Public Diplomacy, Smith-Mundt and the American Public (original) (raw)
Related papers
Communication Law and Policy, 2006
racy in Iraq and elsewhere, restricting information domestically undermines the strength of U.S. policies about the importance of transparency in government. As it continues to promote free flow of information abroad, the U.S. government's half-hearted commitment to domestic dissemination of certain government-sponsored information will be increasingly scrutinized and criticized. This issue is of importance not only for the policy objectives of the U.S. government but for the continued worldwide belief in the value of access to information as the basis for rational self governance. Various scholars have examined the U.S. government's international propaganda efforts. For example, one writer chronicled the subversive radio activities of the U.S. government-primarily the Central Intelligence Agency-during World War II. 6 Another researcher documented the international implications, including Cold War-related U.S. propaganda efforts overseas, of the American civil rights movement in the mid-20th century, 7 and yet another wrote about the U.S. government's efforts to destabilize and culturally infiltrate Eastern Europe's Communist Party regimes during the early years of the Cold War. 8 Other studies have focused on the impact of wartime propaganda and other government conduct on press freedom 9 and on various aspects of twentieth century U.S. propaganda. 10 Yet the literature on international U.S. propaganda has devoted very little attention to the Smith-Mundt Act's domestic dissemination ban. The researchers who have touched on the topic have not, for the most part, examined the impact of contemporary communication technologies and their policy implications. This article examines the history and intent of the Smith-Mundt Act's prohibition of domestic dissemination of U.S. propaganda aimed at international audiences, and the subsequent creation of the U.S. Information Agency as the chief propaganda arm of govern-THE BAN ON DOMESTIC PROPAGANDA 3 6
Seventy years of the Smith Mundt Act and US International Broadcasting: Back to the Future?
""The report does not purport to be a thorough retelling of the history of the Smith-Mundt Act's passage in early 1948, nor of amendments or other legislation that came later. Rather, the work presented here seeks to offer a modest overview of the legislation that has governed U.S. international broadcasting, as well as public discussion about it, since the end of World War II.""
Public Diplomacy and the Transformation of International Broadcasting
Cardozo Arts and Entertainment Law Journal, 2003
In Media and Sovereignty, I described a variety of elements that, together, compose a foreign policy of media space. In this article, I focus on one of the instruments of such a policy, namely international broadcasting. Until the events of September 11, 2001 and the war in Afghanistan, there was precious little public attention to the place of international broadcasting in the armament of external influence. Scholarly treatment of international broadcasting has recently lagged. But international broadcasting encapsulates many of the conflicts and difficulties that are central to understanding the need that one society may feel to shape the information space of another. We shall see the struggle to harmonize goals of "objectivity" with the need to act as an effective instrument of propaganda, the potential split between advancing national policy and acting as a credible journalistic enterprise and the tension between promotion of favorable regimes and the nourishment of dissent. International broadcasters have a range of styles, and additional styles are now emerging. Among these are the power purposefully to alter the mix of voices in target societies, to affect the composition of their markets for loyalties, to destabilize, to help mold opinions among their public and otherwise to assert "soft power" for the purposes of achieving the national ends of the transmitting state.
The War on Ideas: Alhurra and US International Broadcasting Law in the ‘War on Terror’
Westminster Papers in Communication and Culture, 2009
Numerous non-Arab states employ international broadcasting agencies to impact the Arab media mix. This article examines the recent American intervention into the Arab public sphere-via its satellite television network, Alhurra ('the free one')-and the inherent norms promoted by these efforts. The regulations guiding the American government's international broadcasting efforts establish certain standards and guidelines that can explain why Alhurra's credibility suffers and audience remains scant-it is more accountable to domestic political actors than it is to the audiences it is trying to reach. The structure of political oversight established by American international broadcasting law resembles the top-down authoritarian model of media governance common to many Arab regimes. This suggests that reconstructing Alhurra as an independent network able to push ideational envelopes and facilitate cross-national exchange without the burden of its current imperative, selling deeply unpopular American polices, should be considered. Background When the United States government launched the 'war on terror' following the attacks of 11 September 2001, it understood the campaign would entail more than military operations, namely, winning the 'hearts and minds' of the Arab world (Khalaf, 2004). Thepremise was that propaganda by anti-American leaders and groups, and cultural misunderstanding, fuelled a hateful ignorance of the United States. The government launched a wide-ranging program of activities, publications and media primarily through the State Department, but also through the Department of Defense to some degree, and other federal agencies such as US Agency for International Development (USAID). Congress, America's representative, legislative branch of government, also played a role in shaping American communications abroad. This article focuses on one program overseen by the federal agency that manages US international broadcasting, the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) ('Foreign affairs…', 1998).
