President Trump has ordered cuts to the U.S. Agency for Global Media, impacting hundreds of journalists and reducing American media influence abroad. This could allow nations like China and Russia to increase their propaganda efforts. Critics highlight the importance of U.S. media in providing independent reporting, especially in restrictive regimes. Experts voice concern over the narrative shift as media alternatives diminish.
Following an executive order from Trump to reduce U.S. Agency for Global Media funding, the global media landscape is facing significant changes. This order, aimed at cutting nearly $1 billion, resulted in the swift dismissal or leave of numerous journalists, marking a drastic reduction in U.S. media influence abroad. Experts argue that this move may benefit adversaries like China and Russia, who are heavily investing in international propaganda and disinformation campaigns.
Lisa Curtis, a former National Security Council official, expressed concern about the consequences of these cuts. “Closing the service will actually help our adversaries,” she stated, emphasizing that countries like China and Iran are currently increasing their investment in anti-American messaging. Curtis mentioned a legal challenge against the funding cuts, as the financial support was established by Congress.
Recent reports highlight China’s success in media procurement, offering essential equipment that supports their operations. Meanwhile, Russia has adopted a more aggressive stance with government-sponsored outlets like Sputnik actively targeting Western narratives. As European nations have restricted Russian media post-Ukrainian invasion, Russia is redirecting its focus toward Africa through strategic social media campaigns.
The impact of budget cuts on U.S. media is evident, with the BBC recently ceasing its Arabic radio services, allowing Russian media to fill that void. Sarah Cook, who conducted the Freedom House report in 2022, argued that substituting U.S. media with Chinese counterparts is complex. “Even if Chinese state media are doing it, the content is completely different,” she noted, indicating a stark contrast in editorial independence and objectivity.
Kari Lake, a prominent Trump supporter, criticized the U.S. Agency for Global Media, categorizing it as inefficient and unnecessary. This stance aligns with the Trump administration’s broader view that government-funded media is outdated amidst an abundance of private news outlets. Yet, U.S. broadcasters have historically provided nuanced coverage in various languages, often facilitating critical reporting from insider exiles.
Curtis highlighted the significant audience reach of Persian-language broadcasts, like Radio Farda, which engages 10 percent of Iran’s adult population weekly. Additionally, Radio Free Asia serves as an essential outlet for Tibetan and Uyghur journalists, enabling them to report without the influence of Chinese government censorship. Mareike Ohlberg, a researcher on Chinese media policies, observed that China’s global media hiring surge began during the 2008 financial crisis, as they aimed to counter Western narratives. “That expansion is going to continue,” she predicted, emphasizing that fewer alternatives would solidify their influence.
Trump’s decision to cut funding for the U.S. Agency for Global Media risks diminishing American media presence globally. With countries like China and Russia ramping up their information operations, the shift in the media landscape could lead to an increase in government-controlled narratives. Experts warn that the absence of U.S.-funded outlets may leave a gap filled by propaganda, impacting the quality and diversity of international journalism.
Original Source: m.economictimes.com
