have.  And they are well on their to being 24 hours behind the news cycle in China when they cut live evening radio broadcasts to China (evening in DC, morning in China).
 
What they want to be is a mediocre and insipid “lifestyle” and social media website.  
 
This is the slippery down slope.
 
It is interesting to note that the BBG/IBB is soliciting public comment about aspects of its strategic plan, consolidation and related matters.  Don’t expect a groundswell of interest and/or support beyond the Beltway.  In fact, if the interest in what the agency is doing is as low as we expect, the message may well be that the agency isn’t worth American taxpayer money.  It is not on the radar of the average American who may question its relevance in the context of other pressing national priorities and have other notions about how public money should be spent.
 
We’d like to see the BBG come clean with exactly how much interest they are able to generate from this latest gambit.  We’d like to see what American citizens and taxpayers think about this little-known and less understood Federal agency.
 
We’ll wait to see how the House of Innovation spins lack of interest by the American public in their enterprise.
 
Basics and fundamentals, ladies and gentlemen.  These guys have abandoned both and have preordained the demise of US international broadcasting.  Without its core base, the House of Innovation is lost in search of an audience that has gone elsewhere or has been abandoned entirely.
 
The House of Innovation has delivered on one thing: the BBG/IBB has lost the information war.  These bureaucrats, with their own agenda and bonus-mongering, have allowed global publics to lose interest in US international broadcasting.
 
People who know, including those same rivals and adversaries, know that the BBG/IBB have thrown in the towel.  It is only a matter of time before their entire venture capitalist/corporatist fantasy collapses on itself.
 
The Federalist
May 2012
 

A Guest Commentary from Canada by Edite Lynch

It has become worldwide knowledge that American President Barack Obama, in a sit-down chat with Prime Minister Medvedev of Russia, categorically stated that he would have more “flexibility” after the 2012 American election in November, which quite obviously he expects to win.

Considering the fact that very early in his presidency he quickly engaged with Russia and went through a mock ceremony of “Restarting” relations, it soon became apparent that he was giving away the store in the new START treaty and America was placed in a disadvantaged state vis a vis anti-ballistic missile defense.

Given this kind of information of sucking up to Putin’s Russia, it becomes even more disturbing when one hears about the strange and incomprehensible actions of the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) toward both its U.S citizen broadcasters working at the Voice of America (VOA) but also the many foreign journalists and contractors who outnumber the Americans, as well as the termination of seasoned journalists to be replaced by neophytes untrained in media issues.

The “flexibility” comment becomes more insidious when viewed through the prism of what is happening with a very respected and valued organization such as the Voice of America which has operated for 70 years with tremendous results, especially in the former Soviet Union.

It is also common knowledge that a fish starts to decay from the head on down. Are the inexplicable machinations of the BBG managers being directed from a source that is by-passing the oversight committees in Congress?

Given the very obvious kowtowing to Russia and with the Voice of America Russian Service broadcasting a fake interview purporting to be that of Alex Nalvalny in order to discredit a valuable anti-Putin activist at will, without just cause and with impunity, the question must be asked, who is really pulling the strings in this situation?

If the BBG is acting as an island unto itself, with no real oversight from Congress, which appears to be the case except for its revised position regarding VOA Cantonese and Mandarin language broadcasts to China and Tibet, then that behaviour must be curtailed because American taxpayer dollars are supporting the BBG in a way that is neither fruitful nor productive given the VOA Charter and its abused employees.

The BBG managers are definitely not worth the money that is being paid to them for not doing what their job descriptions call for, which is to correctly manage America’s voice to the world in an exemplary fashion as well as a truthful one. There continues to be something rotten in the state of the BBG that is not being adequately addressed.

Annette Lantos with her husband Congressman Tom Lantos

At the meeting of the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) in Miami on April 20, the federal agency in charge of U.S. international broadcasting decided to reverse its earlier decision on Voice of America (VOA) program cuts to China and Tibet. In expressing his full support for restoring funding for these broadcasts, BBG Governor Ambassador Victor Ashe said:

This will make people like Annette Lantos very pleased and happy. She is a special figure in history.

Annette Lantos is the Chairman of the Lantos Foundation for Human Rights and Justice. She and her late husband Congressman Tom Lantos were both Holocaust survivors. Click here for more information about Mrs. Lantos’ pro-human rights activities.

Earlier this month, Annette Lantos had written a letter to the nine members of the bipartisan Board urging them to save U.S. taxpayer-funded news broadcasts to China, Tibet, and Russia. Her letter states:

“I write to you on a personal basis to express dismay that Voice of America radio and television broadcasts to Russia ceased in 2008. I am deeply concerned that although last year’s proposed cuts of VOA Mandarin and Cantonese radio and television programs were halted, this year’s proposal includes the elimination of VOA Cantonese services and VOA Tibetan Radio Services, at a time when there is significant unrest in Tibet. I urge you to continue the Cantonese and Tibetan broadcasts, and to restore them to Russia.”

Victor Ashe spearheaded the effort to overturn the earlier decision on cuts in broadcasting to China and Tibet.

He recalled that as U.S. Ambassador he had the privilege to welcome to Poland Annette Lantos and her late husband Congressman Tom Lantos when they came in 2005 for the 60th anniversary of the liberation of the Auschwitz-Birkenau Nazi death camp.

“It was a very difficult time for him emotionally to visit the barracks where torture occurred every minute,” said Ashe.

Speaking about the Broadcasting Board of Governors’ decision to restore funding in the next fiscal year for Voice of America radio broadcasts to Tibet and for the VOA Cantonese Service with its radio, television and Internet programming to China, Victor Ashe said that “hopefully, the response of this committee will receive the same attention that her [Annette Lantos'] eloquent letter has received.”

In her letter, Annette Lantos noted the efforts of the independent, nongovernmental Committee for U.S. International Broadcasting (CUSIB) in support of the free flow of uncensored news from the United States to countries without free media:

“I write in support of the efforts of the Committee for U.S. International Broadcasting. The CUSIB works to ensure that U.S. government-funded broadcasts promote respect for human rights and freedom of the press, especially in nations where these basic freedoms are under attack.”

Reggie Littlejohn, President of Women’s Rights Without Frontiers and member of CUSIB’s Advisory Board, said, “I am deeply grateful to Mrs. Lantos for supporting Voice of America broadcasts into China, as she is a towering presence for human rights all over the globe, including millions who suffer at the hands of the brutal, totalitarian regime in China.  With a wave of self-immolations in Tibet, now is not the time to cut off VOA broadcasting in Tibetan.  The Cantonese broadcasts are essential as well.”

In addition to Ambassador Victor Ashe, other BBG members: Susan McCue, Michael Meehan and Dennis Mulhaupt, also made strong public statements at the meeting in Miami last week in support of continuing U.S. broadcasts to Tibet and China.

To read the entire letter by Annette Lantos click here.

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.

For further information, please contact:

The Committee for U.S. International Broadcasting (CUSIB)
New York, New York

Ann Noonan, co-founder and Executive Director
Tel. 646-251-6069

Ted Lipien, co-founder and Director
Tel. 415-793-1642

Email: contact@cusib.org
www.cusib.org

by The Federalist

It is painful – the process of seeing the depths to which US Government international broadcasting has fallen at the hands of the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) and its International Broadcasting Bureau (IBB) staff.

Here’s the latest example:

On Friday, April 20, 2012 the BBG issued another one of its press releases extolling itself, this time on the subject of its broadcasting to China. The title of the press release:

“Board Forges Ahead With China Strategy, Adapted to Modern Media Environment and Audience Needs”

Let’s be clear:

The BBG has no China strategy. Along with that, the BBG is not meeting audience needs or effectively addressing a “modern media environment, which for US Government international broadcasting requires a balanced multi-media approach to deal with the broad disparities within intended audiences and similar issues of accessibility.

The strategy embraced by the BBG/IBB is the strategy of defeat. In turn, this strategy of defeat has turned into a strategic rout. Once started, it is very difficult to stop – and will not be stopped while in the hands of the current BBG/IBB. Some would argue that this process started in the Middle East with the end of the VOA Arabic Service. It certainly became manifest with the unilateral ending of broadcasts to Russia in 2008 by the BBG/IBB. It continues with ineffective and costly television programs to Iran via its Persian News Network (and yes, the “Parazit” satire program doesn’t cut it because its strategic value is questionable and it has not been successful as a lead-in for the Persian News Network news programs). It continues in Latin America where those pesky Iranians are ratcheting up their Spanish language broadcasts.

Returning to the issue of China:

Thanks to the BBG/IBB, United States is already a big-time loser. It has ceded the initiative to the Chinese. In essence, the BBG has to concede that the Chinese have essentially outmaneuvered them across all media. As the BBG/IBB has noted on its BBG Strategy website, the Chinese jam BBG programs “very well.” The Chinese also have the likely capability to jam BBG television programs even if they have not exercised that capability. And as far as the Internet is concerned: forget it. The Chinese have replicated their own Internet, albeit content-controlled and periodically blocked. That’s it: game, set and match.

But wait! Breaking news!

Now we learn from the latest BBG press release:

“At the April meeting of the BBG Strategy and Budget Committee, the Board asked that key senior staff form a working group to devise a holistic solution for reaching audiences throughout China, including Tibet.” (emphasis added)

“Holistic solution?!?”

Chinese officials must be highly amused at this latest BBG/IBB pronouncement.

Why?

Because we are well into the realm of the surreal on the Third Floor of the Cohen Building.

Badly.

Like an illness.

If the Chinese government wants the clearest indication that it has won what has to be one of the greatest of victories against the United States in the arena of international broadcasting, they just got it via this press release.

Whatever prestige US international broadcasting had has now been driven into oblivion by mumbo-jumbo and psycho babble by the wonks of the BBG/IBB.

And this thing about “asking” senior staff to form a “working group:” doesn’t the BBG know the meaning of the word “direct?” You don’t ask. You order and direct. You hold that senior staff accountable – in part because it is likely that there won’t be a great deal of enthusiasm for a task that has the potential for revealing how seriously messed up these officials have made of US Government international broadcasting.

Once again, the BBG has taken a pass on effective leadership.

Let’s go back to what we have said in previous commentaries:

The Chinese have a $7-billion dollar budget for its international broadcasting budget. It is booming into North America with radio, television and print media. They are a major player. They have the posture of a major player. Most assuredly, they do not rely on psycho-babble like the charlatans in the Cohen Building who are pushing a ludicrous “flim flam strategic plan” or a “holistic solution” to its self-inflicted disaster in China.

And look at this:

“The funding increase required in order to implement the board’s China distribution strategy totals approximately $3 million for FY 2013.”

What did we just say above?

The Chinese have a $7-BILLION dollar budget for its international broadcasting.

And if the Board doesn’t wrangle that $3-million dollars from the Congress, the BBG may very well try to terminate more US Government international broadcasting; in other words, proceed with the favorite BBG/IBB operational model: business as usual.

The BBG/IBB is no longer a serious threat to the Chinese – on any platform, in any medium.

How many times do we need to say it: this is really bad.

It’s bad not only for the US Government international broadcasting effort to China. It’s bad for all of US Government international broadcasting. The BBG/IBB has no meaningful strategy for effectively carrying out the agency’s mission as codified in the VOA Charter. They can’t even carry out their own spin on the Charter: “supporting freedom and democracy.”

Has there been any manifestation of this “holistic solution” regarding US Government international broadcasting to China?

Sort of.

We learn from our sources that the VOA China Branch staff has been informed that it will only do live radio programs to China in its morning broadcasts from Washington. That would be evening time in China.

For the evening programs from Washington, the broadcasts will be a repeat of the morning shows. We do not know if this includes the newscasts typically at the top of the hour and on the half-hour. Even so, in essence, this means that the Chinese radio broadcasts will be 24 hours behind in the news cycle, particularly in long-form news content. That means that the repeated programs could well be overtaken by events, making the “holistic solution” look even more ludicrous and ridiculous to the Chinese audience.

You know what happens next?

The audience will likely stop listening to the evening broadcasts (evening DC, morning in China). They will catch on to the fact that VOA is dealing in what is essentially “old news.” Good-bye audience!

Maybe the IBB apparatchiks will spend some of that $50-million dollar Gallup contract on doing a survey to verify that this decision results in no one listening to the evening Chinese broadcasts from VOA anymore.

Brilliant!

And then they will troop out the usual IBB spin that no one listens to radio. Why would they when the BBG/IBB sets up the VOA China Branch to fail by cutting back on generating live programming for virtually all of its evening broadcast schedule?

There is nothing worse than the work of the staff of the VOA China Branch being deliberately undermined by decisions of the career, bonus-seeking bureaucrats on the Third Floor of the Cohen Building.

And let’s be clear: this is a known BBG “strategy,” albeit in a different form. In the past, the BBG has eliminated broadcasts over radio frequencies, which in turn means that audiences can’t hear the broadcasts. Do a survey. No audience. Good-bye broadcasts and/or language services altogether.

In any form, this constitutes self-inflicted defeat, ladies and gentlemen. It is intentional and it is deliberate – brought to you by the bonus-mongers of the IBB.

And you can best believe that if the BBG/IBB “brain trust” decides to pull the plug on the evening VOA Chinese broadcasts, the Chinese will then have the opportunity to really ramp up and concentrate their jamming efforts of the VOA Chinese morning broadcasts.

One other thing:

We also learn from our sources that the BBG/IBB “holistics” now want to do two hours of live television programming to China.

What’s wrong with this picture?

The production costs for those two hours of television are substantially greater than those for the same amount of radio time.

This isn’t rocket science. Here’s an example: The average American needs to look no further than the Super Bowl to understand how costly television time is: the amount of money to produce a television commercial to run in the Super Bowl – along with the amount of money that networks will charge to run that spot. Sure – this is at the high end of the spectrum by nature of the event. However, a side-by-side comparison of the typical radio versus television spot would show the same cost difference.

And every Member of Congress knows how much radio versus television time costs when they are formulating their media campaigns in their election bids. The same thing applies when costing out radio versus television programs. That’s something every Member of Congress can understand and see in context. They should be asking the BBG/IBB for this cost comparison for what it intends to do with its VOA China Branch programs – presuming the BBG/IBB would be forthright with an honest answer – which isn’t a given.

And here’s another way to look at it –

You are not likely to hear a US congressman or senator saying to one’s constituents that he/she is looking for a “holistic solution” to the national debt, to Social Security solvency, to rising food and gasoline prices or the war on terrorism.

You know why?

Because it would be absolutely ludicrous! It would be moronic. The congressman or senator would be soundly ridiculed across all media. It would be the kind of nonsense that gets people unelected.

That is what the BBG/IBB is doing: trafficking in nonsense in the form of oxymoronic pronouncements.

We’ve seen a variation of this oxymoron before. It has been applied to the VOA Central Newsroom. In that instance, a senior Newsroom manager referred to taking a “holistic approach” to VOA news reporting.

You know what this is?

It’s reaching, grasping at straws. It’s desperation – not being willing to face the reality that the people in charge of this agency and its mission have lost their grip, their ability to carry out the mission effectively or efficiently. The initiative now is in the hands of others: the Chinese, the Russians, the pesky Iranians, the “Arab Spring” fundamentalists.

US international broadcasting has deteriorated to such an extent that the highest levels of US Government must make a decision to rescue the agency’s mission and remove it from the hands of the BBG/IBB – some of whom are now reported to be preparing for overseas junkets.

Perhaps these Don Quixotes are on a search for the ultimate “holistic solution!”

Most likely, the travel will be at taxpayer expense, of course.

The American taxpayer should never pay for a strategy of defeat. They should have zero tolerance for officials of a Federal agency who embrace and are proponents of a strategy of defeat.

Perhaps the only thing “holistic” about the BBG “strategy” is that it is shot full of holes, if you’ll pardon the play on words.

We provide the BBG press release for your excursion into the surrealism of the “holistic solution” below.

The Federalist
April 2012

###

Friday, April 20, 2012

Board Forges Ahead With China Strategy, Adapted to Modern Media Environment and Audience Needs

Miami, Fl, April 20, 2012 – The Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) today announced a renewed strategy for broadcasting to China that will be reflected in the ongoing dialogue with Congress about the Agency’s proposed FY 2013 budget.
“China’s highly competitive media market and its government’s aggressive jamming of BBG content are long-standing challenges,” said BBG board member Michael Meehan. “Beijing blocks media of many kinds and aggressively stifles free expression, especially in regions where dissent continues to arise in the open, such as Tibet. While the Board understands the reality of the current budget environment, it also perceives a pressing need for the news and information that we provide to be seen and heard across China and Tibet.”

In response to inquiries from Congress and other stake-holders, the Agency is developing alternatives that take into account the roles of Radio Free Asia (RFA) and Voice of America (VOA) Tibetan Radio, along with VOA Cantonese TV programming and VOA satellite TV capability in China.

At the April meeting of the BBG Strategy and Budget Committee, the Board asked that key senior staff form a working group to devise a holistic solution for reaching audiences throughout China, including Tibet.

The funding increase required in order to implement the board’s China distribution strategy totals approximately $3 million for FY 2013. The Board directed top agency management to identify various areas to offset the cost of the new strategy, including migrating satellite frequencies to the KU band and accelerating other transmission optimizations.
This was one of several key initiatives discussed today at the Board’s meeting, held this month in Miami at the Office of Cuba Broadcasting.

