Isaacson compromises in battle over public control of U.S. international broadcasting

The Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) chairman Walter Isaacson has modified some of his positions on the reorganization of U.S. international broadcasting in response to criticism and pressure from individuals and groups opposed to limiting public ownership and control of U.S. Government’s journalistic communications with foreign audiences.

The BBG open meeting in Washington, DC on January 13, which was streamed online, saw Isaacson backtracking slightly on his earlier support for de-federalizing the agency and its main assets, including the Voice of America (VOA) and Radio and TV Marti. At the meeting, Isaacson spoke about proposing legislation to create a new “hybrid” organization, with “optimal” combination of federal U.S. government broadcasting and the so-called “surrogate” or “grantee” broadcasters.

The BBG is proposing to merge the surrogate broadcasters, which include Radio Free Asia (RFA), Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL), and the Middle East Broadcasting Networks (MBN)—Radio Sawa and Alhurra Television, into a single large corporate bureaucracy.

Compared with his previous statements, Isaacson’s comments last Friday were less specific about de-federalization, which — critics of Isaacson’s plan argue — would limit public ownership and control of U.S. broadcasting assets and broadcasting content and place them in the hands of corporate officials, some of whom might be former CNN associates of the BBG chairman.

At the Friday meeting, Isaacson also seemed less confident about the final outcome of the legislation, which is likely to encounter strong bipartisan opposition in Congress. He predicted that numerous amendments will be offered.

Many members of Congress already see the BBG as poorly managed and lacking transparency and accountability. They had blocked the BBG’s recent plan to end Voice of America radio and TV broadcasts to China and warned BBG officials not to take similar steps in the future without fully consulting Congress.

The BBG was so shaken by this bipartisan Congressional rebuke that at the Friday meeting BBG members congratulated the Voice of America on the 70th anniversary of broadcasting to China. The effort to recognize VOA broadcasting to China and to other countries was led by Governor Victor Ashe, a senior Republican member. He spoke at length Friday about the dedication of VOA broadcasters and his recent visits with VOA director David Ensor to various VOA language services.

Isaacson’s current more cautious approach may be due to the opposition from Ashe who has emerged as the chief critic of the parts of the plan that would limit public scrutiny of how U.S. international broadcasting assets are managed.

Isaacson announced that all BBG members voted for going ahead with the reorganization plan, but it was obvious from his comments that it was a result of a compromise with Ashe and perhaps some of the other Republican members of the BBG.

The BBG has four Democratic and four Republican members. The Secretary of State serves as an ex-officio member of the Board. In his comments, Victor Ashe made it clear that he remains highly sceptical about some aspects of the plan and plans to push for further compromises.

Ashe may have already won Isaacson’s approval for keeping open the only shortwave radio broadcasting facility in the U.S. in Greenville, North Carolina, which BBG executives wanted to close down.

While less controversial that the attempt to de-federalize the entire BBG, the proposed merger of the surrogate broadcasters has been criticized for potentially destroying their effectiveness by limiting their independence and ability to specialize in human rights reporting to specific countries and regions.

Isaacson is known to favor creating a global news agency funded by U.S. taxpayers. Critics of the plan fear that the proposed merger is designed not to save money — the savings would be minimal, as pointed out Friday by Ashe — but to place many of the current assets of the surrogate broadcasters in the hands of bureaucrats to allow them to implement the BBG chairman’s vision of a centralized global newsroom.

Critics point out that in addition to interference from the State Department the centralized newsroom model was one of the reasons for the Voice of America’s relative ineffectiveness during the early years of the Cold War, which led to the creation of Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty as surrogate, more independent and more effective broadcasters.

Isaacson may have reached an initial compromise with Ashe on the merger plan by agreeing to put the head of the Middle East Broadcasting Networks Brian Conniff in charge of its implementation. Conniff is known to oppose those parts of the plan that would limit independence of surrogate broadcasters and subject them to control by BBG officials who are the plan’s chief authors. During the meeting, Isaacson thanked International Broadcasting Bureau (IBB) deputy director Jeff Trimble and director of the Office of Strategy and Development Bruce Sherman for their contributions to developing the BBG’s reorganization plan. They were recently placed in these new high level positions after the merger of BBG and IBB staff.

At the Friday’s meeting, Isaacson confirmed reports that the reorganization plan calls for the abolishment of the International Broadcasting Bureau director’s position, now occupied by Richard Lobo, and creating a new CEO position for all U.S. international broadcasting entities. It was made clear, however, that the Board has full confidence in Lobo.

The IBB executive staff is likely to play a major role in the reorganization process as the BBG members serve part time and many fail to regularly attend in person the Board’s monthly meetings. Critics point out that BBG/IBB executives have been consistently rated in government-wide employee surveys as the federal government’s worst managers and leaders. They are eager to be free of such surveys and other executive branch and Congressional scrutiny that reveals their poor performance and limits their freedom of action. Critics warn that the new arrangement would allow the BBG to further restrict employees’ rights. The BBG has been accused of terminating broadcasts to countries without free media, eliminating U.S.-based jobs, exploiting contract employees, and discriminating against its non-America journalistic workforce.

Critics also charge that despite lacking foreign policy and human rights advocacy experience, because of their largely commercial media background, some BBG members and their executive staff also want to further separate U.S. international broadcasting from the U.S. foreign policy establishment.

What emerges, these critics say, is a battle for control of U.S. international broadcasting with BBG executives using arguments of reforms and questionable savings to limit public ownership of these important national security assets. What these executives want, according to critics, is yet another National Public Radio where programming philosophy and administrative policies are determined not by a legislative process but by a small self-selected group of individuals. Some of the top BBG positions are already occupied by former CNN employees. Chairman Isaacson was a former CEO at CNN.

As Isaacson is very busy promoting his successful biography of Steve Jobs, and most other BBG members are equally busy with their private businesses and activities, it is common knowledge that the BBG restructuring plan was developed almost entirely by a small group of bureaucrats who have been in charge of U.S. international broadcasting for many years.

According to one critic with several decades of experience in international broadcasting, American public, members of Congress and the foreign policy establishment should be highly skeptical of claims of reform and savings coming from the authors of the BBG restructuring plan who have been rated year after year as the worst leaders and managers within the entire U.S. government. The BBG is in a dire need of reform and Congress should hold hearings to determine the best structure for managing U.S. international broadcasting, the critic suggested. But agreeing without any questions to the plan developed by this particular group of failed managers to give themselves almost unlimited control over important national security assets, the critic warned, would be a terrific mistake.

Related posts:

Shortlink for this post: http://wp.me/p1PTlq-3f8