3 ms·
I think it is fair to call it propaganda. It is funded by U.S. Agency for Global Media [0], their first principle is to "Be consistent with the broad foreign po
by angio 6y ago
I think it is fair to call it propaganda. It is funded by U.S. Agency for Global Media [0], their first principle is to "Be consistent with the broad foreign policy objectives of the United States" [1]. That means they cannot be considered free independent press since they won't be able to take a stance that goes against the US government.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Agency_for_Global_Media https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Agency_for_Global_Media
[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20191215131808/https://www.bbg.gov/who-we-are/oversight/legislation/standards-principles/ https://web.archive.org/web/20191215131808/https://www.bbg.g...
- ardy42 6y ago> That means they cannot be considered free independent press since they won't be able to take a stance that goes against the US government. I don't think it means that. Sure, they're not going to run strongly anti-American editorials, but we're talking about news reporting here, and they don't seem to finch at reporting news that doesn't make the US look good. For instance: This article repeats criticisms of US police actions against journalism and carries this gem: "“Abuse of power against journalism is really as old as America itself,” Wheaton said. “It’s an eternal struggle between journalists trying to expose and power trying to hide.”": https://www.voanews.com/press-freedom/police-response-press-black-lives-matter-protests-tests-first-amendment https://www.voanews.com/press-freedom/police-response-press-...: This article (republished from the AFP) is actually not too different from a certain type of subtle anti-democracy propaganda you'd see on CCTV (i.e. selectively emphasize foreign unrest to make Chinese authoritarianism look good): https://www.voanews.com/usa/timeline-us-race-riots-1965 https://www.voanews.com/usa/timeline-us-race-riots-1965 They have an entire category dedicated covering one of the biggest American domestic problems (which, IMHO, doesn't make the US look good): https://www.voanews.com/usa/race-in-america https://www.voanews.com/usa/race-in-america This article reports on some harsh criticism of the Iraq war: https://www.voanews.com/europe/british-inquiry-finds-iraq-war-went-badly-wrong https://www.voanews.com/europe/british-inquiry-finds-iraq-wa... This article does not paint pretty picture of the war in Afghanistan: https://www.voanews.com/middle-east/us-war-terror-kills-nearly-500000-afghanistan-iraq-pakistan https://www.voanews.com/middle-east/us-war-terror-kills-near... This article (from a US conservative website) criticizes VoA for not being pro-government enough, and carries another gem: "The viewpoints generally expressed in these Voice of America articles are those of demonstrators, protesters, and rioters, and indistinguishable from coverage in The New York Times or The Washington Post.": https://www.heritage.org/progressivism/commentary/the-voice-americas-one-sided-coverage-black-lives-matter-protests https://www.heritage.org/progressivism/commentary/the-voice-...