An account of those initiatives, as well as reports and other documents, will be posted on the Agency’s website, www.BBG.gov.

The Broadcasting Board of Governors is an independent federal agency, supervising all U.S. government-supported, civilian international broadcasting, whose mission is inform, engage and connect people around the world in support of freedom and democracy. BBG broadcasts reach an audience of 187 million in 100 countries. BBG networks include the Voice of America, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, the Middle East Broadcasting Networks (Alhurra TV and Radio Sawa), Radio Free Asia, and the Office of Cuba Broadcasting (Radio and TV Martí).

For more information, please call the BBG’s Office of Public Affairs at 202-203-4400 or e-mail publicaffairs@bbg.gov.

by The Federalist

Let’s get right down to the nitty-gritty:

Against every major American rival or adversary (China, Iran and Russia being the Big Three), the BBG/IBB is a big-time loser. It does not matter what the medium. It does not matter what the “platform.” The BBG/IBB “agnostics” have failed miserably. The results are the same.

The “BBG Strategy” is a strategy of defeat. These internationalists/globalists are just that: defeatists. They are embarrassed by the American historical record of greatness and the inspiration that greatness gives to others. They are not up to the task. They have reduced US international broadcasting to something third rate. They are not creating, as they claim, a “global news network.” They are getting out of the serious news business, as anyone in the VOA Central Newsroom knows all-too-well.

In place of the solid program requirements of the VOA Charter, the BBG Strategy (their “flim flam strategic plan”), has reduced content of VOA programs: more superficial, less long form and in-depth, leaving audiences with something less than a complete or substantive treatment of major world issues. The broadcast staff is overextended. Expected to do “more with less,” the actual result is “less with less,” in terms of both quality and quantity.

And worst of all, they want to “expand and elevate” social media and expect the American taxpayer to foot the bill. That is what the BBG/IBB “strategists” are all about: ripping off the American taxpayer, trafficking in “lifestyle” trivia and mediocrity and giving themselves bonuses in the process.

Try as they might, the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) and their bonus-mongering International Broadcasting Bureau (IBB) staff can’t shake the obvious: they are trying to take the US Government out of the business of international broadcasting. In doing so, they are left to defend the indefensible, putting up a self-serving sales pitch on their “BBG Strategy” website.

One of the cornerstones of what the BBG/IBB does is use semantics and half-truths to argue its case.

Let’s consider some of their arguments:

We’re Not Eliminating Radio

Most assuredly, they are. In the FY2013 budget proposal, the BBG/IBB wants to eliminate or reduce 14 of 43 Voice of America (VOA) language services and their radio broadcasts. They want to make additional cuts to language services of the various grantee operations. For VOA, the reduction represents a loss of over 30% of its radio broadcasting capabilities. They are not expanding radio broadcasting operations. They are cutting them. Indeed, when the BBG/IBB shut down VOA Russian radio broadcasts in 2008, a remark attributed to a senior agency official was, “We want all of VOA to be like the Russian Service in five years.” That means: no radio.

We know these BBG/IBB types very well. When they want something, they bite down hard and don’t let go. You can sense the psychological lockjaw to their thinking. They have wanted to make serious cuts to radio operations for years. By far, this is the largest attack against radio by these bureaucrats in the history of the agency. If they get these cuts, they will want more, using the same justifications and tricked up “data” to rationalize their case. They want out of radio in a big way. That is the intended outcome.

The Chinese and Radio

The BBG/IBB concedes that the Chinese are “interested” in shortwave radio.

No.

The truth of the matter is the Chinese government is committed to radio.

According to the BBG/IBB, the Chinese government has established a network of shortwave transmitters nationwide. The BBG/IBB notes that the Chinese use the same frequency that the BBG/IBB uses.

The BBG/IBB acknowledges that the Chinese are effective in jamming (or blocking) foreign broadcasts and “do so with great effect.”

In short, the BBG/IBB is on the defensive in China. This admission of Chinese effectiveness is saying that the BBG/IBB does not have effective countermeasures in place to overcome the Chinese success in jamming programs.

And ironically, the countermeasures taken by the Chinese government are the clearest acknowledgement that they take these VOA broadcasts seriously, when it seems the BBG/IBB does not.

The Chinese have also invested serious money, to the tune of about $7-billion dollars, in their overseas media operations. The BBG/IBB acknowledges that the Chinese want to be a big-time international media player.

Typically, the BBG/IBB is behind the curve. The Chinese are big-time media heavyweights. They have made their overseas media presence felt, including brand-new facilities in DC’s Chinatown, right across the National Mall from the BBG/IBB in the Cohen Building.

The BBG/IBB then turns around and dismisses the Chinese radio effort as a loss leader: something they are willing to do, “to accept fractional returns on its investment.”

If the BBG/IBB believes its own rhetoric, the Chinese have already won a great victory.

The BBG/IBB can’t see the obvious: With one stroke, the Chinese have created a successful countermeasure: they have established a domestic network using the same frequency as that used by the BBG/IBB and have blanketed the country to reach all its population. The Chinese government would not be making this substantial investment if the BBG/IBB broadcasts had no merit. They have made that investment to counter the news and information provided by US Government international broadcasting assets. And they wouldn’t be making that investment if audiences for shortwave radio programs were “so low,” as the BBG/IBB claims. In a country of 1.5 billion people, even so-called “low” percentages still translate into BIG population numbers.

Satellite Jamming and the Internet

The BBG/IBB goes on to argue that satellite jamming occurs only with “rogue states” (i.e., those pesky Iranians). The Chinese have yet to do so.

This confuses action with capability. The Chinese no doubt make daily threat assessments. That the Chinese have not done something does not equate with the lack of the capability to do something. If a judgment is made that the nature of a threat increases, no doubt the BBG will be very surprised with what the Chinese can do or are willing to do to protect their interests.

The BBG/IBB is not even paying attention to its own employees. We remember quite well an articulate, demonstrative argument offered by members of the VOA China Branch in 2011 when the BBG/IBB wanted to wipe out VOA Mandarin and Cantonese broadcasts. When it comes to capabilities of the Chinese government, a staffer correctly observed: “They can do it and they will do it.”

The BBG/IBB avoids arguing that their Internet content can’t be blocked. That’s because the Chinese, among others, have demonstrated they are more than capable of blocking, controlling and monitoring the Internet. Indeed, they have even created their own search engines and other common Internet features for use by their own population. They block. They control. They filter. The more successful the Chinese are in developing and expanding their own Internet model, the less effective will be the Internet outsiders, including the BBG/IBB, in developing a following.

And the BBG/IBB is missing the boat in another big way: the Chinese look inward for answers, not necessarily to some outside source. The Chinese leadership isn’t stupid. It is well aware that the needs of its people have to be met. It has made a conscious decision to put economic development as its top priority which in turn impacts on the effort to improve Chinese standards of living. It is not willing to turn loose the “Wild West” of the Internet on its citizens and risk what the government sees as great strides in Chinese development, stability and projection of its power.

We’re not defending what the Chinese are doing. We’re are analyzing their actions and assessing the impact of their decisions.

Like we said, the Chinese have already won a great victory. They see the BBG/IBB actions as a lack of resolve, a manifestation of weakness and lack of commitment. They’d be right on all counts.

And it doesn’t hurt to have about 7 times the money as the BBG/IBB (the kind of money which the agency will never see anytime soon) for the Chinese to make their model work.

And after all of this, one should pay close attention to the robust discussion going on inside China over the ouster of party leader Bo Xilai and the detention of his wife who is implicated in the killing of a British business consultant. Some of that discussion is taking place on the Chinese Internet, even in the face of government efforts to shut down or block certain sites.

In short, the Chinese are demonstrating that they don’t need the BBG/IBB to tell them what to think or how to conduct discussion and debate over topical Chinese issues. They are doing it for themselves.

The BBG/IBB Strategic Train Wreck:

One of the things the BBG/IBB “brain trust” has really excelled in is moving US Government international broadcasting into a no-win position.

Let’s go back to 2008 when the BBG/IBB dumped its VOA Russian broadcasts.

You know what that represents?

The BBG/IBB unconditionally surrendered to the Russians in the arena of international broadcasting.

Within weeks of that decision, the Russian military went on the offensive against the Republic of Georgia. It wasn’t just a purely conventional military operation. The Russians also used sophisticated cyber warfare assets to interdict Georgian and other websites.

And since, the Russians have expanded their broadcasting operations directed toward North America across all media: print, radio and television.

These guys don’t mess around.

And as we have seen with the VOA Russian website, it is all-too-easy to be compromised by false interviews and blogs that are easily taken over by anti-American, Russian ultra-nationalist postings. It’s a great deal for the Russians – whether government or non-government – to use a US Government website to fry the Americans.

These guys aren’t stupid. On the other hand:

At the same time the BBG/IBB was taking Russian broadcasts out of the strategic US Government broadcasting equation, they were also going after the VOA Georgian Service. Remember what we said earlier about the BBG/IBB: they bite down and don’t let go when they’re after something. They want to give up the Georgians and have once again put VOA Georgian on the chopping block.

It may have also escaped the attention of the BBG/IBB that there is a major conflict going on in Syria. The Syrian government has been tossing ordnance (artillery fire) into neighboring Turkey.

Guess what?

The BBG/IBB wants to give up its VOA Turkish service.

If there ever was a really strategic country in the Middle East, Near East or anywhere that has a convergence of critical strategic interests, it’s Turkey. And it’s been that way for two thousand years.

Of course, history is the thing the BBG/IBB knows the least and cares about even less.

And they’re giving up on Spanish to Latin America, including Cuba.

Who is filling the void?

Those pesky Iranians!

And they’re giving up on broadcasts to Tibet.

Need we say more about the defeatists and capitulators of the BBG/IBB “strategy?”

These are the same people that make gratuitous statements about “supporting freedom and democracy.” In view of what the agency is doing, that statement is BBG/IBB hypocrisy in action.

The actions of the BBG/IBB are a statement of its own. Their actions and intended objectives are saying that people and places are not important to them. Worse, they are saying that these people and places are not important to the United States Government.

And ultimately, the BBG/IBB demonstrates that it lacks the fortitude to stay with its mission. The Chinese had it right when one of their state newspapers called the decision to abandon Mandarin and Cantonese broadcasts last year “mission unfinished.”

So here is where things stand:

The Russians know they have won a great victory.

The Chinese know they are well on the way to winning a great victory.

The Iranians are poised to have a field day in Latin America.

And don’t even bring up that “Arab Spring” nonsense. All those American taxpayer millions spent on broadcasting to the Arab and Muslim world over the last decade and the end result is heading toward something wholly unsettling to American interests.

It is no wonder that the United States is one, big-time loser in the arena of global public opinion. If you’re scoring results, these BBG/IBB people are 0-4 in big league play.

Another thing:

Let’s go back to that $50-million dollar contract with the Gallup polling organization.

The more we think about it, the more we see that contract as less of a vehicle for research and more of an attempt by the BBG/IBB at a public relations device – an attempt to use “data” to validate a dysfunctional “strategic plan.” It’s more of the same from the BBG/IBB: beating themselves senseless expecting a different result.

Like we said, they bite down and don’t let go, even when what they are doing compromises US national and public interests and rips off the American taxpayer in the process.

The BBG/IBB has set in motion a process in which the ultimate outcome is to abandon the agency’s mission. There will be no turning back. To do so would be an admission that they are wrong. To repair the damage would cost the American taxpayers many more millions of dollars.

Either way, to continue the dysfunctional plan or to take remedial action to repair the damage from that plan, the BBG/IBB folks don’t care.

No accountability.

No responsibility.

The ultimate expression of arrogance and the corporate “strategy” which they have adopted.

The Federalist
April 2012

Annette Lantos, the wife of the late Congressman Tom Lantos, is the Chairman of the Lantos Foundation for Human Rights and Justice. Click here for more information about Mrs. Lantos’ pro-human rights activities.

Reggie Littlejohn, the founder of Women’s Rights Without Frontiers, serves on the Advisory Board for the Committee for U.S. International Broadcasting, an independent, nongovernmental organization which supports free flow of uncensored news from the United States to countries without free media. WRWF is a non-partisan, international coalition to oppose forced abortion and human trafficking in China. Reggie Littlejoh is an internationally acclaimed expert on China’s One Child Policy. She has briefed the White House and testified twice before Congress and at the European and British Parliaments.

Annette Lantos Defends Voice of America Broadcasts to China

Annette Lantos, wife of the late Congressman Tom Lantos, has written a letter to the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) defending Voice of America China broadcasts in Tibetan and Cantonese.  The BBG put these broadcasts on the chopping block in its budget proposal earlier this year. 

Herself a holocaust survivor, Mrs. Lantos recounted the way that VOA broadcasts “fanned the fires of resistance in the brave underground fighters who sought to destroy the brutal Nazi totalitarianism from within.”  Her letter states:

“I well remember as a girl in Nazi-occupied Hungary, how every Sunday afternoon my family
would draw the shades, close the curtains, and gather around the shortwave radio, pressing our ears close so that we could catch each precious word of freedom and hope that poured out of that radio receiver like manna from heaven . . . The VOA and BBC broadcasts were our
one connection to freedom, our one connection to hope, and our lifeline that gave the resistance the courage to endure to the end. . . To cut off the VOA broadcasts would have been to cut off the very legs of the resistance.”

Reggie Littlejohn, President of Women’s Rights Without Frontiers, said, “I am deeply grateful to Mrs. Lantos for supporting Voice of America broadcasts into China, as she is a towering presence for human rights all over the globe, including millions who suffer at the hands of the brutal, totalitarian regime in China.  With a wave of self-immolations in Tibet, now is not the time to cut off VOA broadcasting in Tibetan.  The Cantonese broadcasts are essential as well.”

Littlejohn continued, “As Mrs. Lantos stated, ‘VOA has been the voice of freedom and democracy in China for 70 years. It is highly respected, even venerated, in China.’ Congressman Tom Lantos would not stand for any cuts to VOA.  Mrs. Lantos is carrying on his powerful legacy.  As Congressman Lantos warned: ‘We must remember that the veneer of civilization is paper thin.  We are its guardians, and we can never rest.’”

Mrs. Lantos served as the Executive Director of the Congressional Human Rights Caucus, co-founded by Congressman Lantos, the only holocaust survivor ever to serve in the United States Congress.  Mrs. Lantos now serves as the Chairman of the Lantos Foundation for Human Rights and Justice.  http://www.lantosfoundation.org/index.asp

Mrs. Lantos’ letter also urges restoring broadcasts to Russia.  In addition, it commends the efforts of the Committee for U.S. International Broadcasting (CUSIB), which works to ensure that U.S. government-funded broadcasts promote respect for human rights and freedom of the press, especially in nations where these basic freedoms are under attack.  Littlejohn serves on the Advisory Board of the CUSIB.

http://www.cusib.org/cusib/2012/04/12/cusib-applauds-annette-lantos-plea-to-save-voice-of-america-services/

Read Mrs. Lantos’ letter here: 

http://womensrightswithoutfrontiers.org/letter.pdf.pdf

–
Reggie Littlejohn, President
Women’s Rights Without Frontiers
www.womensrightswithoutfrontiers.org
Stop Forced Abortion – China’s War on Women! Video (4 min.) Link

The wife of the late Congressman Tom Lantos, with whom she had worked for many years on numerous human rights campaigns around the world, also pleads with the BBG to restore Voice of America broadcasting to Russia, which had been suspended in 2008 and only partially renewed.

The Committee for U.S. International Broadcasting welcomes Mrs. Lantos’ plea in support of U.S. international broadcasting to nations and groups suffering from human rights abuses. BBG members should pay attention to these words of a Holocaust survivor:

“The VOA broadcasts fanned the fires of resistance in the brave underground fighters who sought to destroy the brutal Nazi totalitarianism from within. To cut off the VOA broadcasts would have been to cut off the very legs of the resistance. The same is true today in nations ruled by totalitarian regimes.”

CUSIB believes that the proposed broadcasting cuts and firing of nearly 300 Voice of America and other BBG journalists and staffers will harm U.S. national security and the cause of human rights and freedom around the world. CUSIB also believes that the Broadcasting Board of Governors is making a mistake in cutting essential programs while maintaining and even increasing non-programming spending and outside contracting.

CUSIB joins Mrs. Lantos in her plea to the Broadcasting Board of Governors and hopes that President Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and members of Congress from both parties will ask the BBG to change its course:

“I know that my late husband, Congressman Tom Lantos, would have fought to save the VOA Russian, Tibetan, and Cantonese Broadcast Services — to use all available means to deliver uncensored news, hope and encouragement to those seeking freedom. How could I do any less?”

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.

Website: http://www.cusib.org

This press release was issued through 24-7PressRelease.com.  For further information, visit http://www.24-7pressrelease.com.

SOURCE Committee for U.S. International Broadcasting

Mrs. Lantos’s April 4, 2012 letter to the BBG begins:

“I write in support of Voice of America radio and television broadcasting, particularly to China, Tibet and Russia. In addition, I write in support of the efforts of the Committee for U.S. International Broadcasting. The CUSIB works to ensure that U.S. government-funded broadcasts promote respect for human rights and freedom of the press, especially in nations where these basic freedoms are under attack.”

