Organizational Issues

Relevant Government Entities

The White House. As an executive branch agency, the USAGM ostensibly should report to the President and coordinate activities with the National Security Council (NSC)—especially given the direct and implied national security aspects of the agency’s messaging globally. However, there currently is no specific office in the White House or NSC liaison for the USAGM.

The original network, VOA, functioned under the Office of Coordinator of Information as early as 1941, the War Department’s Office of War Information from 1942 to 1945, the State Department from 1945 to 1953, and the U.S. Information Agency from 1953 until the creation of the independent Broadcasting Board of Governors in 1999. Although some oversight and management functions of the agency are provided by the State Department, the USAGM otherwise has little connectivity to larger departments or agencies and even less to the White House. With the dissolution of the U.S. Information Agency in 1999, the USAGM has virtually been under its own supervision and guidance. The results have been dismal.

Personnel. Personnel is one of the biggest concerns for the USAGM and its grantees. Attracting talented staff who will stay and letting go of poorly perform- ing personnel are hurdles. Additionally, whistleblowers have come forward with numerous credible allegations of illegal nepotism and improper hiring practic- es.40 Past agency leaders have ignored national security procedures when hiring and have failed to adequately vet staff.41 Government hiring policies and federal law must be followed, and serious policy changes must be implemented to end these practices.

The State Department. VOA was most effective before and during the Cold War when it was under the direct supervision and control of the War and State Departments, respectively. If VOA is not put in the direct chain of command under the NSC, serious consideration should be given to putting VOA under the direct supervision of the Office of Global Public Affairs at the Department of State. The Office of Global Public Affairs was formed during the Trump Administration by consolidation of the State Department’s Bureau of International Information Programs and Bureau of Global Public Affairs.  Ensuring that taxpayer-funded TV, radio, and messaging tells America’s story is imperative and should be coordinated with the existing foreign- language social media platforms at the State Department. Currently, VOA’s foreign-language TV programming is unreliable in telling America’s story, given its amorphous interpretation of its independence firewall and its waning adherence to certain provisions of the Smith–Mundt Act depending on which political party is in office.

The VOA firewall is meant to protect broadcasters from government interference with content; however, USAGM staff have abused the firewall and used it as an offensive measure to block oversight. Additionally, the Smith–Mundt Act stipulates that USAGM services are meant to tell the American story abroad—never to domestic audiences—but the agency has used its taxpayer funding to promote partisan messaging in the U.S. One of the most egregious examples was when, in 2020, it bought ads on its foreign- language social media sites to disseminate a Biden campaign ad and targeted it to a major Muslim population in Michigan.42 Moreover, VOA often airs foreign adversaries’ propaganda, which is antithetical to its congressionally mandated core mission. State Department oversight or “command” may be one way to ensure that VOA and the rest of the USAGM returns and adheres to its original mission.

Clear lines of command and communications between the USAGM and an appropriate office of the National Security Council are also sorely lacking, as has been any reasonable accountability for USAGM senior leadership and strategy. The State Department’s Assistant Secretary for Global Public Affairs and Undersecretary for Diplomacy and Public Affairs should also be in the accountability loop for agency actions. While the U.S. Secretary of State technically has a seat on the board of the agency, it is a toothless seat that is often deferred to the undersecretary and/or assistant secretaries noted above. This position should be relevant and directive when U.S. foreign policy and strategic communications are at stake.

For example, the years-long delay in confirming the Trump-appointed CEO left disastrous holdover leadership from the previous Administration. Employing effective leadership, even in an acting capacity, while a new CEO is awaiting Senate confirmation is necessary to prevent a repeat of this behavior.

Congress. The USAGM receives its budget and mandates directly from Congress. Often, changes in major functions at the agency happen because of the lobbying efforts of a few connected individuals—often grantees lobbying for more funds and less accountability. Those changes can and do handcuff leadership from any meaningful oversight. An overhaul of the agency with review from Congress to modernize, streamline, and reduce waste must be done with congressional support. Key nongovernmental stakeholders, allies, and non-allies. These include industry groups, nonprofits, trade associations, foundations, and activist organizations, for example, America First Legal Foundation,43 USAGM Watch,44 BBG-USAGM Watch,45 and Whistleblower Protection Project.46

CONCLUSION

The USAGM is a story of a lost opportunity both to help restore the world’s con- fidence in the promise and ideals of America and to set a high mark for journalistic integrity and unbiased reporting. These two areas have suffered severely under two decades of USAGM mismanagement and lack of oversight. Finding solutions to these problems and the restoration of the agency’s networks must be the priorities of future agency leadership.

To accomplish this, the USAGM must be fully reformed top to bottom with congressional and White House support. The possibility of consolidating not only the agency’s subparts, but bringing the entire agency under the supervision of the NSC, the State Department, or both would dramatically aid that reform. If the de facto aim of the agency simply remains to compete in foreign markets using anti-U.S. talking points that parrot America’s adversaries’ propaganda, then this represents an unacceptable burden to the U.S. taxpayer and a negative return on investment. In that case, the USAGM should be defunded and disestablished. If, however, the agency can be reformed to become an effective tool, it would be one of the greatest tools in America’s arsenal to tell America’s story and promote freedom and democracy around the world.