Communication, Culture & Critique, 2010
Drawing from archival research, I historicize current media policies and reform efforts by analyzing the 1940s critical juncture when policymakers, social movements, and communication industries grappled over commercial media's role in a democratic society. By focusing on policy formations around the Hutchins Commission and the FCC's “Blue Book,” I propose that a suppressed media reform movement resulted in a “postwar settlement” marked by three assumptions: media should remain self-regulated, practice social responsibility, and be protected by a negative freedom of the press. This social contract consolidated an industry-friendly arrangement that contained reform movements, foreclosed on alternative models, discouraged structural critiques of the U.S. media system, and privileged media owners' rights over those of the public's—a relationship that continues today.Revisitando el Arreglo de Posguerra de los Medios de los Estados Unidos: Los Orígenes y las Implicancias del Contrato Social entre los Medios, el Estado, y la PolíticaVictor PickardResumenBasado en una investigación de archivos, investigo históricamente las políticas corrientes de los medios y los esfuerzos de reformas mediante un análisis de la coyuntura crítica de 1940 cuando los creadores de las políticas, los movimientos sociales, y las industrias de la comunicación lidiaron sobre el rol de los comerciales en los medios en una sociedad democrática. Mediante la focalización en las formaciones de las políticas alrededor de la Comisión Hutchins y el libro azul del FCC, ’’ propongo que un movimiento de reforma de los medios suprimidos resultante del “arreglo de posguerra’’ está marcado por tres asunciones: los medios deben permanecer auto-regulados, practicar la responsabilidad social, y ser protegidos de la libertad negativa de la prensa. Este contrato social consolida un arreglo de la industria amistoso que contiene los movimientos de reforma, la quiebra de los modelos alternativos, desestimula la crítica estructural al sistema de los medios de los EE.UU. y privilegia los derechos de los dueños de los medios sobre los del público—una relación que continúa hoy.Revisiter le règlement d’après-guerre des médias américains : les origines et les conséquences du contrat social entre les médias, l’État et la politiqueVictor PickardÀ partir d’une recherche d’archives, j’historicise les politiques médiatiques et les efforts de réformes d’aujourd’hui grâce à une analyse du moment critique des années 1940 où décideurs, mouvements sociaux et industries de la communication luttaient autour du rôle des médias commerciaux dans une société démocratique. En me concentrant sur l’élaboration des politiques autour de la Commission Hutchins et du « Livre bleu » de la Commission fédérale américaine des communications (FCC), je propose qu’un mouvement réprimé de réforme médiatique a conduit à une « entente d’après-guerre » caractérisée par trois postulats voulant que les médias devraient s’auto-réguler, être socialement responsables et être protégés par une liberté négative de la presse. Ce contrat social a consolidé un arrangement favorable à l’industrie qui a réprimé les mouvements de réforme, évité les modèles alternatifs, découragé les critiques structurelles du système médiatique américain et privilégié les droits des propriétaires contre ceux du public : une relation qui se poursuit aujourd’hui.Neue Betrachtungen zum Nachkriegsabkommen der US-Medien: Ursprünge und Implikationen des Gesellschaftsvertrages zwischen Medien, Staat und GemeinwesenVictor PickardBasierend auf einer Quellenanalyse stelle ich aktuelle Medienpolitik und Reformbestrebungen in einen historischen Kontext, indem ich den kritischen Punkt der 1940er Jahre analysiere, als sich politische Entscheidungsträger, soziale Bewegungen und die Kommunikationsindustrie über die Rolle der kommerziellen Medien in einer demokratischen Gesellschaft auseinandersetzten. Ich befasse mich mit der Politikgestaltung der Hutchins Kommission und dem ,,Blue Book“ der Federal Communication Commission (FCC) und schlage vor, dass eine unterdrückte Medienreformbewegung in einem ,,Nachkriegsabkommen“ gekennzeichnet durch drei Annahmen resultierte: Medien sollten selbstreguliert bleiben, sollten soziale Verantwortung praktizieren und sollten durch eine negativen Freiheit der Presse geschützt werden. Dieser Gesellschaftsvertrag konsolidierte ein industriefreundliches Arrangement, das Reformbewegungen beinhaltete, alternative Modelle ausschloss, die strukturelle Kritik des US-Mediensystems abschreckte und die Rechte privilegierter Medienbesitzer über die der Öffentlichkeit stellte – eine Beziehung, die bis heute fortgeführt wird.
ACPD 2022 Comprehensive Annual Report on Public Diplomacy & International Broadcasting
ACPD 2022 Comprehensive Annual Report on Public Diplomacy & International Broadcastin, 2022
The 2022 Comprehensive Annual Report on Public Diplomacy and International Broadcasting, published by the U.S. Advisory Commission on Public Diplomacy in fulfillment of its congressional mandate, assesses the major public diplomacy and global media activities conducted by the U.S. Department of State and the U.S. Agency for Global Media (USAGM). Based on data collected from the State Department’s Public Diplomacy bureaus and offices, the Public Affairs Sections at U.S. missions worldwide, and the USAGM, the report serves as a unique reference document, highlighting public diplomacy strategies and resources used to advance U.S. foreign policy objectives. The report also serves as a platform for innovation, assuring that U.S. government public diplomacy initiatives remain effective in a consistently competitive global information environment. Finally, the 2022 report spotlights how practitioners are helping to strengthen democracy worldwide through the integration of diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility into public diplomacy programming.
Introduction to " International Broadcasting and Public Diplomacy in the 21st Century "
International broadcasting remains a key activity in public diplomacy. In this Introduction I discuss how international broadcasting has long been associated with the projection of foreign policy interests, from an instrument of empire building in the 1920s and 1930s, through the Cold War and beyond. In particular, the Introduction evaluates how modern Information Communications Technologies, especially the internet and social media, have transformed the way international broadcasting contributes to public diplomacy. Issue This editorial is part of the issue " International Broadcasting and Public Diplomacy in the 21st Century " , edited by Gary D. Rawnsley (Aberystwyth University, UK).