Annette Lantos is the Chairman of the Lantos Foundation for Human Rights and Justice.

Her late husband Tom Lantos (February 1, 1928 – February 11, 2008) was a Democratic member of the United States House of Representatives from 1981 until his death and a powerful champion of human rights around the world. In speaking before the House of Representatives after his death, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi stated that Lantos “devoted his public life to shining a bright light on the dark corners of oppression. . . He used his powerful voice to stir the consciousness of world leaders and the public alike.” U2 lead singer Bono called him a “prizefighter,” whose stamina would make him go “any amount of rounds, with anyone, anywhere, to protect human rights and common decency.”

The Lantos Foundation for Human Rights and Justice describes Annette Lantos’ role as her late husband’s partner in the struggle for human rights:

“For almost 30 years, Tom and Annette Lantos worked together in the Congress, fighting for the human rights and dignity of people in every corner of the world. This commitment to human rights was a shared passion, born out of their joint experience as Holocaust survivors. With colleagues on both sides of the aisle, they co-founded the Congressional Human Rights Caucus and waged many important legislative battles. After his death, Congress permanently established the Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission, which continues the work of The Human Rights Caucus.”

Click here for more information about Mrs. Lantos’ pro-human rights activities.

Annette Lantos

228 Justice Court, NE #B Washington, DC 20002

Members of the Broadcasting Board of Governors

330 Independence Avenue
Washington, DC 20237

To Whom It May Concern:

I write in support of Voice of America radio and television broadcasting, particularly to China, Tibet and Russia. In addition, I write in support of the efforts of the Committee for U.S. International Broadcasting. The CUSIB works to ensure that U.S. government-funded broadcasts promote respect for human rights and freedom of the press, especially in nations where these basic freedoms are under attack.

I write to you on a personal basis to express dismay that Voice of America radio and television broadcasts to Russia ceased in 2008. I am deeply concerned that although last year’s proposed cuts of VOA Mandarin and Cantonese radio and television programs were halted, this year’s proposal includes the elimination of VOA Cantonese services and VOA Tibetan Radio Services, at a time when there is significant unrest in Tibet. I urge you to continue the Cantonese and Tibetan broadcasts, and to restore them to Russia.

I well remember as a girl in Nazi-occupied Hungary, how every Sunday afternoon my family would draw the shades, close the curtains, and gather around the shortwave radio, pressing our ears close so that we could catch each precious word of freedom and hope that poured out of that radio receiver like manna from heaven. We had to strain to hear over the static caused by Nazi attempts to block the signal, but we were grateful to do so, because these words of truth were pure gold in the ubiquitous mire of Nazi propaganda. The VOA and BBC broadcasts were our one connection to freedom, our one connection to hope, and our lifeline that gave the resistance the courage to endure to the end. The VOA broadcasts fanned the fires of resistance in the brave underground fighters who sought to destroy the brutal Nazi totalitarianism from within. To cut off the VOA broadcasts would have been to cut off the very legs of the resistance. The same is true today in nations ruled by totalitarian regimes.

Now, the people of China and Tibet are suffering at the hands of a brutal, heartless regime. They also cannot speak openly without fear of punishment. The Chinese Communist Party seeks to maintain complete control over the information available to the people of China and Tibet. The CCP blocks the Internet and controls the flow of information, distorting the truth and promoting distrust of America. VOA has been the voice of freedom and democracy in China for 70 years. It is highly respected, even venerated, in China. Human rights activists like Chinese Nobel Peace Prize laureate Liu Xiaobo and Chinese campaigner for women’s rights Chen Guangcheng languish in prison and under house arrest. VOA broadcasts may be the only link with the free world for their families and supporters.

Millions of Cantonese speaking and Mandarin speaking Chinese people depend on VOA daily as their lifeline to the light of truth, freedom and hope. Millions of Tibetans also depend upon VOA’s Tibetan radio broadcasts. Radio reaches hundreds of millions who are too poor to afford television or the Internet, especially in rural China and Tibet.

Further, VOA radio and satellite television serve to counter anti-American propaganda in the most powerful way, giving a positive view of America, which is so necessary during this time of increasing Chinese militarism and anti-American militancy. Thus, these broadcasts are important to our national security.

I know that my late husband, Congressman Tom Lantos, would have fought to save the VOA Russian, Tibetan, and Cantonese Broadcast Services — to use all available means to deliver uncensored news, hope and encouragement to those seeking freedom. How could I do any less?

Recent pro-democracy protests around the world and attempts to suppress them show that giving up radio and television broadcasting to rely exclusively on the Internet would be a mistake, because the Internet can so easily be monitored and blocked. I commend the CUSIB’s efforts to urge the Broadcasting Board of Governors to maintain broadcasting – especially Voice of America radio and television broadcasting – into China and Tibet, and to restore it to Russia.

Sincerely,

Annette Lantos

To read the entire letter by Annette Lantos click here.

by Quo Vadis
 
Year after fiscal year, members of Congress in bipartisan fashion, question the  plans of the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) and its powerful Executive Staff to eviscerate the Voice of America. Since 1999, the Broadcasting Board of Governors has governed the units responsible for U.S. international broadcasting including the Voice of America, Radio/TV Marti and the grantee organizations:  RFE/RL, RFA (Radio Free Asia) and for the past several years, MBN (Middle East Broadcasting Network).
 
All sorts of reasons for dismantling VOA are presented.  The latest reasoning goes like this: the Chinese government jams VOA Mandarin and Cantonese broadcasts. In fact, the BBG people have demonstrated to congressional aides what jamming in China does to the signal.  Ergo, the broadcasts should be shut down.  Their solution?  The Internet, leaving out the critical fact that the Chinese government has complete control of the Internet thanks to its most efficient cyber-army.  Thankfully, Congress understood these facts when it decided to negate the BBG’s attempts last year to drastically cut VOA Mandarin and Cantonese radio and TV broadcasts to China. That did not deter the BBG Executive Staff from narrowing the reduction plan, now proposing to cut the VOA Cantonese Service in FY2013.
 
Another argument presented by the BBG in its jaunts to the Congress is:  since Mandarin and Cantonese speakers can read much of the Standard/Classical Chinese script, the BBG should cease Cantonese broadcasting.  The BBG and its Executive Staff neglect to mention that in their spoken forms, the Mandarin and Cantonese languages are totally different.  Therefore, by closing VOA Cantonese as they have been proposing for years, the BBG would effectively eliminate communications with over 60 million Cantonese-language speakers in China, including the residents of Hong Kong.
 
Using that curious reasoning of the BBG and its Executive Staff regarding jamming, one wonders how world history might have changed if the present BBG had governed international broadcasting during the long years of the Cold War? What would have happened if the VOA and RFE/RL had stopped its broadcasts to the countries of Eastern Europe and the USSR when jamming was extensive?   Would the Berlin Wall have fallen?  Would Lech Walesa have created the Solidarity movement?  Would the Republic of Georgia and the Baltic countries have had the chance at independence from the Soviet Union? Would the names of Vaclav Havel and Alexander Dubcek been known to the Czechoslovak people?
 
During the Cold War, in-country monitoring of broadcasts in those areas conclusively showed that there were significant lapses in the effectiveness of the Soviet and Eastern European jammers to fully obliterate the signals (quite a common thing that happens in shortwave broadcasting). Past Directors of the VOA  during the Cold War understood the issues of radio reception and the ability of shortwave to elude jamming, especially outside the cities. They would never have proposed the cessation of U.S. broadcasts to critical areas as the BBG is doing now.  And if by chance they had, there would have been some intervention by the U.S. Information Agency which at one time had a prioritized list of countries for which U.S. broadcasts, in the interests of national security, were essential.
 
Concrete evidence since the ’89 fall of the Berlin Wall with the subsequent liberalization in countries escaping the Soviet yoke shows that listening to VOA broadcasts, in spite of attempts at signal jamming, was extensive throughout the USSR and Eastern Europe. Using the faulty logic of today’s BBG and its Executive Staff in cutting broadcasts because of jamming, U.S. international broadcasting would have lost what many have called its finest hour.
 
And then, there’s that sticky question of shortwave radio that the BBG and its Executive Staff keep saying is out-of-date and passe.  Ironically, their own research shows that over a billion people in the world tune in regularly to shortwave radio and that shortwave is necessary in countries with vast land stretches like Russia which encompasses nine time zones as well as China or Brazil.  Their own statements verify that the bulk of their present audience listens via radio.  Their conclusion?  But, of course, heave shortwave radio broadcasts and close the Edward R. Murrow Transmitting Station in Greenville NC.  Due to opposition from BBG member Victor Ashe and intervention by North Carolina Congressman Walter B. Jones, the Greenville facility has been saved for now.
 
It is comforting to know that there are many in Congress, on both sides of the aisle, who do understand what the VOA mission is all about, including Congresswoman Betty McCollum. In her remarks at a subcommittee hearing several years ago, Congresswoman McCollum stressed the strategic importance of radio in delivering the message of America to the world.  She also pointed out that VOA is a vital part of the public diplomacy toolbox, a comment that no doubt aggravated the BBG Executive Staff who deny that any such function exists for VOA.  Broadcasting employees could only wish that her belief in the value of VOA broadcasts would be shared, in some way, by the BBG Executive Staff.
 
Video:   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SHdpodoVxUE
 
Judging by the BBG’s concerted attacks upon the Voice of America, the remarks of Congresswoman McCollum and the bipartisan opinion of a majority of the U.S. Congress regarding the importance of VOA broadcasts are alien to the BBG Executive Staff whose actions reveal their determination to throw this once-effective 70-year-old institution on to the trash heap of history.
 
 
 

by Quo Vadis
 
The recent and most devastating Reduction-in-Force proposed by Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) in the FY-2013 budget is the latest in a series of frontal attacks against the basic mission of the Voice of America.   For FY-2013, the BBG has stepped up the pace of these annual onslaughts proposing to cut almost 200 broadcasters from an ever-shrinking staff, sapping the strength of America’s voice to the world and draining what’s left of the morale of its broadcasters. At the same time, the BBG is busy feathering its bureaucratic nest with the number of past, present and future management positions exploding.
 
Time and again, over the last few years, the BBG, on the recommendation of its Executive Staff, has marched in lockstep up to Capitol Hill with its proposals to cut  important and vital VOA language broadcasts, including English. Only through the direct intervention of the Congress have VOA broadcasts been spared. But like a toddler in a perpetual temper tantrum, the Executive Staff of the BBG persists in its relentless anti-VOA animus trying to prove to Congress that they, like the Enron folk, are “the smartest guys in the room.”
 
Let’s take a swing through the past starting with 2007, when the BBG proposed closing a number of services including Cantonese, Croatian, Georgian, Greek, Thai and Uzbek for FY2008.  In addition, the BBG planned to cut 14 hours of radio broadcasts in English, plus ending radio in Hindi, Russian and to the Balkan countries.  Reductions were proposed for broadcasts in Portuguese to Africa, Tibetan, and Ukrainian.
 
Nothing doing, said the Congress. The decision was helped along by an unprecedented bipartisan letter to save the VOA in March 2007 signed by eleven (11) former Voice of America Directors who served over the years under both Republican and Democratic administrations.  (see letter at link: http://www.publicdiplomacy.org/78.htm)
 
Fast forward to the final version of the appropriations bill for FY2008, in which the Congress overturned the BBG’s slash-and-burn plan with the following language:  

Language Service Reductions.- The Committee recommendation supports continuing broadcasting which the administration proposed for language service reductions in fiscal year 2008, particularly Albanian, Bosnian, Cantonese, Croatian, English, Georgian, Kazakh, Macedonian, Romanian, Russian, Serbian, South Slavic, Tibetan, Thai, Ukrainian, and Uzbek.

 
True to form, the powers that be at the BBG paid no attention to the will of the Congress which picks up the tab for U.S. broadcasting and proceeded to cut radio/TV broadcasts to Russia in July of ’08, just three weeks before Russian troops invaded Georgia.  The VOA Georgian Service narrowly escaped the same fate thanks to the efforts of a Congresswoman who headed the Congressional Georgian Caucus.
 
Even though rebuffed in the appropriations for FY2008, the Executive Staff of the BBG was at it again the very next year. In the FY 2009 budget process, the BBG  requested implementation of the FY2008 cuts which the Congress prevented them from doing the previous year.
 
“Nay,” said the Congress in a bipartisan vote.
 
The House version of the 2009 appropriations bill included the following language:  

The Committee recognizes VOA for its essential contribution to United States public diplomacy.  The VOA’s English-language radio programming is especially important since it provides accurate, objective and comprehensive news to a potential English-speaking audience of 1.6 billion people worldwide.

 
The U.S. Senate concurred. In its appropriations bill for FY 2009, the Senate wrote: 

The Committee provides $693 million for the Broadcasting Board of Governors, an increase of $23 million above the FY08 enacted level and $ 6 million below the request.  The bill provides funding for broadcasting in languages which the Administration proposed to eliminate in FY09, such as Russian, Uzbek, Tibetan and to the Balkans, where freedom of speech remains restricted and broadcasting is still necessary.

 
 
Same old, same old reduction proposals for FY 2010, but this time less drastic: Croatian, Greek (a perennial target) and Hindi.  In spite of the outcry from listeners in India, BBG executives  closed down VOA Hindi radio/TV broadcasts, arguing that VOA English could substitute for those language broadcasts.  Reductions were also proposed to Radio/TV Marti newscasts and on that basis, the BBG conducted an illegal RIF of 23 employees which was overturned in 2011 by an Arbitrator.  Since the Agency has appealed the Arbitrator’s decision on restoring the fired Marti employees, that situation is still in limbo.
 
Interestingly enough, although the availability of VOA English broadcasts was used as a justification to close VOA Hindi in 2010,  the BBG proposes to cut VOA English programs to the area in FY2013.
 
It didn’t get any better in 2011 with the BBG’s proposed reductions for FY2012. A huge battle erupted last year to save the VOA China radio/TV programming in Mandarin and Cantonese as the BBG proposed closing down the radio/TV broadcasts and transferring their functions to the Internet, which is totally blocked in China and policed by a 50,000+ person cyber-army.
   
In a decisive maneuver, an amendment was proposed for the FY2012 House Appropriations bill by Congressman Rohrabacher and approved unanimously in a bipartisan vote by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee:. 

Limitation: Of the funds authorized to be appropriated to the Broadcasting Board of Governors, 13.76 million is authorized to be appropriated only for Voice of America Mandarin and Cantonese language radio and satellite television broadcasting.  Such funds may not be used for any other purpose.

 
Although the U.S. Congress once again came to the rescue of VOA,  the victory was bittersweet because the BBG, like the Energizer Bunny, was cranking up for the legendary Big One in its FY2013 budget plans with the most sweeping Reduction-in-Force ever proposed for VOA.
 
Battle-weary broadcasting employees are still determined to fight to the end whatever that end may be and have turned again to the Congress to petition for redress of grievance.
 
Congressional staffers often ask VOA employees why they think that the BBG is so intent on cutting the Voice of America.  The only answer seems to be that the BBG and its Executive Staff must truly believe that they, and not the Congress or VOA broadcasters, are “the smartest guys in the room.”  Exactly what the executives at Enron in their corporate arrogance thought as well.
 
​​​​​​​
 
 

A group of Tibetans and human rights community supporters protested Friday in Los Angeles at the Sony Pictures Entertainment office against the planned silencing of the Voice of America (VOA) Tibetan radio programs by the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG), a US federal agency in charge of VOA and other US international broadcasts. Michael Lynton, one of President Obama’s close friends, serves as the BBG’s interim presiding governor. Lynton is the Chairman and CEO of Sony Pictures Entertainment. Sony Corp. announced that Lynton will be promoted to chief executive of all of Sony’s operations in the U.S.

The Broadcasting Board of Governors wants to end Voice of America (VOA) radio news program to Tibet, Vietnam and Laos — all three nations ruled by repressive communist regimes. The Board also wants to close down the VOA Cantonese Service with its radio, television, and Internet news programs to China. In a move that will please Russia and its President-elect Vladimir Putin, the BBG also plans to end Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) broadcasts in Chechen to Chechnya and Voice of America Georgian radio programs. Foreign policy experts say that the Chinese government will be pleased by the termination of VOA Tibetan and Cantonese broadcasts.

The BBG continues to insist on ending VOA Tibetan radio broadcasts despite this week’s statement from the U.S. State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland who told reporters that China is aggravating the situation in the Tibetan region by its attacks on the Dalai Lama, Tibet’s spiritual leader-in-exile.

“We remain deeply concerned about the tensions and the human rights violations in the Tibetan areas. China’s own continuing vilification of the Dalai Lama and repeated accusations with regard to the Dalai Lama, and saying that he is directly involved – as to the Tibetan grievances, it just makes the situation worse. So we continue to call on China to respect the human rights of Tibetans and to – and allow journalists in, etcetera.”

The U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee has approved a resolution deploring what it calls “the repressive policies targeting Tibetans” and urges Beijing to resume talks with Tibetan Buddhist leaders, including the Dalai Lama. The resolution does not carry the weight of law, but it urges U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to seek a full accounting from Beijing on its ongoing crackdown, particularly at the flashpoint Kirti monastery.

