• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

What’s behind Trump’s fresh push to wrest control of Voice of America

anotherguy said:
How long before the name is changed to VOT - The voice of Trump??? :(
Click to expand...

The only question is whether the president has the power and right to name the VOA director. Period.
 
DavidEduardo said:
The only question is whether the president has the power and right to name the VOA director. Period.
Click to expand...

The new CEO of USAGM (Pack), is the only one who can name the new VOA Director. The Boards have all been disbanded. Of course, since the President nominated the CEO...
 
New analysis on the changes taking place at VOA:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/life...7dcfe0-b1b1-11ea-8758-bfd1d045525a_story.html

BTW the previous head of the USAGM is now the CEO of NPR. There's a comment from him here:

https://www.npr.org/2020/06/18/8798...o-fires-news-chiefs-raising-fears-of-meddling

Pack's immediate predecessor as permanent CEO of the broadcasting agency, John Lansing, now CEO of NPR, expressed concern in an interview.
"If VOA is converted to a mouthpiece for an American president's agenda, then we will be giving aid and comfort to authoritarians around the world," Lansing said, "and that will ultimately make American citizens less safe and will diminish America's standing around the world."
Click to expand...
 
MarkW said:
VOA is a complete waste of taxpayer dollars. The fact it even still exists is asinine.
Click to expand...

If you saw the impact to listeners outside your little community, you probably wouldn't make a statement like that. But as usual, if it isn't something you consume or listen-to, it must be a waste of money.

You'd be surprised how much money is spent on things that have much less positive effects than VOA, or the other U.S. government-funded broadcasters.
 
Kelly A said:
If you saw the impact to listeners outside your little community, you probably wouldn't make a statement like that. But as usual, if it isn't something you consume or listen-to, it must be a waste of money.
Click to expand...

As I mentioned before, when I owned a group of stations in Ecuador in the 60's and when I consulted in every Spanish-Speaking country in Latin America except Cuba and Nicaragua in the 60's and 70's and in the Domincan Republic in the 80's and deep South America in the 90's and 00's... period when Shortwave was still listened to and active and also when it was declining... it was impossible to discern any influence of the VOA anywhere I worked.

Granted, I only worked in very large cities where there was an ample assortment of radio that had better sound and was totally localized. I'm sure that in some rural areas before local commercial radio was available that the VOA had more listeners.

And probably in areas with severe media control, such as behind the Iron Curtain, back then the VOA was useful and productive. Of course, i got that feeling when consulting Radio Marti in the 80's and 90's, too.

But I think the VOA has spent too much trying to served the free nations of the world for the last 60 years. It's a post-WW II concept that has not been modified adequately even now.
 
Last edited:
DavidEduardo said:
But I think the VOA has spent too much trying to served the free nations of the world for the last 60 years. It's a post-WW II concept that has not been modified adequately even now.
Click to expand...

It works when we have a clear foreign policy. When we don't, it's a waste of time. It probably would have helped to adjust the targets to where they could do the most good. But right now, the focus appears to be aimed more towards the domestic than the international. And the domestic audience doesn't really need another media source, no matter what they call it or who programs it.
 
TheBigA said:
It works when we have a clear foreign policy. When we don't, it's a waste of time. It probably would have helped to adjust the targets to where they could do the most good. But right now, the focus appears to be aimed more towards the domestic than the international. And the domestic audience doesn't really need another media source, no matter what they call it or who programs it.
Click to expand...

Well stated and a good perspective. Do you think anyone who is involved in DC understands that?

(I think your perspective and clarity... and simplicity... are not complex enough for career politicians and government workers.)

I have had the feeling that the last several directors think of the VOA as if it were a domestic network... just that instead of car insurance and pillows they are selling Democracy, Inc.

Radio Moscow lost its attitude and concept with the fall of the wall, and about the only organization that knows how to do it right is the BBC and they fell to the funding issue.
 
DavidEduardo said:
Radio Moscow lost its attitude and concept with the fall of the wall,
Click to expand...

There was nothing for Radio Moscow to push during the Yeltsin years; it wasn't really clear which way he'd be taking the nation. By the time power was handed over to Putin, it was very late in the game for shortwave and besides, Putin wasn't one to boast to the world about his plans. Why would a veteran KGB man do something like that? The Voice of Russia had its moments, and was more entertaining to the casual listener than Radio Moscow was, but you're right: It had no real mission after the Wall fell. I'm sure Putin shed no tears for it. RT (television and online) is a far better fit, technically, stylistically and philosophically, for today's world.
 
DavidEduardo said:
Well stated and a good perspective. Do you think anyone who is involved in DC understands that?
Click to expand...

The people who work there know who their audience is. A lot of them worked at domestic outlets before going there, so they know the difference.

The political appointees are something else. Michael Pack may know how to create influential films, but I think he's in way over his head at USAGM. That has been the common theme to almost all of the presidential appointments in this administration. Firing all the experienced department heads puts him at an even greater disadvantage. The engineers there know more about running the place than the CEO.
 
KeithE4 said:
VOA is a pale shadow of its former self. It broadcasts mainly to Africa and Asia, with the African Service as the majority of the English-language broadcasts. Greenville NC is the last remaining VOA site in the US.

.
Click to expand...

Perhaps more a technical point, but USAGM has transmitters in Saipan and Tinian.
 
Apparently the Board members didn't pay attention to the defense authorization bill that passed in 2016, which allowed-for elimination of the nine member oversight board, and gives the new UASGM CEO much more power:

https://docs.house.gov/billsthisweek/20161128/CRPT-114HRPT-S2943.pdf

https://www.nexttv.com/news/defense-bill-would-abolish-bbg-governing-board-161487

This all started December 23, 2016

From the Legal Information Institute:

"(c)Termination of Director of International Broadcasting Bureau
Effective on December 23, 2016, the position of the Director of the International Broadcasting Bureau shall be terminated, and all of the responsibilities, offices, authorities, and immunities of the Director or the Board under this chapter or any other Act or authority before such date shall be transferred or available to, assumed by, or overseen by the Chief Executive Officer, as head of the Board."
 
Sounds like, under the law, he could program rap, disco or all Lawrence Welk.
Or, China Radio International .
(Was this story approved by Pack?)
 
TheBigA said:
Among the people the new head of USAGM fired were all the non-partisan boards of directors who oversaw the various media platforms.
Click to expand...

Is there such a creature as a "non-partisan" individual today? I've never, even in my international experience, seen such a polarized, partisan situation as exists today in the US.

So how does one define "non-partisan" today?
 
Last edited:
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom