Because the *real* audience is on Capitol Hill.

"Foreign audiences need interpretation of US government policies, and insight into the American way of life and love of freedom. In difficult earlier years, notably during the cold war, this function was performed by the US Information Agency (USIA) and government radio such as the VOA, Radio Free Europe, and Radio Liberty, broadcasting to people behind the Iron Curtain and beyond. USIA was disbanded after the cold war, its remnants placed under the State Department, its transmitters given a new home under a civilian board of governors. After 9/11, though, the need to project accurate information about the US to Arab countries and others became urgent again. How best to reinvigorate public diplomacy became a critical discussion. On the campaign trail, Sen. John McCain vowed that if elected president he would reconstruct USIA. Republican Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas earlier this year introduced a bill to do just that, but it has failed to gain traction." John Hughes, Christian Science Monitor, 2 July 2009.
     It is perhaps not surprising that a commentator who was both an associate director of USIA and a director of VOA (he lists the two jobs in that order) tries, every few months, to re-muddle the distinction between public diplomacy and international broadcasting. The International Broadcasting Act of 1994 and VOA's separation from USIA happened because of an obvious conflict: the entity whose job is to report the news was located under the entity whose job was to advocate US foreign policy. US international broadcasting according to the Brownback plan ("the National Center for Strategic Communications ... would manage U.S. international broadcasts directly") would transmit content pleasing to Washington decision makers rather than serving the informational needs of any (former) overseas audiences. Posted: 05 Jul 2009 Permalink Print