VOA’s Tibetan Service reported Wednesday that a 20-year-old monk named Lobsang Sherab set himself on fire in the main street of Cha township in China’s southwestern Sichuan province. Sherab was a member of the Kirti monastery, where anti-Beijing sentiment runs high.

Sherab was the 20th Tibetan monk or nun who have died by self-immolation this year, with at least 10 others surviving their suicide attempts.

BBG officials say that radio broadcasts to Tibet by Radio Free Asia (RFA), a semi-private broadcaster also funded and managed by the BBG, are sufficient even if there is a political and human rights crisis in Tibet.

The Broadcasting Board of Governors apparently does not believe that the Voice of America serves as a powerful symbol of America’s support for the oppressed people around the world, a media and foreign policy expert told BBG Watch. According to this expert, the Voice of America is one of the few remaining tools for delivering uncensored news to Tibet from the United States. The continued existence of Voice of America Tibetan radio programs also sends public diplomacy messages to the Tibetans that their suffering will not ignored or forgotten by the American people, the expert said.

The BBG cites tight budgets as the reason for the proposed cuts, but critics argue that the BBG’s out-of-control bureaucrats make these programming cuts to save their own jobs and those of big contractors. The BBG has awarded a 50 million dollar five year audience research contract to Gallup despite serious doubts about the value of conducting public opinion surveys on sensitive political and media issues in countries like China where the population is intimidated by a repressive regime.

The BBG plans to drastically reduce other broadcasting programs, including English and Spanish-language Voice of America international news reporting and news from the United States. At the same time the BBG is building up its bureaucratic arm, the International Broadcasting Bureau (IBB), giving its executives large bonuses despite their official Office Personnel Management (OPM) rating as the worst leaders and managers in the federal government.

Critics charge that the BBG is destroying America’s strategic information outreach to the world to feed its own bureaucracy. The bureaucratic arm of the BBG — the International Broadcasting Bureau (IBB) — is run by Richard Lobo, also one of President Obama’s close friends and supporters.

###

From the protest organizers:

Tell Michael Lynton to pay attention to the Tibetans who self-immolate to shock the conscience of the world.

Shock Michael Lynton’s conscience by signing our petition.

Tell Michael Lynton to save Voice of America radio broadcasts to Tibet, radio, TV, and Internet programs in Cantonese to China, and other American broadcasts and information programs to the world.

Tell Michael Lynton to stop taxpayers’ wasting money on the International Broadcasting Bureau bureaucracy and their big contractors while people in Tibet, China, Vietnam, Laos and around the world want news, hope and support from America.

What: Protest at Sony Pictures Entertainment Global Communication
When: Friday, March 30, 2012
Time: 11:00 –12:00AM
Where: 10202 West Washington Blvd. Culver City, California 90232

In the past several months, the tragedy of series of self-immolation of Tibetan people happened in Tibet. Because of news blackout, few people know the truth. The cancellation of the Tibetan language radio service of the Voice of America (VOA) will worsen the condition of freedom of information for Tibetans in China.

We hope Mr. Michael Lyton, the CEO of Sony Pictures Entertainment Global Communications and the Presiding Interim Chair for the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG), who supports VOA’s cuts, can change his mind and support the continuing of Tibetan radio service of VOA.

Sponsors:
China Democracy Party
Visual Artists Guild
Local Tibetans from Los Angeles Area

Contacting:
James Zheng 626-227-4575
Minzhu98@yahoo.com

The Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) member Michael Meehan and BBG’s Director of Strategy and Development Bruce Sherman will speak about their embattled federal agency’s new strategic vision for US international broadcasting at a panel discussion later this month organized jointly with Gallup which recently landed a controversial 50 million dollar audience research contract with the BBG. Also see the BBG announcement: “Gallup Joins BBG To Examine Media Freedom.”

The “Media Freedom and Public Confidence: Informing, Engaging, and Connecting the World through the Media” panel discussion will take place March 28, 2012 from 10:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. at The Gallup Building at 901 F Street, NW, Washington, DC. Attendance is by registration.

The announcement says that the discussion will focus on how the world’s populations perceive media freedom within their countries. The panelists will also share data on citizens’ confidence in their media.

The joint BBG/Gallup event may offer an opportunity for the public to learn more about the controversial agency which one US Senator described as the most worthless organization in the federal government. Its officials are consistently given the lowest leadership and management ratings in the annual Office of Personnel Management (OPM) employee opinion surveys. Their union reports that employees have no confidence in the strategic plan and reforms announced recently by BBG officials.

BBG employees, their union and human rights groups all point out that while attacks on free press intensify around the world, the BBG is pushing for major cutbacks in broadcasting to countries without free media as part of the proposal for reorganizing US international broadcasting. Critics see it as an attempt by BBG officials to save their bureaucratic jobs at the expense of critical broadcasts and journalistic positions which they want to eliminate to protect theirs from budget cuts. A BBG spokesperson implied that keeping Tibetan and Cantonese radio broadcasts by both Voice of America and Radio Free Asia during a period of tight budgets would be irresponsible.

An anonymous Voice of America journalist said, however, that the decision to end VOA radio broadcasts in Tibetan and to abolish the VOA Cantonese Service suggests that the Broadcasting Board of Governors “has gone mad.” “This is happening on the day China’s Vice President Xi Jinping, heir apparent of the communist regime, arrives in Washington on a get-to-know-you visit. This is happening while Tibet is burning. A day after the 23rd Tibetan monk self-immolated to protest unprecedented Chinese crackdown on their religion,” a journalist wrote.

Bruce Sherman who will speak at the joint BBG/Gallup panel is the chief BBG strategic planner behind unprecedented recent and previous cuts to Voice of America (VOA) broadcasts to Tibet, China, Russia, and Afghanistan as well as major proposed reductions in VOA English and Spanish news programs. The event will offer an opportunity for Sherman and Meehan to explain the silencing of the Voice of America to most of the world and for members of the public to ask questions about the BBG’s strategy and its restructuring plan.

Michael Meehan is one of nine members (there is currently one vacancy) of the bipartisan Broadcasting Board of Governors which manages all civilian US government-funded international broadcasting. The majority of BBG members have approved the latest programming cuts, although senior Republican member Ambassador Victor Ashe has been raising objections about some of the Board’s decisions and plans, including the price tag of the audience research contract with Gallup, and expressing concern about poor management and poor employee morale.

Jim Clifton, Chairman and CEO of Gallup, is scheduled to speak at the event. At about the same time the BBG had voted to approve the 50 million dollar five-year contract with Gallup, it had also decided to end numerous broadcasts, mostly at the Voice of America, and to eliminate positions of over 200 broadcasters and support staffers.

Despite these programming cuts, the BBG’s administrative organization, the International Broadcasting Bureau (IBB), has added dozens of new positions in the last two years to support far fewer programs. Critics argue that much of the audience research the BBG needs is either free or can be purchased at a much lower cost, while audience research in China and other countries ruled by authoritarian regimes is practically impossible to conduct among the intimidated population without getting highly biased results.

Even when audience research results are accurate, critics argue that by applying commercial marketing analysis to what are unique US taxpayer-supported journalistic programs, BBG and IBB officials have shown their inability to draw program planning conclusions that are appropriate for US broadcasters who are required by law to speak on behalf of the United States and are committed to promoting human rights and democracy.

One critic said that while good audience research is absolutely essential, seeing the larger geopolitical and foreign policy picture combined with the ability to interpret the data for a non-commercial US government-funded broadcaster with a unique public mission are even more important. This ability has been spectacularly absent among BBG strategists, the critic told BBG Watch.

Critics have also accused BBG officials of insisting on programming changes based on audience research results which showed that audiences in countries like China and Russia object to strong criticism of their governments’ human rights records. BBG officials and their private consultants reportedly have made these demands during program and audience research reviews with BBG broadcasters, arguing that suggested programming changes will enable them to improve audience ratings. Some journalists who objected to these orders were dismissed or their programs eliminated by BBG executives. BBG experts reportedly told the Voice of America Russian Service not to refer to the Russian military attack on Georgia in 2008 as an invasion because according to their research audiences in Russia object to such an description.

BBG journalists reported that officials have also transmitted to them requests from repressive regimes and affiliate stations abroad demanding limits on political reporting while asking for less controversial non-political coverage.

The original BBG’s founding mandate was to protect the Voice of America and other taxpayer-supported international broadcasters from frequent past interference with news reporting from the State Department and the White House, but critics charge that interference from the BBG and its audience researchers and strategists can be even more insidious.

In their FY2013 budget proposal, BBG officials insist that there is duplication between the Voice of America and the so-called private surrogate broadcasters such as Radio Free Asia (RFA) and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL). Officials claim that rather than relying of the federally-owned and federally-operated Voice of America, the job of informing audiences about the United States and US policies can be done in many countries by privately-run broadcasters also managed by the BBG.

These plans have met with strong bipartisan opposition in Congress which last year had blocked the BBG plan to end VOA radio and TV broadcasts to China. Unlike the surrogate broadcasters, the Voice of America has a Congressionally-approved Charter to inform the world about the United States.

Critics describe the BBG cuts to the Voice of America as an indirect attempt to de-federalize it by transferring assets to private broadcasting entities under BBG’s management and lessening Congressional and public scrutiny over all US international broadcasting.

The latest BBG proposal to end VOA radio broadcasts to Tibet and VOA Cantonese broadcasts to China at the time of increasing reports about self-immolating Tibetan monks and people seeking basic human rights in China being sent to languish in the Laogai –- re-edcuation through labor camps — have sparked an outrage among human rights organizations.

The International Campaign for Tibet NGO has included an appeal to Congress to continue VOA radio programs to Tibet. The online appeal has already produced thousands of messages to more than 470 congressional offices, the International Campaign for Tibet reported. One BBG critic said that BBG strategists seem completely unable to understand political and human rights dimensions, such as the suffering of the Tibetans and Chinese dissidents, that audience research in countries like China, Russia, Iran, and Cuba cannot properly capture.

Critics also point out that BBG strategists have an unusual record of proposing US broadcasting cuts shortly before major international crises or assaults on human rights. The latest BBG program cutting proposal preceded a major spike in repression in China and Tibet, while the BBG’s 2008 decision to end Voice of America radio and TV broadcasts to Russia came just days before Russia launched a military attack on neighboring Georgia. In another planning blunder by BBG strategists, the proposed VOA Chinese broadcasting cuts in 2011 were to take effect on the anniversary of the founding of communist China. The latest BBG proposal again calls for ending Voice of America radio broadcasts to Georgia.

In justifying previous and current proposed cuts, BBG officials insist they need to transfer resources from broadcasting to support new media technologies. But critics charge that since many of these technologies are free or inexpensive, the money taken from US government broadcasting to strategically important countries like China and Russia is wasted on the BBG and IBB bureaucracy and lining the pockets of big private contractors while contract employees are being shamelessly exploited.

An anonymous VOA journalist wrote that in addition to ending Voice of America Tibetan radio, BBG strategists are decimating VOA broadcasts to the Laos (4 out of 6 employees), Vietnam (10 out of 15 employees) and Cantonese to China (all 7 employees). The journalist observed that the BBG is cutting America’s broadcasts to three out of five remaining communist regimes. The journalist added that while planning all these cuts, the BBG promoted Bruce Sherman to an SES position, hired an SES director for the Office of Digital Design and Innovation, hired a BBG communications director, another SES. All three SES positions were created as the Broadcasting Board of Governors was planning to eliminate dozens of rank and file journalists. “Who needs this Board that cannibalizes its own worker bees to feed itself?” — the journalist asked.

Bruce Sherman and Michael Meehan will have a chance to respond to this and similar questions at the joint Broadcasting Board of Governors and Gallup panel discussion in Washington on March 28.

View more information and register for this event on the Gallup website HERE.

by Quo Vadis 

In November 2011, at a forum sponsored by the Public Diplomacy Council and reported on by Adam Clayton Powell III, participants heard that the newest 2011 VOA audience figures showed an increase of 22 million for the international broadcasting audience in comparison with 2010.  Good news, of course, and fast on the heels of a brand-spanking-new Strategic Plan unveiled just a month prior and authored by the IBB spokesman at the forum, the Director of the Office of Strategic Planning and Performance Measurement of the United States Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG).

In those 2011 VOA audience figures, “the biggest success on the planet” is how the IBB spokesman described U.S. broadcasting in Afghanistan.  Evidently, the data showed three-quarters of the entire country watches or listens to American broadcasts. Additionally, 400,000 Afghans subscribe to BBG text messaging services. According to available research data, less than half of the population in Afghanistan has a TV and only a tiny minuscule has access to the Internet. Therefore, it would not be difficult to deduce that radio, for the time being, is by far the most powerful medium in the country to reach potential listeners.
 
In reaction to the news about the impact and popularity of U.S. broadcasting in Afghanistan, the BBG/IBB in its FY-2013 budget submission decided to cut those evidently powerful VOA radio broadcasts to Afghanistan while proposing to release eight seasoned VOA broadcasters. In so doing is the Agency, as some wonder, transferring the functions away from VOA’s federal employees to the RFE/RL surrogate grantee, thereby opening up the back door to de-federalization?   

That non-sequitur in deciding to cut VOA Afghan broadcasts in spite of their importance and popularity is rivaled by the announcement in the FY-2013 budget that VOA will cut most of its English-language broadcasts to the world including China and the Middle East. This decision ignores the fact that according to some, English is or should be the official language of the United States, remains the language of diplomacy, culture, and commerce in the world as well as being the second language of choice for millions of people around the globe from Albania to Zambia. One can only wonder if the BBC, plus Radio Canada International and Radio Australia, perhaps inspired by the daring VOA example, will soon cut its English-language broadcasts to the world as well. 

At the Public Diplomacy forum, there came a “medium is the message” a la Marshall McLuhan moment when the IBB spokesman stated: “Impact cannot be reduced to audience, but you cannot have impact without audience,” adding that broadcasting needs to look at specific audiences – not just traditional elites, but young people and women.” Actually, the Voice of America has been doing that for many years, informing audiences with the latest news and commentary and tailoring its back-half features to the diverse interests of its listeners with programming aimed at a cross-section of the listening audience: farmers, students, teachers, engineers, politicians, elites, business people, young/old, men/women, rich and poor. In its music programs, the VOA of the not-too-distant past  broadcast the full spectrum of American music: opera and classical music, country, Broadway, folk, pop, rock, hip-hop, blues, jazz and never concentrated solely on rock and pop music, as in Radio Sawa to the Middle East, as if that were the only musical genre produced in America.

Beyond audience growth, another goal of the Strategic Plan, said its author, is for VOA and other U.S. broadcasters to embrace user content and use material created by listeners and viewers. According to the IBB spokesman at the forum, the “value added” by U.S. international broadcasting would be checking and verifying the accuracy of material submitted by the audience. Unfortunately, the “check-and-verify” concept was challenged by the recent gaffe of the VOA Russian website which published a completely fictitious interview supposedly with a leader of the anti-Putin dissident movement in Moscow, Alexei Navalny, who announced to the world that the VOA interview was totally bogus and conducted via cyberspace with an impostor. “Value added” is a slippery slope, indeed.

One questioner at the PD forum said he could not find the phrase “public diplomacy” anywhere in the Strategic Plan.  “Correct,” said the Strategic Plan author, the reason being:  “Objective journalists by and large, don’t subscribe to the idea that they are changing people’s attitudes,” continuing that “attitudinal and behavioral change is the hope, but not a direct goal.”  And the explanation finished with:  “we don’t do the advocacy piece. Good things will come from good journalism.”  

Crystal-clear.  Forget the WHAM (Winning Hearts and Minds) factor.

That comment is in sharp contrast to the words of the distinguished public diplomacy expert, Walter Roberts, whom many credit with being one of the founding fathers of VOA. At the recent 70th birthday celebration of VOA, Walter Roberts stated: As the information revolution proceeds, diplomacy will become much more public diplomacy and public diplomacy cannot exist without international broadcasting. When I predict that in 30 years the Voice of America will exist, I also predict that Deustche Welle will also exist, that the BBC will exist because international broadcasting is a vital part of public diplomacy.”

Although public diplomacy was indeed omitted in the latest Strategic Plan, former BBG Chairman, Walter Isaacson, placed international broadcasting at the center of our national security. In his remarks when the Strategic Plan was unveiled, Mr. Isaacson said: “Our media outlets – VOA, RFE/Radio Liberty, Alhurra TV and Radio Sawa, RFA, and Radio/TV Marti – are a vital, cost-effective national security asset, whose impact is felt by some 166 million people weekly across the globe where critical U.S. interests are at stake.”

That difference of opinion is reflected in the current state of affairs at the BBG/IBB where there is an obvious disconnect about the true mission of international broadcasting between upper management and some middle-managers together with most of the rank-and-file.  Over the past few years, that disconnect is also obvious with the U.S. Congress which has consistently overruled the plans of the BBG/IBB in the national interest and the interests of national security.

The VOA ensemble trudges on and plays its heart out in spite of who happens to be the leader or conductor at any given time. Many directors embraced their duties conducting the VOA ensemble with enthusiasm, earning respect and admiration; others were indifferent or perceived the employees as a bothersome and unruly bunch, preferring to keep interaction to a minimum. Regardless of whether the Director was a gem or a lemon or whether upper management knew the score or didn’t, the broadcasting band continued to play on and does so now until such time as its voice will be silenced.

