Former Voice of America editor argues against privatization of U.S. international broadcasts

I disagree with Alex Belida’s suggestions, The Future of U.S. International Broadcasting: A Call for Debate on its Mission and Funding, although each has elements that could be merged into something new, purposeful and relevant.  After more than forty years with VOA, USIA and similar entities, the charges about “emigre groups” are the usual ones I’ve heard for decades, are discriminatory, incorrect and ring hollow. 

US international broadcasting should not be totally government or totally private.  To turn it into an international CNN is a total waste of taxpayer’s money and give private companies a chance to force their commercial/political views on international broadcasting.  Especially, it should not be private while using taxpayer’s money. 

Charges of clinging to the past are also hollow.  There’s plenty from the past that is still useful, but the usual charges of “emigre groups” and “past” try to sweep away a lot of relevance for US international broadcasting so that elite groups that claim to know “all about” broadcasting can do their thing and force their opinions while  claiming objectivity. 

To base international broadcasting on audience size is ridiculous.  Basing all international ideas on domestic methodology guarantees failure.

BBG’s new ideas are almost totally wrong and that goes for many of their opponents.  There is a need to take a serious look at the whole field of int. broadcasting by US in an objective manner without charges of “past” and “emigre groups.”

As for BBG, it should be abolished.  There are many other, a lot more powerful groups trying to exert control than “emigre groups.”  My experience has been that many ideas from “emigre groups” have had more relevance, objectivity and good, targeted (NOT propagandistic) broadcasting than those who promote CNN. 

There is also the issue of what is “propagandistic.”  A lot depends on the political views of the individual or group rather than national interest.

And yes, US int. broadcasting should be “in the national interest,” not in the interest of CNN, Fox, ABC or whatever.  And yes, to say positive things occasionally about America is not propaganda, considering that news is made by the negative. 

And yes, despite its faults (“warts and all” – Ed Murrow!) America is a great country, its continued existence as a great power must continue and yes, “telling America’ story to the world” is the right thing to do – objectively.  And yes, CNN and the like air materials that foreign audiences often don’t care for or don’t understand (if you have people writing news as if they were writing for the Washington Post.)  That’s what is meant by “targeted” material, things that the audience understands and is interested in terms of relevance to that particular audience and to America.  As for music, they can pick up CDs at their corner store.

Vello Ederma
former Deputy and Acting Chief, European Division, VOA
former European News Desk Chief, News Division, VOA
former Duty Editor, News Division, VOA
media specialist, USIA

Related posts:

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