PressEthic

Research on the United States government's attempt to spread the message of democracy yields some interesting results, and leaves me wondering whether the reality of its broadcasting conducted outside of its borders is fully appreciated by its own citizens.

For example, take a look at the website of the BBG, and more specifically the so-called, "Strategic Plan," outlined therein, in a PowerPoint(doesn't work), PDF and one-page synopsis version.

The overarching mission as stated is to:

To promote and sustain freedom and democracy by broadcasting accurate and objective news and information about the United States and the world to audiences overseas.

The site, referring to the various forms of delivery for the different media, says they must be those that:

our audiences use and we control.

"Control." Sinister sounding? Only if you take it as such I suppose...

As a federal entity granted its alleged independence in 1999, the BBG is naturally required to submit details of its expenditure and operating costs, as part of government accountability requirements. The most recent "Annual Report" (here's the PDF), published nearly a year ago now, notes that:

We take the stewardship of taxpayer resources seriously and are committed to improving our internal controls and financial processes.

Sounds like there's a problem with the finances of the organisation which:

with the support of the Administration and Congress...has accomplished several key goals in FY 2004...two 24/7 television services in Arabic to the Middle East: Alhurra and Alhurra Iraq.

So it's independent right? But with the support of the Administration (i.e. Bush's White House) it has accomplished a key goal of funding Alhurra, an Arabic channel broadcasting in Iraq among other places. Was this a key goal of the Administration, or of the BBG, and was it a key goal before the invasion of Iraq? How independent can it therefore be?

The role of Radio Free Europe in the conflict with Soviet power has been recognised, and even had some success attributed to its broadcasting. According to the BBG's Management Report, the 9/11 commission concluded that:

“Just as we did in the Cold War, we need to defend our ideals abroad vigorously. America does stand for its values...If the United States does not act aggressively to define itself in the Islamic world, the extremists will gladly do the job for us."

There are a large number of statements both on the site and in the annual report which I am surprised at, given their level of honesty about the BBG agenda. So it seems that the US is broadcasting its messages of democracy around the world with increasing levels of success, and increasing levels of taxpayers money, having spent over $700m FY2004 according to the report. Surely such behaviour could only be acceptable to the liberal media at home if it is occurring abroad. What if it were to take place in the US itself though? To be continued....