Not much different from the musicians in this video playing Dance of the Comedians from Smetana’s “The Bartered Bride” with the irrepressible rascal, Victor Borge, at the podium.

Link to Video

Getting a BBG Birthday Cake

THE VOA ANNIVERSARY WALTZ:  LA DANSE MACABRE?

by Quo Vadis

For the past 10-15 years, as annual budget time nears, there’s a haunting presence in the halls of the Voice of America, call it, if you will, Mme La Guillotine furtively hovering in the background as broadcasters wonder whether this year it will be all over and they will be declared extinct like the dodo bird, a faded blip on the international broadcasting scene. A small cabal from the Executive Staff on the third floor of the Cohen Building, known as Valhalla to rank-and-file, stride to and fro with furrowed brows from meeting to meeting buttressed by bulging binders and glowing Power Point presentations, as they ponder the fate of the VOA language services in what some think is a macabre reenactment of the thumbs-up or down of Roman Coliseum days.

Some Services are plagued with this recurrent nightmare year after year as grating as a needle stuck in the groove of a scratched LP or maddening as the events in the film, Groundhog Day.  One of them is the VOA Georgian Service, doomed and then redeemed not once but many times. The Service was first saved from extinction by a VOA Director after a persuasive presentation by the service members together with a panel of knowledgeable experts.  In succeeding years, that pesky Mme La Guillotine persisted in prowling around the parameters of the Georgian Service. In ’08,  they were again on the chopping block but were saved, this time by the intervention of two gutsy Congresswomen, one who chaired the Congressional Georgian Caucus and believed that the Republic of Georgia was of great geo-political importance to the United States, a seemingly foreign concept to those making the decisions on diminishing the Voice of America. Fast forward to 2011 when VOA Georgian celebrated its 60th year of broadcasting with the well-deserved congratulatory messages and celebration. With those cheers for VOA Georgian achievements still a fresh memory, the fate of the Service once again hangs in the balance with severe cutbacks proposed in 2012, keeping only two employees who will be expected to produce high-quality TV and Internet – a recipe for potential failure.

In the ’08 proposed closures which Georgia barely escaped thanks to swift action by Congress, VOA Tibet was also scheduled to go off the air but escaped like its spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama, who had been forced into exile to India many years before.  Last year, the VOA Tibetan Service, created by law in 1991, celebrated its 20th anniversary at festivities replete with kudos and toasts to its accomplishments. The very next year, perhaps because of the anniversary curse, third-floor executives announced that VOA Tibetan radio broadcasts, described by the Dalai Lama as a crucial lifeline to the outside world for his oppressed people, would be off the air leaving TV and internet. BBG executives are evidently oblivious to the fact that only exiled Tibetans in India can see VOA Tibetan TV since transmissions are effectively blocked within the country just as Chinese authorities prevent any internet access.  One of those fabled and familiar “oh well” moments.

Speaking of the bad-luck connection between VOA anniversaries and disaster, the Russian Service celebrated its 60th anniversary with much hoopla only to be unceremoniously shut down a year later in August of ’08 two weeks before the invasion by Russia of neighboring Georgia.  Ignoring the specific written advisory of Congress that radio/TV broadcasts to Russia be continued, the BBG transferred VOA Russian to internet only with the inevitable result that it lost its listeners, prestige and reach. Four years later, we see an aggressive Russia caught in the vise of an autocratic Putin and his plutocracy with unprecedented-since-the Cold-War venomous anti-American attacks issued from its ruling circles as our U.S. ambassador frantically strives to connect via Twitter.

The revolving-door scenario is repeated with the VOA Greek Service year after year: dumped and then resurrected, closed and then opened like a barn door in a windstorm.  Appeals to Congress and support from American Hellenic organizations kept turning the tide but again this year the Red Queen refrain – Off with their heads – is heard as the Greek Service faces closure for mysterious reasons known only to a select few perhaps in the secluded holy monasteries of Mount Athos.

The VOA China Branch narrowly dodged the infamous VOA anniversary curse last year when the U.S. Congress overruled the BBG‘s plans to cut radio/TV broadcasts to China and transfer its communication functions solely to InterNet which is almost totally blocked by China’s formidable cyber army. The Branch properly celebrated its 70th anniversary not in the confines of the VOA building but in the Rayburn Building of the U.S. Congress.

In March, the VOA celebrated its 70th anniversary with a glowing tribute to its influence and impact throughout the world over seven decades with congratulations from the U.S. President, the Secretary of State, video greetings from the Dalai Lama and Burmese activist Aung Suu Kyi, all kinds of hosannahs from near and far, from inside and outside the building.

Knowing the track record of anniversary celebrations preceding extinction, one can only wonder if the BBG knows something that VOA employees do not?

Moral of the story?  Beware of management emissaries from Valhalla bearing cake.

The bureaucratic executive staff at the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) and its operating arm the International Broadcasting Bureau (IBB) are proposing major cuts in U.S. international broadcasting to strategic countries and regions while expanding their own ranks and expenses. They have targeted the primary strategic U.S. broadcaster — the Voice of America (VOA) — for the most severe program cuts and reductions while bureaucratic IBB positions will grow from fiscal year 2011 from 593 to 678.

The IBB/BBG executive bureaucracy has been rated in the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) surveys as the worst among all federal agencies in management knowledge and leadership.

Growing bureaucracy at the expense of programs

The proposed reductions are driven not by a considered strategic world view, but by bureaucratic expedience and a fundamental misunderstanding of the mission of VOA. If the fiscal year 2013 proposal is enacted, the staff level for VOA will be reduced by 13.2% from the current year. In contrast, only 3.3% of the positions from the International Broadcasting Bureau (IBB), which provides administrative support to the BBG, will be cut. If the fiscal year 2013 proposal is enacted the number of full time equivalent (FTE) positions for the IBB will rise from 593.2 in fiscal year 2011 to 678.2. In the same time period VOA will lose 121.2 FTE positions. The general trend of the IBB has been to grow larger while the number of language services they support is being reduced. Broadcasting should be the last thing to be cut. It makes little sense to grow the bureaucracy while cutting that which it is meant to support. The eliminations and reductions in broadcasting to Tibet, China, Laos, and Vietnam alone will cut 28 positions from VOA.

PROPOSED REDUCTIONS AT VOA

The Broadcasting Board of Governors oversees all civilian international broadcasting operations funded by the U.S. government:  VOA/Office of Cuba Broadcasting, Radio Free Asia (RFA) Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) and the Middle East Broadcasting Network (MBN).

Of these, VOA is the only Agency subject to direct Congressional oversight because it is part of the U.S. Government.

In addition to world news, VOA provides news and information about the United States, its people, its ideals and beliefs and its government policies.

RFA, REF/RL and MBN are privately-run organizations yet federally funded by grants from the BBG.  Each operates as a surrogate broadcaster by acting as a free-press for those countries in which they operate.  Their mission is to be an alternative for in-country news.  Their mission does not include broadcasting news from or about the United States, its people, its ideals or U.S. government policies as is enshrined in the VOA Charter, Public Law 94-350.

ACTIVITY                  # OF POSITIONS         #OF POSITIONS CUT

Central News                     125                            – 43 

POTENTIAL IMPACT:   With its Central Newsroom staff in Washington, DC, reduced by one third, VOA would risk losing a high quality  news service that has been its brand since 1942.  It will no longer be able to cover news, trends and American life comprehensively 24/7 — its trademark as a “go to” source about America and the world.  Carefully sourced information is essential to the success and standards of VOA’s more than 40 language services.  The news writing responsibility will be delegated to the language services which are staffed in part with non-U.S. citizen contractors who have little, if any, stake in or understanding of U.S. foreign policy.  It is essential to use a Central News Service which could and should be used by ALL the various elements.  The recent occurrence in VOA Russian where a fake interview with the dissident Naval’ny was posted on the VOA Russian website is a perfect example of the chaos that can ensue if this reorganization of Central News is approved.

English                                  99                             – 28

POTENTIAL IMPACT:   Radio broadcasts (shortwave, AM and FM) would be silenced to all areas of the world except Africa.  This includes strategically important broadcasts to the Middle East, China and Tibet where where VOA English is the only USG international broadcast service that is not jammed.  VOA’s remaining global broadcasts in English would cease including all hourly newscasts and regionalized news and information about America from a uniquely American point of view.  Emphasis would be placed on social media and the Internet which are easy to interdict.  In this decision, the BBG ignores the fact that all over the world, English is becoming a favorite second language, especially among the youth.  The great popularity of  VOA Special English programs with its limited vocabulary and explanation of idiomatic English phrases is a prime example of good programming that reaches listeners who are interested in English.

Broadcast Operations       284                           -16     

POTENTIAL IMPACT:    Linked to reduction in need for radio technicians to support programs throughout this list

Spanish                                  27                            -14 

POTENTIAL IMPACT:    Six Spanish broadcasters will remain in Washington; 4 will be transferred to New York, and 4 to Miami.  This is Phase 1 of a long-range VOA and Radio-TV Marti consolidation.  VOA radio relays to 19 Spanish-speaking countries in our hemisphere will be severely curtailed at the same time Iran has established HispanTV a Spanish language TV channel that communist/Cuba sympathizer Hugo Chavez is actively involved with.  This is in addition to Hugo Chavez’ other project – Telesur which besides Venezuela is cosponsored by from Argentina, Bolivia, Cuba, Ecuador, Nicaragua and Uruguay.  Telesur broadcasts 24/7 to South, Central and North America.  The Network has a staff of 500 with offices throughout Latin America and broadcasts via satellite, cable, and terrestrial TV and radio platforms.  The content has been identified by various groups as being anti-U.S.  Perhaps as a result, one country after another in Latin America is choosing leftist governments.  The BBG has been steadily ignoring these threats in our hemisphere cutting Portuguese to Brazil and sporadically broadcasting to countries which could be potential threats to our national security.  Also, there has been NO directive from Congress which would authorize the BBG to dramatically reorganize and consolidate Radio/TV Marti.  What happens to the Radio Broadcasting to Cuba Act, Public Law 98-111 which Ronald Reagan signed in 1983 putting it under the auspices of the VOA?

Afghan (Dari-Pashto)          40                             -10 

POTENTIAL IMPACT:    VOA radio to strategically-important Afghanistan would be halved from 12 to 6 hours daily during the critical 2012-2014 drawdown period for NATO and US forces.  Original programming would be cut, risking a possible loss of younger multimedia expert staff and a substantial reduction in VOA Afghan’s audience share (60% of adults).   Six hours weekly of TV would be retained while all research information points to the fact that RADIO is the prime communication in Afghanistan.

Vietnamese                       16                                -10

POTENTIAL IMPACT:    VOA will lose its 17 ½ hours weekly of radio, leaving only Internet services to a country where all the media are controlled by the Communist Party.  The six remaining staff members may not be able to: 1) sustain four current Internet sites they now reach, as Hanoi steps up efforts to control these by establishing its own state-owned social network, 2) retain the VOA Vietnamese position as the third most visited website at the Voice.  The proposed cut would severely hinder America’s ability to counter the propaganda of communist governments in Hanoi and Beijing.  The VOA Vietnamese Service has been a trusted source of news since 1943 and has almost 5 times the audience of the Vietnamese Service of Radio Free Asia.  In essence, this cut to VOA Vietnamese is punishment for a job well done.

Cantonese                             7                               -7            ABOLISH SERVICE

POTENTIAL IMPACT:  VOA Cantonese would be abolished on grounds that the audience is “negligible.” But RFA Cantonese will continue, with eight staff members even though it has only a “trace” audience.  In an independent survey last year, VOA had a weekly TV audience share of 9.8 % in Hong Kong and 1.9% in Guangdong Province.  VOA has a recognition factor there 2.5 times greater than RFA.  VOA and RFA have different and distinct missions (preamble, page 1). Following the example of the successful programming to Eastern Europe and the USSR during the Cold War when the US broadcast through surrogate stations RFE/Radio Liberty as well as VOA, RFA should be entrusted with programming about domestic events while VOA Cantonese radio/TV would concentrate on world news.  Another factor arguing for retention is the fact that as of March 1, 2012, Chinese authorities stopped all Cantonese-language programming in Guangdong province affecting over 50 million people.  Hong Kong, also predominantly Cantonese-speaking with 7 million people, could also be affected down the line.  Contrary to what the BBG has erroneously said re: Mandarin and Cantonese having the same classic standard Chinese characters, SPOKEN Mandarin and SPOKEN Cantonese are totally different languages.  During this time when Cantonese speakers in China would be deprived of media in their own language is a crucial strategic moment for VOA/RFA to INCREASE not decrease programming.

Tibetan                                 22                            – 7

POTENTIAL IMPACT:    All VOA Tibetan radio will be abolished, with TV expanded from its current two hours to three hours a week to a country where there are no affiliates on which to broadcast the program.  Although PRC radio jamming is extensive, the television audience in Tibet is still smaller by comparison because of government efforts to jam TV satellite signs.  There’s no reason to help the PRC achieve their objective of silencing the Voice and radio which remains a major information link to the worldwide Tibetan diaspora.  Interestingly enough, in his remarks recorded for the 70th anniversary of VOA, the Dalai Lama kept repeating the impact of VOA Tibet RADIO to the Tibetans and its great importance.  A recent feature on NPR revealed the fact that Buddhist monks secretly listen to VOA Tibet radio programs although under constant surveillance by Chinese militia.  At this critical moment when over 20 monks have self-immolated to bring the attention of the outside world to their plight is no time to CUT VOA Tibet programs which are truly a lifeline for those listeners.  Accurate research on radio listening habits in Tibet are virtually impossible to obtain since outsiders are not allowed free access into the country.  Research is available on TV listening habits among Tibetan refugees in India who fled the oppression in their native country.

Bangla                                 11                             – 6

POTENTIAL IMPACT:   All Bangla AM and shortwave will cease, and remaining 5 staff will concentrate on FM and TV placement.  VOA Bangla, aided by a powerful AM signal from Thailand, had more than 1,000 fan clubs in 2002 and its presence on Dhaka FM demands adequate staff to produce programs.

Albanian                             12                              -5 

POTENTIAL IMPACT:   All VOA radio in Albanian will end, but TV production will continue.   VOA is the leading international broadcaster to Kosovo and Albania but will be hard pressed to retain this position with only 7 staff.

Greek                                   4                              – 4              ABOLISH SERVICE

POTENTIAL IMPACT:  The proposed elimination of broadcasting to this strategically important country is ill-advised.  It would come just as its financial crisis and internal unrest threaten Greece’s security and the financial stability of both the EU and the United States.  VOA Greek reaches nearly 500,000 people weekly in Athens alone.  It is also on the air in Cyprus.  Its strategic importance is being totally ignored.

Turkish                                 8                            – 4

POTENTIAL IMPACT:   Cutting this service in half to focus only on the Internet while abolishing TV and radio broadcasts would seriously undermine VOA’s capability to reach a critical and growing anti-American Muslim audience in the volatile region.  It would also threaten impressive audience gains of the past year.  The 24/7 website recommended by the BBG requires more staff, not less.  Internet service in Turkey is spotty at best.  The BBG, as is the norm, is shooting itself in the foot with this decision and in addition, imperiling our national security.

Georgian                            6                            – 4

POTENTIAL IMPACT:   Reducing rejuvenated VOA Georgian by two thirds makes no strategic sense.  In 2010, when Georgian broadcasts ceased, Russian troops invaded that strategically important country two weeks later.  Russia occupies, or has growing influence, in neighboring South Ossetia and Abkhazia and hostilities could potentially break out with no warning.  The Republic of Georgia is making tremendous strides in its economy.  The 60 years of VOA Georgian broadcasting into the country have created a pro-American stance among its people.  Georgian forces have fought in Iraq & Afghanistan. VOA Georgian radio would disappear at precisely the wrong time especially since many predict that after his victory, Putin may once again begin aggressive actions against Georgia.  The two surviving staff members would find it impossible to produce both a high quality Internet and TV service prescribed by the BBG following the proposed reduction.   The BBG is setting the service up for failure and within a year, would probably close the service.

Lao                                      6                               -4

POTENTIAL IMPACT:  Lao media are tightly controlled by the ruling communist party which has been in power since 1975.  With its staff cut to two and the loss of shortwave transmissions, VOA Lao will be severely weakened — producing material largely for 8 affiliated FM stations across the border from Laos in neighboring Thailand.  Laos is a country hungry for a variety of Western news sources.  VOA and RFA, even with their different missions, can fill the void,

Burmese                           13                             – 1

POTENTIAL IMPACT:    Burma is on the verge of substantial democratic reforms.  It’s been said that the Rangoon government is contemplating allowing VOA radio and TV programs to be rebroadcast on Burmese government controlled media which may be wishful thinking and not valid information on which to base the decision to possibly cut .  Affiliate programming is highly uncertain as that programming can be shut down suddenly and quickly as it was with VOA Russian, Ukrainian, Azerbaijan and other language services.  Ironically, in a video presentation at the VOA 70th anniversary celebration, the leader of the Burmese democracy movement, Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, spoke of her 18 years under house arrest and repeated over and over how VOA Burmese which she listens to every night was her lifeline of information and the source of the hope that kept her alive.

PROPOSED_REDUCTIONS_AT_VOA.doc.PDF

PROPOSED_REDUCTIONS_AT_VOA.doc

Go here to read the rest:
‘Fearful’ and ‘encircled’ – Putin is ‘no longer a tsar’

Lipien reports that US government-funded media freedom broadcasters, Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Liberty (Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty, RFE RL), have resorted to self-censorship of their news to keep broadcasting on two leased radio stations in Moscow in the days leading up to Russian presidential elections.

Self-censorship affects only their radio newscasts on two AM Moscow transmitters, which are leased and paid for by the US government to rebroadcast VOA and RL programs. It does not extend to their other program delivery options, such as their websites.

Lipien reported that the newscasts on these stations were changed in response to a request from Russian operators of the transmitters who had warned that broadcasting political programming or poll results several days before the elections would violate Russian media law.

Because uncensored VOA and RL newscasts are still available online and, in the case of Radio Liberty, also through shortwave radio transmissions, a spokeswoman for the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG), which manages and funds these two broadcasters, said that

the restrictions “do not interfere with the ability of the Voice of America or Radio Liberty to cover the elections or to carry on with their other duties.”

In the case of the Voice of America, however, removing news even from some broadcasts may violate Public Law 94-350, also known as the VOA Charter, which mandates that

“VOA will serve as a consistently reliable and authoritative source of news.” Furthermore, the law, also known as the VOA Charter, stipulates that “VOA news will be accurate, objective, and comprehensive.”

Removing certain news from certain Voice of America newscasts or eliminating newscasts altogether undermines the law’s requirement that VOA will serve as a consistently reliable and authoritative source of news, BBG Watch concluded.

The BBG’s newly-hired director of communications Lynne Weil said in a response to an inquiry from Free Media Online, a US-based media freedom NGO, that

“the BBG and its content providers, including the many individuals who risk their lives to shine the light of truth on some of the world’s darkest corners, are fiercely protective of their journalistic independence and integrity, and vigilant about any obstacles – real or potential – to getting their work done.”

Lynne Weil further explained that

“The VOA Russian Service intends to report on the elections and update its website and blogs throughout the election cycle, without any restriction on its activities, BBG spokeswoman said. The VOA Russian Service prepares, however, a 30 minute radio program that gets broadcast Monday through Friday on another AM station in Moscow. The rest of VOA’s programming on the Moscow medium-wave station is in English.  Because the frequency is on a local lease, it is subject to the Russian law.  To comply, in the five days before the election the VOA English Service is making a  change to the 24/7 stream sent to Moscow —  replacing its five-minute hourly newscast with a pre-recorded segment that invites audiences to go online to VOANews.com for news and information about Russia and the world,” Lynne Weil said. “The remainder of English stream to Moscow is unchanged.”

Read Lipien’s full op-ed in Digital Journal Op-Ed: America’s radios dancing to Putin’s tune in Moscow

Follow this link:
Russia – Draft electoral law provision threatens freedom of expression

Read the original post:
Russia – Human Rights Watch calls for an end to intimidation of activists, media as election nears

See the rest here:
Russia: Harassment of Critics

See the article here:
Putin ‘on a collision course’ or ‘at a fork in the road’?

The BBG  executive staff, now part of the International Broadcasting Bureau (IBB) reporting to IBB director Richard Lobo, has been persistent in trying to close down numerous VOA broadcasting services or to reduce their programs. In 2007, these BBG executives wanted to cut the number of hours of radio to Tibet. A demonstration on Capitol Hill by Tibetan Buddhist monks and an unequivocal admonition from Congress thwarted their plans. Last year, Congress again thwarted their plans to end VOA radio and TV programs in Mandarin and Cantonese to China. This year, BBG executives again proposed to eliminate all VOA radio broadcasts to Tibet and to close down the VOA Cantonese Service. Many other VOA broadcasting services are also slated to be cut or reduced, with the loss of 170 VOA positions.

The BBG’s proposal calls for the elimination of VOA radio broadcasts to Georgia, a country facing a major threat from Russia and internal threats to freedom of the press. The VOA Georgian Service had already been slated to be shut down in 2008. “However, the war with Russia saved us within one day,” wrote a VOA staffer. (It did not save VOA Russian radio and television programs, which went silent 12 days before the war started. The BBG staff refused to resume them in response to the war emergency.)  Because of the Russian-Georgian conflict, the Georgian Service was allowed to go from 30 minutes to one hour of daily radio broadcasts. But the BBG staff was determined to eliminate VOA radio to Georgia sooner or later.

For historical reference, this is how the BBG staff treated the Georgian Service in 2008 shortly before and after the Russian invasion of Georgia:

After the Russian-Georgian conflict had started, the BBG “approved continuation of VOA Georgian surge broadcasts for the foreseeable future” — not “indefinitely,” which would have been a proper term to use if the BBG wanted to send a strong message to former President, now Prime Minister Putin and assure VOA Georgian broadcasters that their work is valued and should continue. The press release, drafted by the BBG staff,  reminded instead VOA Georgian broadcasters that all BBG broadcasting to Georgia was to be done by RFE/RL after September 30, 2008. There was not a single word of thanks for their heroic efforts to keep VOA broadcasts on the air. Reduced by the BBG cuts to only a four-person team, they have fought exhaustion, working without any days off since the crisis started.

In their FY2013 budget proposal, the BBG wants to cut four positions from the VOA Georgian Service.

“At this point, we have six positions, although only five are occupied. By this decision, we will be reduced to two staff positions. The VOA Director is saying we will retain several contractors,” wrote a VOA staffer.

“The Budget proposal is calling for a more TV-oriented Georgian Service. We do not know how we can do this with only two people on staff. The Service is demoralised. We feel this is crippling, especially since our staff was completed only a year ago,” wrote a VOA broadcaster.

In December 2010,  the Service started a brand new TV program ( the first TV production by the VOA Georgian Service). It is broadcast on a nationwide public TV channel in Georgia. “It was well received by audiences and journalists,” wrote a VOA staffer.

But, as with many other VOA television programs placed on local networks abroad, there is a problem of journalistic integrity and adherence to the Voice of America Charter, a Congressionally-passed Public Law which mandates accurate, balanced and comprehensive coverage by VOA.

A VOA source reports that the Voice of America Georgian Service has “asked” not to produce Georgia-related political news reports for their television program being placed on the public TV channel in Georgia.

“We believe that this restricts us in communicating with the audience about the most pressing topics,” wrote a VOA staffer, “but for now we seem to be stuck with this affiliate network.”

This is a common problem for many VOA broadcasting services. Local affiliates dictate what kind of programming or reporting is or isn’t acceptable. If VOA does not comply, they take VOA programs off the air. These demands often originate with local regime and government officials who object to VOA news reports and want to ban or restrict them.

Television is particularly prone to this kind of pressure. Radio is less affected, but some local radio affiliates also try to restrict political coverage. “By crippling the Georgia Service by staff reductions, we will no longer be able to provide radio broadcasts, which — unlike television — are a major avenue for our political news reporting,” wrote a staffer. “We can say much more on the radio, and get much more of it out despite attempts to censor our output.”

A Voice of America source close to the situation listed several other factors contributing to the demoralization among the VOA Georgian Service staffers. They are convinced that BBG officials want to cripple VOA broadcasting to Georgia:

- Voice of America  Georgian Service was recognized for its 6o years of broadcasting last December when BBG Governor Victor Ashe and VOA Director David Ensor presented us with a commemorative plaque. We believe that both Governor Ashe and Director Ensor were honestly trying to be helpful and supportive, but no doubt BBG staffers knew at that time what they were planning to do to our staff and our broadcasts and other BBG members went along with their plan without asking questions that ought to be asked.

- Russia continues to occupy 20 percent of the Georgian territory.

- Georgian media is ranked as partly free by Freedom House. The television market is increasingly controlled by the government. In the meantime, the Voice of America Georgian Service is being “asked” not to produce Georgia-related political reporting for its television program. We believe that this restricts us in communicating with the audience about  the most pressing topics, but for now we seem to be stuck with this affiliate.

- The Voice of America Georgian Service represents the only American news media presence in Georgia. Prague-based Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) is obviously not in the same category. Broadcasting to Georgia is in the national security interests of the United States. By crippling the VOA Georgian Service with staff reductions, we no longer will be able to provide radio broadcasts, which — unlike our television program  – are a major avenue for our political news reporting.

- The Voice of America Georgian Service is to lose for staffers. At this point, we have six positions, although only five are occupied.

- By this decision of the BBG, we will be reduced to two staff positions. The VOA Director is saying we will retain several contractors who are exploited, poorly paid and have no rights or benefits. They can also be fired without any recourse at any time. BBG officials also want to fire most of our staffers.

- The BBG Budget proposal is calling for a more TV-oriented Voice of America Georgian Service. We do not know how we can do this with only two staff positions.

- The Voice of America Georgian Service is demoralized. We feel this is crippling, especially since our staff composition was completed only a year ago. 

- In December 2010,  we started a brand new TV program ( the first TV production by the VOA Georgian Service) broadcast on a nationwide public TV channel in Georgia. It was well received by audiences and journalists. 

- We feel the cuts and reductions proposed by the BBG staff are unfair since the Georgian Service has been performing extremely well despite not being given enough time to show its full potential — in radio, TV and web — after our last minute revival in 2008. It is just not fair.

- We feel that the next step of BBG executives, after crippling and reducing the VOA Georgian Service, is its closure. This is happening when media freedom in Georgia is worsening, critical parliamentary and presidential elections are coming up, the government is stepping up pressure on the opposition, and anti-American rhetoric is growing among the society at large. With the Russian elections in March and Putin’s expected victory, the situation in Georgia can only go sour, especially within the Russian controlled territorial enclaves. With Russia’s military presence inside these separatist regions and a potential for instability and conflict affecting U.S. military, political, economic and other interests in the region, Voice of America radio broadcasts in Georgian serve a vital national security function.

In her “Quieting the Voice of America” article, Dr. Helle Dale of the Heritage Foundation argues for strengthening U.S. international broadcasting to countries without free media and reforming the Broadcasting Board of Governors, the federal agency that manages VOA.

Link to the full article by Helle Dale, Heritage Foundation:

Quieting of the Voice of America

BBG Watch has also been warning for some time that under the Broadcasting Board of Governors priorities, its programming, marketing, and staffing policies, the Voice of America Russian Service has developed a “pro-Putin bias.” This bias was described in the BBG’s own study commissioned from a noted independent Russian journalist and new media scholar Dr. Nikolay Rudenskiy.

BBG Watch recommends reading Alexandr Solzhenitsyn’s 1982 article in National Review, “Soft Voice of America”, and the 2011 study of the Voice of America Russian Service website done for the BBG by Dr. Nikolay Rudenskiy. Link to the Study.

Critics blame the overall culture of mismanagement and contempt for rank-and-file journalists by a small group of entrenched executives who have just proposed to cut $17 million form the VOA budget. They plan to end VOA radio broadcasts to Tibet, to eliminate the VOA Cantonese Service and to cut more than 200 positions.

Meanwhile, Voice of America broadcasts to Iran and Russia continue to attract negative attention for poor performance and, in the case of the VOA Russian Service, favoring a pro-Kremlin view while ignoring American viewpoints on human rights violations in Russia and Vladimir Putin’s autocratic rule. America’s enemies in Russia, China and Iran have good reasons to cheer. U.S. taxpayers funding pro-Putin VOA programs – Washington Examiner.

The Broadcasting Board of Governors is also being criticized for mishandling broadcasting to the Middle East by BBG-run Alhurra TV and Radio Sawa.

A Bloomberg editorial, “U.S. Broadcast for Iran Might Be Free, But Doesn’t Have to Be Cheap: View,” asks: “Programs that go on and on. Shows that lack focus. Graphics and production values that make Iranian state TV look hip by comparison. Why has the U.S.-run Persian News Network been so bad for so long?”

The Bloomberg editorial notes that the Broadcasting Board of Governors just announced a 2013 budget that would cut VOA’s allocation by $17 million. “The network should cancel them [proposed budget cuts] and focus on what it can do well,” the editorial says in reference to the VOA Persian satirical TV program “Parazit.”

The PNN web site is off-putting, the editorial notes. The Bloomberg editorial concludes that “When a well-executed show like ‘Parazit’ can begin to undercut the legitimacy of the Iranian regime, there’s no telling what a superlative network could do.”

Hussain Abdul-Hussain, the Washington Bureau Chief of Kuwaiti newspaper Al Rai, who used to work for the BBG-managed Alhurra TV, wrote in The Huffington Post article, “Alhurra and the Arab Spring,” that “VOA Arabic had a respected Arabic Service, but the Bush administration decided to replace” it with Radio Sawa and Alhurra TV, which — he argues — undermined both transparency and accountability.

“There is one thing in common between Congress-funded Arabic TV, Alhurra, and countries of the Arab Spring. Both have unaccountable leaders, who have been in place since forever, and who look like they are staying indefinitely,” the journalist wrote. He also noted that “Since then, the leaders of Alhurra and Sawa, none of them a journalist, have remained in place and have outlasted administrations and Congresses.”

Link to Washington Examiner op-ed by Ted Lipien.

Ted Lipien, a former Voice of America (VOA) acting associate director, has been warning for some time that marketing and staffing policies pushed by the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) executives have changed the focus of VOA and other BBG broadcasters from serious, accurate and well balanced journalism to ratings-chasing entertainment and sloppy reporting produced by inexperienced, poorly paid, otherwise exploited, unsupervised and unedited contractors, many without any background in American life and media.

In his latest op-ed in The Washington Examiner, Lipien makes this point again. Anticipating the expected line of defense of BBG bureaucrats, who refuse to acknowledge the problem and dismiss a recent “fake” interview on the VOA Russian website and charges of “pro-Putin bias” as atypical, Lipien cites a study by a prominent independent Russian journalist and new media scholar Dr. Nikolay Rudenskiy who found not just one but many examples of the Voice of America Russian Service website giving prominence to pro-Putin and pro-Kremlin views and failing again and again to provide an American perspective on human rights and media freedom violations in Russia.

Lipien was also interviewed by NPR’s Michele Kelemen who reported that a recent webcast on the VOA Russian Service site included a long statement from a Putin supporter in Russia without an effective attempt to counter or balance his pro-Kremlin views.

U.S. taxpayers funding pro-Putin VOA programs – Ted Lipien – Washington Examiner
If American taxpayers had any idea what kind of messages Voice of America (VOA) is sending in their name and at their expense to Russia, they would be hopping mad.

Opposition leaders and independent journalists in Russia have warned that the VOA Russian website has a pro-Putin bias and downplays human rights reporting, but the latest scandal brings the harm to a new level. The VOA site posted a fake interview and embarrassed a leading Russian pro-democracy figure.

The VOA is funded by Americans to broadcast information programs to countries without free media. A leading Russian anti-corruption lawyer and Putin critic, Alexei Navalny, wrote a scathing Twitter comment accusing VOA of “going nuts.”

He dismissed the purported interview with him on the Russian website as “100 percent fake.” He further suggested that someone in Washington should start listening and “let all these guys go.”

The VOA Russian Service removed the interview and apologized to Navalny, no doubt hoping the scandal would soon blow over.

But the story was picked up by RIA Novosti news agency and other Russian media, which reported on it in Russian and English. Significantly, the VOA English website ignored the whole incident.

What we have here is not just an isolated journalistic flop. Russian opposition leaders have known for quite some time there is something fundamentally wrong with the VOA Russian website.

In early 2011, the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG), a federal agency that runs VOA, commissioned a study from a highly respected independent journalist living in Russia.

He warned that the website favored a pro-Putin line. It even downplayed a human rights speech delivered in Moscow by Vice President Joseph Biden.

The BBG bureaucrats did not highlight this damning assessment to members of the bipartisan board or to the new VOA director, David Ensor. They told them instead that the Russian Service was doing a terrific job.

On the day the Russian Service editors were getting ready to post their apology, Ensor praised them for being a model of innovation.

The fake interview was obtained by a newly hired contractor from Russia through an exchange of emails.

Someone should have known that pro-Kremlin activists have broken into email accounts of many anti-Putin leaders, but an editor, also recently hired as a contractor, gave his approval instead of doing further checking.

Even after the Russian Service apologized to Navalny, some of its staffers continued a whispering campaign accusing him of giving the interview and then lying about it.

A pro-Putin bias and scurrilous accusations against a courageous human rights activist may explain what kind of journalists the BBG has been hiring recently to manage the Russian website.

Some of them had worked for the pro-Putin media in Russia. To make room for these poorly vetted and poorly paid contractors, BBG executives retired experienced editors.

These officials also told the Russian Service not to be too harsh on the Kremlin because, according to BBG audience surveys, most Russians don’t like it. And that’s bad for ratings, they said.

They allowed VOA websites to be hacked a number of times. And, they failed to tell the Board promptly about the latest incident.

The same BBG officials are also responsible for drafting a plan to restructure U.S. international broadcasting that will be soon presented to Congress.

And, guess what, it would give them more control and turn the agency into an NPR-like structure with both international and domestic programs. It amounts to asking American taxpayers to continue paying for Putin’s propaganda.

Their latest proposal calls for ending VOA radio broadcasts to Tibet. Congressional committees with oversight functions need to step in and clean the place up before these failed bureaucrats do even more damage to America’s reputation abroad.

Ted Lipien is a former VOA acting associate director and co-founder of the nongovernmental Committee for U.S. International Broadcasting (CUSIB – www.CUSIB.org).

Link to the original article >> U.S. taxpayers funding pro-Putin VOA programs – Ted Lipien – Washington Examiner

View original post here:
Russia – Wave of attempts to intimidate independent media in run-up to presidential election

Kelemen interviewed the new VOA director David Ensor and former VOA journalist and director of the Committee for U.S. International Broadcasting (CUSIB) Ted Lipien. Lipien also served as acting associate VOA director and placed VOA and Radio Liberty programs on stations in Russia before the Russian government of Vladimir Putin forced these stations to drop these programs. CUSIB opposes plans by the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) to cut VOA programs to Russia, China and other countries that restrict free media.

Ensor told Kelemen “So we may have been scammed, but we may never know for sure.” Ensor apologized for the incident and said the Russian service has tightened its procedures.

But NPR reported that others don’t see this as an isolated incident. Lipien said that the Russian service now relies on contractors, who aren’t familiar with American journalistic values.

“And I’m not saying that one should not hire people with fresh knowledge of countries like Russia,” Lipien says. “But if you are the Voice of America, you also need seasoned editors with other experience — American experience.”

An independent Russian journalist and new media scholar Dr. Nikolay Rudenskiy, who evaluated the VOA Russian website for the Broadcasting Board of Governors, which manages the Voice of America, concluded that it has a “pro-Putin bias” and downplays human rights reporting and American viewpoints. See: “New media scholar Nikolay Rudenskiy is author of ‘pro-Putin Bias in VOA’study.” But a Senate staffer familiar with the evaluation said there is “no smoking gun” to indicate a deliberate pro-Putin bias.

NPR’s Michele Kelemen reported, however, that in one Voice of America Russian Service webcast, the VOA host hardly pushes back in a lengthy interview with a pro-Putin youth leader, who complains that the U.S. is trying to foment revolution in his country.

Read and listen to NPR report: Russian Accuses Voice Of America Of Fake Interview by MICHELE KELEMEN

Broadcasting Board of Governors awards 50 million dollar research contract to Gallup while eliminating dozens of overseas broadcasts and over 200 U.S.-based jobs.

Journalists at the Voice of America, Radio Free Asia, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Alhurra TV, Radio Sawa, and Radio and TV Marti are outraged that their parent agency, the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG), has awarded a 50 million dollar multi-year audience research contract to Gallup while approving plans for drastic cuts and reduction in broadcasting overseas and for firing over 200 reporters and support staff, the majority of them working for the Voice of America in Washington, DC. The BBG plans to eliminate completely Voice of America radio broadcasts to Tibet and to close down the VOA Cantonese Service which produces both radio and television programs to China.

The BBG awarded the five-year 50 million dollar contract to Gallup on December 6, 2011. Link to: Award Notice, International Audience Research Program (IARP), Solicitation Number: BBG50-S-11-4564-RJ, Broadcasting Board of Governors.

As they were discussing the award of the research contract to Gallup, members of the bipartisan Board were finalizing plans to end or reduce broadcasts and other information programs to Afghanistan, China, Tibet, the Russian Federation including Chechnya, Burma, Laos, Vietnam and several other countries. Most of the cuts affecting over 200 positions target journalists, broadcasters, and support personnel while sparing top BBG executives and managers whose ranks have swelled over the years as they kept eliminating program after program serving foreign audiences.

According to inside sources, not all BBG members voted to approve this contract. Senior Republican member Victor Ashe was believed to be strongly opposed to some of the terms of the Gallup contract and its high cost. Sources told BBG Watch that he fought hard to save the jobs and operations at the Edward R. Murrow Radio Transmitting Station in Greenville, North Carolina but was outvoted in his attempts to save other programs for overseas audiences and American jobs.

Critics who acknowledge the importance of audience research objected to the contract’s exorbitant cost and pointed out that no reliable research can be conducted in the most critical countries such as China, Russia and Iran. Critics also argue that previous BBG-ordered audience surveys in these countries produced highly suspect and skewed results, which the BBG executive staff — consistently rated in official U.S. government employee opinion polls as being last in leadership and knowledge among managers of all federal agencies — then used to justify cuts in programs to China and Russia. Critics also point out that a substantial amount of money from this contract will be paid out to Gallup affiliates and contractors in China and Russia, while the BBG eliminates jobs of Americans working in the United States to bring uncensored news to these and other countries. The Gallup contract was awarded under the chairmanship of Walter Isaacson, a Democrat, who has subsequently resigned. Since the BBG has elected to make only one award, services at non-competitive pricing will be performed.

The Broadcasting Board of Governors is an independent Federal entity that is responsible for U.S.-funded non-military international broadcasting. The BBG awarded this contract through an umbrella organization called the International Broadcasting Bureau (IBB), which is headed by President Obama’s appointee Richard M. Lobo. Lobo and his wife have been soliciting money for the Obama reelection campaign. First Lady Michelle Obama has recently visited their home in Florida for a fundraiser event.

According to our sources, BBG and IBB executive staff apparently failed to tell BBG members that one of their previous attempts to reduce radio broadcast hours to Tibet was promptly rejected by members of Congress after a group of Tibetan Buddhist monks staged a silent protest on Capitol Hill in 2007.
Despite their dismal performance ratings, Lobo kept the old management team and approved outstanding performance bonuses of up to $10,000 for some of its key members. They are believed to be responsible for proposing to eliminate jobs of hundreds of BBG journalists over the last several years. They were also responsible for drafting specifications for the 50 million dollar audience research contract that was eventually awarded to Gallup.

While the total cost of the multi-year contract is 50 million dollars, BBG estimated that the total amount of the so-called “Task Orders” to be issued under the contract will fall within the $5M – $10M price range per year. It is anticipated that each contract will have a one year base ordering period with (4) one year option ordering periods. Link to International Audience Research Program (IARP), Solicitation Number: BBG50-S-11-4564-RJ, Broadcasting Board of Governors.

The Board is composed of nine members (currently there are only eight). Eight members (4 Democrats and 4 Republicans) are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. The ninth, the Secretary of State, serves ex officio. The Secretary is represented on the Board by the Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs. That place on the Board is held currently by Ambassador D. Kathleen Stephens, the Acting Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs.

The independent, nongovernmental Committee for U.S. International Broadcasting (CUSIB – www.cusib.org), which last year had opposed a previous BBG effort to end all VOA radio and TV broadcasts to China and to fire 45 journalists, is again protesting against the latest BBG proposed cuts. The BBG’s last year’s proposal for China was overwhelmingly rejected by Democrats and Republicans in House and Senate oversight committees.

After the unveiling of the BBG’s FY2013 Budget Proposal, a CUSIB spokesperson told BBG Watch that “this egregious effort to disappropriate funding from VOA will effectively undermine the purpose of the Congressionally-mandated Public Law 94-350 to inform the people in China who speak Cantonese by providing them with news broadcasts that promote freedom and democracy.
 
“This campaign against Voice of America – during PRC Vice President Xi Jinping’s week-long visit to the United States – is nothing less than another attempt to concede that little by little, the Broadcasting Board of Governors will dismantle America’s commitment to broadcast news from the United States,” a CUSIB spokesperson said.

CUSIB also pointed out that the VOA Tibetan Service was created by an Act of Congress, Public Law 101-246, signed into law on February 16, 1990 “to provide Voice of America Tibetan language programming to the people of Tibet”. The BBG’ FY2013 Budget Proposal undermines the purpose of that Federal as well, a spokesperson said.

In commenting on the 50 million dollar Gallup audience research contract, proposed program cuts and firing of over 200 BBG journalists, the Committee for U.S. International Broadcasting spokesperson said:

“It is doubtful that Gallup or any company can successfully conduct a reliable audience research about Voice of America and other US Government-funded broadcasts into countries like Iran, China, Russia and Cuba.  People are too afraid to even admit that they know what these broadcasts are, much less tell a stranger that they are consumers of these news and information programs, which their governments tell them are dangerous and designed to destroy their nations. In fact, whatever audience research results Gallup reports will likely be skewed and counterproductive, i.e. they will lead the BBG to wrong conclusions about these audiences.”

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

The Broadcasting Board of Governors – International Broadcasting Bureau (BBG/IBB), known to be the worst organization in the Federal Government, added to its reputation on Monday, February 13, 2012 when it announced substantial cuts to its broadcast operations, as part of the administration’s FY2013 budget request to the Congress.
 
A total of 14 out of 43 language operations – around 33% of the Voice of America (VOA) – will be adversely affected.  Some of the services will shut down completely, some will be reduced.  Our focus is on VOA; however, the other entities controlled by the BBG/IBB (Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Radio Free Asia and Radio and TV Marti among them) also face cuts.  The agency claims that there will be reductions in management; but at this juncture it is a claim only, absent hard numbers yet to publicly identify the number of positions and whether or not the position are encumbered by real, live people.
 
You can be assured that the IBB bonus-managers including our “$10,000 Bonus Man” will not be affected.  They are, after all, the architects of the intentional destruction of US international broadcasting.
 
Thankfully, they are not able to take unilateral action.  Much remains in what will be a vigorous and rancorous contest of wills between the bonus-managers and the people involved with protecting US international broadcasting assets and US national interests.
 
What this proposal means is this:
 
This is a clear and unmistakable statement that US international influence is in decline.  The size and scope of the proposed cuts demonstrates that the BBG/IBB intends actions that will accelerate that decline.
 
The BBG/IBB is taking the United States out of the business of direct international broadcasting.  Its primary target is radio, the medium which still commands the largest share of the agency’s audiences – contrary to claims by the agency that people are turning away from radio.  That is pure nonsense.  It remains the primary medium through which people get useful news and information.  It is affordable.  It is accessible.
 
Sources inside the Cohen Building note that David Ensor, the VOA director, says that radio has a very secure place at VOA, that it is not dying by any means and that it won’t be killed before its time. Before its time? Many others had predicted or anticipated the end of radio. They were all wrong.
 
Unfortunately, the agency’s actions speak a whole lot louder than words, even those from Mr. Ensor who has been more candid than most senior officials in his frank assessments of agency operations.  But, it just does not work in this case.  Sustaining a 33% reduction in its primary operations is not a sign of a healthy and robust future for the agency, its employees and the core audiences that rely on VOA broadcasts.
 
If you are a VOA employee, you should feel betrayed.
 
If you are among the billions of people around the world who rely upon radio broadcasts and are without access to the Internet (the BBG/IBB medium of choice), you should feel betrayed.
 
If you are an American taxpayer, you get the trifecta: your tax dollars go to support a failed agency, with a failed strategy and a bunch of bonus-managers who line their pockets while doing their “corporate” thing and pile-driving the agency and its employees right into the ground.
 
Even if the proposed cuts are reversed by the Congress, the damage to the agency’s image and credibility is permanent.  This kind of intentional breach with the agency’s employees, the agency’s mission and global publics is beyond repair.
 
As Secretary of State Clinton rightly observed, “We are losing the information war.”  The BBG/IBB is responsible for losing this war and they are not going to acquire a sudden change in fortune with these reductions or with its sham of a “strategic plan.”
 
This is nothing less than an intentional act of self-destruction.
 
Which reminds us – forget the other load of nonsense about creating a “global news network.”  Global news networks do not abandon known audiences.  Just ask the Russians, the Chinese and the Iranians.  They are going at their international broadcasting efforts full bore.
 
What the BBG/IBB intends to do is abandon radio audiences.  These audiences have and will continue to go elsewhere for news and information when abandoned by the BBG/IBB.  They have done it Russia.  And they will continue to do so if the BBG/IBB succeeds in its demolition strategy.
 
In short, the myopic bonus-managers are intentionally creating strategic vacuums, affording elements hostile to US interests to fill the void.  In the globalized environment of the 21st century, the entire world is strategic.  It’s a chess game with serious consequences.  Not manage the chess board and you become outmaneuvered, cornered and run out of options because you don’t have the assets in place to deal with known or emerging threats.
 
That is your BBG/IBB: inept and outmaneuvered by superior skill sets.  Where do those superior skill sets reside?  See above: China, Russia and Iran.
 
 
Let’s briefly examine some of the things we know the agency wants to do, since they reveal the direction of the agency under the BBG/IBB “flim flam strategic plan:”
 
They want $9-million dollars for TV to Egypt.
 
Here we go again with this “Arab Spring” thing.  Here’s the real deal:
 
The “Arab Spring” is a term of art created by Western media.  There is no such thing.  There is something else quite different.  It’s called revolution.  Revolutions tend to be bloody affairs, particularly in the Middle East.  As Senator John Kerry said last year, “It is too early to be doing a victory lap for democracy in the Middle East.”  Why?  Because, these revolutions go their own way, not necessarily the way the United States wishes they would.
 
In Egypt, the military is in charge.  The Egyptian military is not a liberal organization.  It is traditional, conservative.  It will not go quietly into the night and retreat to its barracks.  It is not about to cede power to mobs on the streets of Cairo.  The military gets it where the Western media doesn’t: this is all about power, who loses it and who keeps it.  They intend to keep it and may find themselves working closely with the Muslim Brotherhood, a well-organized fundamentalist organization that has been waiting a very long time for its moment of prominence and power.
 
This is $9-million dollars wasted because the United States has lost its resonance in the Middle East.  The BBG/IBB had ten years (2001-2011) to get its act together and garner support from the “Arab street.”  That is supposedly the purpose behind Radio Sawa and al-Hurra television.  What do the American taxpayers have to show for the millions of dollars invested in these program efforts?
 
Nothing.  
 
That window of opportunity has closed.  No one knows when it will re-open.  Arab publics remain adamant about leveling the playing field with Israel.  If you think you’ve seen bloodshed up to this point that is nothing compared to the next act in this drama; and that is the next act, after the dust settles from the latest round of groups vying for power across the Middle East, across ethnic and religious lines, among the Arab themselves and of course, the Iranians who are intent upon positioning themselves to command hegemony over the Middle East – and that means not just taking the Israelis out of the equation.  It also means establishing dominion over its Arab neighbors.  Remember, the Iranians are not Arabs.  They have a lot to gain by pulling off their intended goals, big time.  They also see this as their moment to reestablish Iran in the image of its ancient Persian empire.
 
Here’s another thing that the BBG/IBB wants:
 
They want to “elevate and expand social media.”
 
Here’s the deal with that:
 
Social chit-chat may get flash mobs, rioters and looters out in the streets, along with anarchists, pie-in-the-sky true believers and other activists.  So what?  It doesn’t mean a thing and it’s all a crock created by Western media.  You know why?
 
Because at the end of the day, social chit-chat does not equate with governance.
 
The next time you are in a plane flying into or out of Washington, DC airspace, take a look down below.  Do you see verdant grasslands stretching out for miles in all directions?  No.  You see what is referred to the megalopolis: miles and miles of urbanity.  So ask yourself some questions:
 
How does all of that work?  How is it all coordinated?  How do you synchronize the movements and needs of society?  How do you provide for the basic necessities of food, clothing and shelter?  In short, how do you maintain civilization without reverting to anarchy?
 
Consider the “Occupy” movement.  There may have been some legitimate issues at the beginning of the undertaking.  But a lot of that got lost when the folks camped out in various cities around the country, including DC.  At the end of the day, what did they contribute to governance?  Not a whole lot.  With regard to DC, they generated a lot of garbage and perhaps helped increase the rodent population (carriers of the plague and other diseases).  But that’s it.  A social experience that devolved into an exercise in collecting trash and eradicating rodents.
 
What do we see from the BBG/IBB in its social media?  Some nice, attractive young woman teaching American slang to Chinese audiences.  Okay, it’s cute, it’s campy.  But at the end of the day, there are about 1.4 billion Chinese in the People’s Republic of China.  What is the contribution to governance?  Not much.  Nothing actually.
 
In things that matter, the BBG/IBB can’t deliver the goods starting with the agency’s mission as codified in the VOA Charter.  Why?  Because it exposes them for all the things they are not doing or have failed miserably in doing.
 
Instead, they try to talk in terms of “supporting freedom and democracy.”  Any organization that initiates an adverse action against 33% of its primary broadcast operations is not in any position to effectively support processes as demanding as “freedom and democracy.”  
 
The BBG/IBB is mouthing words and their actions make them nothing more than mercenary hypocrites.  Remember that “$10,000 Bonus Man” and his cohorts.
 
And forget about this notion that these guys are creating “the world’s leading global news network.”  That is more of the hypocrisy.  The BBG/IBB talks about an audience of 100 million for radio, another 100 million for television and a paltry 10 million for the Internet.  We’re talking a 210 million total out of a world population of 7 billion!  
 
What are these people bragging about?!?
 
These people are not in the business of good governance and delivering an effective mission to justify the tax dollars being used to support this agency.  They are all about putting self-interest as their top priority.  And in doing that, they are destroying the value of the agency’s mission, the work of its employees and surrendering the initiative to other nations or groups with a totally different message than that of the United States.
 
Anyone who is a part of US international broadcasting, anyone who pays for US international broadcasting and anyone who relies upon US international broadcasting should be and has the right to be outraged by the officials of the BBG/IBB responsible for these actions.
 
These characters who fancy themselves as corporatists would likely find themselves fired in the private sector for perpetrating such a fiasco.  
 
The Federalist
February 15, 2012
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

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

Dr. Rudenskiy was hired by the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) in 2011 to evaluate the VOA Russian website. In a report, which was not shared with BBG members, Dr. Rudenskiy concluded that the Russian Service had a “pro-Putin bias” and downplayed human rights reporting.

He wrote in his report that “the site provides little if any unique information or bright and perceptive comment, it appears rather mediocre in terms of journalistic quality or design, and it lacks focus on the topics where it potentially could excel.”

Dr. Rudenskiy’s main criticism, however, was directed at what he perceived as a bias in favor of the Kremlin. In his study, he gave several examples of VOA news reports based mostly on Russian official media that lacked an alternative American perspective.

“Vice President’s [Biden] speech in Moscow University , in which he criticized Russia ‘s leadership on democracy and human rights, was clearly downplayed. The report on this event was titled ‘Joe Biden to Moscow Students: Future is Yours’; a headline as cheerful as meaningless, reminding of Soviet newspapers. What is worse, the report failed to mention that Biden spoke about the Khodorkovsky case as an example of Russia ‘s ‘legal nihilism’ – an important fact noted both in Russia and abroad. One might suspect that the omission was deliberate. If so, that could be regarded as a case of ‘pro-Russian’ (or, rather, pro-Putin) bias.”

Dr. Rudenskiy was a Reagan-Fascell fellow at the National Endowment for Democracy, which published the following biographical note about him:

Nikolay Rudenskiy is the deputy editor of Grani.Ru (www.grani.ru), an independent online media outlet. Trained as an ethnographer, he is the author of about 40 scholarly publications and more than 100 journalistic commentaries focusing mostly on public issues in today’s Russia, including defending freedom of the press, exposing persecution of the regime’s opponents and other human rights violations, and combating racism and other forms of bigotry. During his fellowship, Rudenskiy plans to compare and contrast various approaches to the issue of hate speech in Russia and the United States.

‘Pro-Putin bias’ Evaluation of VOA Russian Website by Dr. Nikolay Rudenskiy.doc

‘Pro-Putin bias’ Evaluation of VOA Russian Website by Dr. Nikolay Rudenskiy.pdf

BBG executives suppressed Dr. Rudenskiy’s study, as they had tried to suppress a similar study critical of Alhurra TV until they were forced by pressure from Congress to make it public.

Dr. Rudenskiy’s study was identified by Ted Lipien, a former VOA acting associate director, in his op-ed “VOA Harms Putin Opposition in Russia” in The Washington Times. The article focused on a fake interview with a Russian anti-corruption lawyer and opposition leaders Alexei Navalny published by the VOA Russian website. The Russian Service removed the interview and apologized to Navalny who wrote in his Twitter account that “Voice of America has gone nuts” and that all those working there should be let go.

In an attack on Lipien, “VOA Public Relations” posted a comment which questioned the accuracy of his description of Dr. Rudenskiy’s study in his Washington Times op-ed:

“Mr. Lipien misleads his audience when he alleges a ‘pro-Putin’ bias, something which could not be farther from the truth. Mr. Lipien should know well, the agency he so sharply attacks is the one that every year hires dozens of independent analysts to conduct rigorous ‘program reviews’ of every VOA language service. Mr. Lipien both misquotes and takes out of context a single remark by one of those analysts about one particular story.”

Asked for a comment, Mr. Lipien told BBG Watch that American taxpayers and members of Congress should read Dr. Rudenskiy’s entire study of the Voice of America Russian Service and decide for themselves whether their money is spent well and whether it favors more the Kremlin or the pro-democratic and anti-Putin opposition.” Sources told BBG Watch that some of BBG executives who had earlier advised BBG members to withhold the Alhurra study from Congress met behind closed door on Thursday to draft a response to The Washington Times article.

We provide additional quotes from Dr. Rudenskiy’s study:

“There are numerous if minor errors in spelling and punctuation, which cannot possibly be listed.”

“it would seem fair that in news coverage and comment on such issues as YUKOS affair or human rights violations in the North Caucasus some kind of special consideration be given to alternative facts and viewpoints.” [rather than only the Kremlin's viewpoint]

“Now, my impression is that VOA has been too careful in avoiding anything that might look like ‘anti-Russian’ bias.”

“Vice President’s speech in Moscow University , in which he criticized Russia ‘s leadership on democracy and human rights, was clearly downplayed. The report on this event was titled ‘Joe Biden to Moscow Students: Future is Yours’; a headline as cheerful as meaningless, reminding of Soviet newspapers. What is worse, the report failed to mention that Biden spoke about the Khodorkovsky case as an example of Russia ‘s ‘legal nihilism’ – an important fact noted both in Russia and abroad. One might suspect that the omission was deliberate. If so, that could be regarded as a case of ‘pro-Russian’ (or, rather, pro-Putin) bias.”

“Perhaps additional background info, such as Russia’ place in Freedom House international rankings, would have been relevant, too.”

“Overall Impression of Journalistic Quality: Is the journalistic quality of the website at a high professional and informational level?

My answer is ‘sorry but no’. The site provides information of satisfactory quality, but it is mostly derived from other sources. Even the report about American Vice President’s meeting with Russian opposition figures was based on Ekho Moskvy and Gazeta.Ru information (VOA’s own interview with Leonid Gozman was added later.) The selection of topics and timeliness leave much to be desired (see below.) The language, if mostly grammatical, tends to be bland and colorless, which reduces the appeal very much. This applies especially to headlines: new Russian journalism has developed a special culture of catchy and witty headlines, and an advanced user expects to find them. Many photos lack expression and appeal.”

“Much of the content doesn’t seem of interest to the Russian Internet audience.”

“Many ‘political’ pieces are less than inspiring, too. A brief account of the presentation of a new book on Cold War lacks substance.”

“Such examples could be easily multiplied. On the positive side, I would like to mention an excellent article on government corruption in the North Caucasus.”

“Regrettably, some interesting topics were underreported.”

“A brief news item based entirely on Russian sources; an American perspective one could have expected from VOA was lacking completely. The same can be said of the scandal involving Vladimir Putin, Western stars and charity money: VOA’s website failed to provide any information or comment from the American side, missing a good opportunity to raise its profile.”

“As for the ‘market niche’ mentioned in the question, I’m afraid it can hardly be located at the moment.”

“Timeliness … is probably one of the website’s weakest points. As far as I could monitor, all big ongoing stories (Biden’s visit, Japan ‘s disaster) were reported with long delays compared to Russian online media. The piece on Biden’s planned meeting with human rights activists on March 10 was among top news a few hours after the meeting actually took place.”

“On March 12, information on the explosion at a nuclear power plant in Japan , which was distributed in the morning Moscow time, did not appear on the site till evening.”

“On the homepage one can see many headlines of news stories dating from a day or even two days before.”

Usefulness: Does the content provided on this site increase understanding of topics or events, and does it provide a basis for forming opinions, making decisions and rendering judgments?

”My general answer to this one would rather be negative. The site provides quite an amount of diverse information, but not all of it seems relevant to the interests of the audience. A clearer focus on specific issues linked to VOA’s mission is needed. Independent forming of opinions by users could also be encouraged by more perceptive comments by high-level contributors – this is where VOA’s competitive position is rather weak. There are few if any bright columns by good authors; the Poedinok (Single Combat) section is entirely about international politics, doesn’t seem appealing to users and is updated at a slow rate. The Editorial section appears somewhat more useful; I wish it carried more on human rights and democracy in Russia.”

“In my view, the site doesn’t look attractive or contemporary.”

Does this site fill a clear niche that positively distinguishes it from others in the target area? Please explain.

”Based on what I said before, my answer to this question is definitely negative. The site provides little if any unique information or bright and perceptive comment, it appears rather mediocre in terms of journalistic quality or design, and it lacks focus on the topics where it potentially could excel. Reaching somewhat beyond the scope of this evaluation, I talked to several people I know in Moscow ; some of them are professionally involved with online media, others are not, but all are avid Internet users. The result of this informal poll was about as I had anticipated: nearly half of the respondents never heard of the VOA website, others just knew about its existence, and only a couple of media professionals had a more or less clear idea about it. I don’t recall VOA being quoted or referred to in the Russian segment of the Internet including social networks or in offline media. On March 18, I found VOA ranking 219th in the Rambler.ru list of online news sources while, for example, Radio Liberty (not exactly the most popular website) ranked 43d.”

In January 2010, Dr. Rudenskiy delivered a lecture “Shrinking from Brainwashing: The Russian Media’s Response to Political Challenges” at the National Endowment for Democracy in Washington, DC.

Link to Video

Shrinking from Brainwashing: The Russian Media’s Response to Political Challenges from National Endowment for Democracy on Vimeo.

Dr. Rudenskiy was hired by the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) in 2011 to evaluate the VOA Russian website. In a report, which was not shared with BBG members, Dr. Rudenskiy concluded that the Russian Service had a “pro-Putin bias” and downplayed human rights reporting.

He wrote in his report that “the site provides little if any unique information or bright and perceptive comment, it appears rather mediocre in terms of journalistic quality or design, and it lacks focus on the topics where it potentially could excel.”

Dr. Rudenskiy’s main criticism, however, was directed at what he perceived as a bias in favor of the Kremlin. In his study, he gave several examples of VOA news reports based mostly on Russian official media that lacked an alternative American perspective.

“Vice President’s [Biden] speech in Moscow University , in which he criticized Russia ‘s leadership on democracy and human rights, was clearly downplayed. The report on this event was titled ‘Joe Biden to Moscow Students: Future is Yours’; a headline as cheerful as meaningless, reminding of Soviet newspapers. What is worse, the report failed to mention that Biden spoke about the Khodorkovsky case as an example of Russia ‘s ‘legal nihilism’ – an important fact noted both in Russia and abroad. One might suspect that the omission was deliberate. If so, that could be regarded as a case of ‘pro-Russian’ (or, rather, pro-Putin) bias.”

Dr. Rudenskiy was a Reagan-Fascell fellow at the National Endowment for Democracy, which published the following biographical note about him:

Nikolay Rudenskiy is the deputy editor of Grani.Ru (www.grani.ru), an independent online media outlet. Trained as an ethnographer, he is the author of about 40 scholarly publications and more than 100 journalistic commentaries focusing mostly on public issues in today’s Russia, including defending freedom of the press, exposing persecution of the regime’s opponents and other human rights violations, and combating racism and other forms of bigotry. During his fellowship, Rudenskiy plans to compare and contrast various approaches to the issue of hate speech in Russia and the United States.

‘Pro-Putin bias’ Evaluation of VOA Russian Website by Dr. Nikolay Rudenskiy.doc

‘Pro-Putin bias’ Evaluation of VOA Russian Website by Dr. Nikolay Rudenskiy.pdf

BBG executives suppressed Dr. Rudenskiy’s study, as they had tried to suppress a similar study critical of Alhurra TV until they were forced by pressure from Congress to make it public.

Dr. Rudenskiy’s study was identified by Ted Lipien, a former VOA acting associate director, in his op-ed “VOA Harms Putin Opposition in Russia” in The Washington Times. The article focused on a fake interview with a Russian anti-corruption lawyer and opposition leaders Alexei Navalny published by the VOA Russian website. The Russian Service removed the interview and apologized to Navalny who wrote in his Twitter account that “Voice of America has gone nuts” and that all those working there should be let go.

In an attack on Lipien, “VOA Public Relations” posted a comment which questioned the accuracy of his description of Dr. Rudenskiy’s study in his Washington Times op-ed:

“Mr. Lipien misleads his audience when he alleges a ‘pro-Putin’ bias, something which could not be farther from the truth. Mr. Lipien should know well, the agency he so sharply attacks is the one that every year hires dozens of independent analysts to conduct rigorous ‘program reviews’ of every VOA language service. Mr. Lipien both misquotes and takes out of context a single remark by one of those analysts about one particular story.”

Asked for a comment, Mr. Lipien told BBG Watch that American taxpayers and members of Congress should read Dr. Rudenskiy’s entire study of the Voice of America Russian Service and decide for themselves whether their money is spent well and whether it favors more the Kremlin or the pro-democratic and anti-Putin opposition.” Sources told BBG Watch that some of BBG executives who had earlier advised BBG members to withhold the Alhurra study from Congress met behind closed door on Thursday to draft a response to The Washington Times article.

We provide additional quotes from Dr. Rudenskiy’s study:

“There are numerous if minor errors in spelling and punctuation, which cannot possibly be listed.”

“it would seem fair that in news coverage and comment on such issues as YUKOS affair or human rights violations in the North Caucasus some kind of special consideration be given to alternative facts and viewpoints.” [rather than only the Kremlin's viewpoint]

“Now, my impression is that VOA has been too careful in avoiding anything that might look like ‘anti-Russian’ bias.”

“Vice President’s speech in Moscow University , in which he criticized Russia ‘s leadership on democracy and human rights, was clearly downplayed. The report on this event was titled ‘Joe Biden to Moscow Students: Future is Yours’; a headline as cheerful as meaningless, reminding of Soviet newspapers. What is worse, the report failed to mention that Biden spoke about the Khodorkovsky case as an example of Russia ‘s ‘legal nihilism’ – an important fact noted both in Russia and abroad. One might suspect that the omission was deliberate. If so, that could be regarded as a case of ‘pro-Russian’ (or, rather, pro-Putin) bias.”

“Perhaps additional background info, such as Russia’ place in Freedom House international rankings, would have been relevant, too.”

“Overall Impression of Journalistic Quality: Is the journalistic quality of the website at a high professional and informational level?

My answer is ‘sorry but no’. The site provides information of satisfactory quality, but it is mostly derived from other sources. Even the report about American Vice President’s meeting with Russian opposition figures was based on Ekho Moskvy and Gazeta.Ru information (VOA’s own interview with Leonid Gozman was added later.) The selection of topics and timeliness leave much to be desired (see below.) The language, if mostly grammatical, tends to be bland and colorless, which reduces the appeal very much. This applies especially to headlines: new Russian journalism has developed a special culture of catchy and witty headlines, and an advanced user expects to find them. Many photos lack expression and appeal.”

“Much of the content doesn’t seem of interest to the Russian Internet audience.”

“Many ‘political’ pieces are less than inspiring, too. A brief account of the presentation of a new book on Cold War lacks substance.”

“Such examples could be easily multiplied. On the positive side, I would like to mention an excellent article on government corruption in the North Caucasus.”

“Regrettably, some interesting topics were underreported.”

“A brief news item based entirely on Russian sources; an American perspective one could have expected from VOA was lacking completely. The same can be said of the scandal involving Vladimir Putin, Western stars and charity money: VOA’s website failed to provide any information or comment from the American side, missing a good opportunity to raise its profile.”

“As for the ‘market niche’ mentioned in the question, I’m afraid it can hardly be located at the moment.”

“Timeliness … is probably one of the website’s weakest points. As far as I could monitor, all big ongoing stories (Biden’s visit, Japan ‘s disaster) were reported with long delays compared to Russian online media. The piece on Biden’s planned meeting with human rights activists on March 10 was among top news a few hours after the meeting actually took place.”

“On March 12, information on the explosion at a nuclear power plant in Japan , which was distributed in the morning Moscow time, did not appear on the site till evening.”

“On the homepage one can see many headlines of news stories dating from a day or even two days before.”

Usefulness: Does the content provided on this site increase understanding of topics or events, and does it provide a basis for forming opinions, making decisions and rendering judgments?

”My general answer to this one would rather be negative. The site provides quite an amount of diverse information, but not all of it seems relevant to the interests of the audience. A clearer focus on specific issues linked to VOA’s mission is needed. Independent forming of opinions by users could also be encouraged by more perceptive comments by high-level contributors – this is where VOA’s competitive position is rather weak. There are few if any bright columns by good authors; the Poedinok (Single Combat) section is entirely about international politics, doesn’t seem appealing to users and is updated at a slow rate. The Editorial section appears somewhat more useful; I wish it carried more on human rights and democracy in Russia.”

“In my view, the site doesn’t look attractive or contemporary.”

Does this site fill a clear niche that positively distinguishes it from others in the target area? Please explain.

”Based on what I said before, my answer to this question is definitely negative. The site provides little if any unique information or bright and perceptive comment, it appears rather mediocre in terms of journalistic quality or design, and it lacks focus on the topics where it potentially could excel. Reaching somewhat beyond the scope of this evaluation, I talked to several people I know in Moscow ; some of them are professionally involved with online media, others are not, but all are avid Internet users. The result of this informal poll was about as I had anticipated: nearly half of the respondents never heard of the VOA website, others just knew about its existence, and only a couple of media professionals had a more or less clear idea about it. I don’t recall VOA being quoted or referred to in the Russian segment of the Internet including social networks or in offline media. On March 18, I found VOA ranking 219th in the Rambler.ru list of online news sources while, for example, Radio Liberty (not exactly the most popular website) ranked 43d.”

In January 2010, Dr. Rudenskiy delivered a lecture “Shrinking from Brainwashing: The Russian Media’s Response to Political Challenges” at the National Endowment for Democracy in Washington, DC.

Link to Video

Shrinking from Brainwashing: The Russian Media’s Response to Political Challenges from National Endowment for Democracy on Vimeo.