{ "id": "IN11365", "type": "CRS Insight", "typeId": "INSIGHTS", "number": "IN11365", "active": true, "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "versions": [ { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 624241, "date": "2020-04-28", "retrieved": "2020-05-19T13:59:36.075639", "title": "President Trump Criticizes VOA Coverage of China\u2019s COVID-19 Response", "summary": "The President\u2019s Criticism of VOA\u2019s Coverage of China\nOn April 10, 2020, the White House included in its online \u201c1600 Daily\u201d summary of key news and events a statement entitled \u201cVoice of America Spends Your Money to Speak for Authoritarian Regimes.\u201d The statement referred to a Voice of America (VOA) story and two posts that, it asserted, \u201camplified Beijing\u2019s propaganda\u201d about Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). The statement criticized VOA for running an Associated Press article on its website on April 7, 2020, which referred to Wuhan\u2019s lockdown as a \u201cmodel\u201d for other countries battling the coronavirus. The White House statement provided an image of part of a March 31, 2020, VOA Facebook post, which included a graphic showing that the U.S. COVID-19 death toll had surpassed China\u2019s then-official tally. On April 7, 2020, a VOA tweet showed a video of a light show put on by the Wuhan government to mark the end of the city\u2019s lockdown. VOA operates under the U.S. Agency for Global Media (USAGM), an independent, federal entity whose mission is to\u201d provide unbiased news and information in countries where the press is restricted.\u201d\nVoice of America released a response to the White House statement, asserting that \u201cVOA has thoroughly debunked\u201d Chinese government and state-run disinformation and propaganda related to the pandemic, and that \u201cwe are free to show all sides of an issue and are actually mandated to do so by law,\u201d unlike Chinese media. VOA also emphasized that due to its \u201cindependent\u201d and \u201cfactual\u201d reporting, VOA journalists have been \u201ceffectively barred by the Chinese government from working inside China.\u201d \nVOA in China\nVOA, which offers international and U.S. news in over 40 languages, targets audiences in China with English, Mandarin (Chinese), Cantonese, and Tibetan television and radio broadcasts, as well as digital content. Mandarin service program areas include reports on major news developments related to the United States, the People\u2019s Republic of China (PRC), U.S.-China relations, Taiwan, and Hong Kong, American culture and sports, and English language learning. USAGM\u2019s VOA-Radio Free Asia (RFA) Global Mandarin initiative, expected to be fully launched in 2021, intends to target 400 million young Mandarin speakers in and outside of mainland China, and aims to counter China\u2019s growing media influence around the world. \nThe Chinese government regularly jams and blocks VOA and RFA Mandarin, Cantonese, and Tibetan and RFA Uyghur radio and television broadcasts and Internet sites; VOA English language services receive less interference. According to USAGM\u2019s FY2021 Congressional Budget Justification, despite censorship and other restrictions, VOA Mandarin service\u2019s audience has continued to grow, particularly for its YouTube programs, which have reached roughly 100 million viewers. During the past year, VOA Mandarin reported on numerous topics that are sensitive to the PRC government and generally banned, including Chinese dissident views, the mass detention of Uyghurs, political protests in Hong Kong, politics in Taiwan, and PRC \u201cmisinformation\u201d efforts. VOA also published articles in English and Chinese questioning China\u2019s COVID-19 numbers and timeline of events. VOA Mandarin\u2019s website received over 68 million visits from April 2019 to April 2020, including 4.5 million article views related to COVID-19 coverage.\nVOA\u2019s Broadcasting Mission, Standards, and Principles\nThe White House\u2019s criticism of VOA\u2019s reporting, reliance on certain sources, and use of private U.S. media sources raises long-standing questions concerning the mission, standards, and limitations of VOA reporting and U.S. international broadcasting to China and elsewhere. VOA\u2019s mission, codified in legislation since the 1970s, requires that its broadcasts \u201cpresent a balanced and comprehensive projection of significant American thought and institutions,\u201d \u201cthe policies of the United States,\u201d and \u201cresponsible discussions and opinion on these policies.\u201d Among other things, the principles governing all U.S. international broadcasting require news broadcasts that are authoritative, accurate, objective, and based on reliable information, all in accordance with the highest journalistic standards. Limitations also exist on the scope of U.S. international broadcasting: governing law states it should not \u201cduplicate the activities\u201d of private U.S. broadcasters or government-supported broadcasting from other democratic nations. All U.S. international broadcasting is required to \u201cbe consistent with the broad foreign policy objectives of the United States.\u201d\nIndependence of U.S. International Broadcasting from Interference\nSince the early days of the Cold War, there has been disagreement, including within Congress, about whether U.S international broadcasting should be an instrument of U.S. foreign policy, advocating for U.S. interests against foreign propaganda alongside State Department public diplomacy and other influence communications, or an independent source of news comporting with journalistic independence and integrity, creating trust in foreign publics by providing objective, unbiased reporting. Beginning in 1994, Congress decided in favor of objectivity and independence, setting out in law the requirements discussed above, and establishing the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG), a bipartisan supervisory entity that would shield U.S. broadcasters from direct federal government influence. In 2016, however, concerns with BBG\u2019s leadership structure led Congress to replace the BBG with a Chief Executive Officer as the head of U.S. international broadcasting. While Congress did not alter the principles that apply to U.S. international broadcasting, the changes left the authority to direct U.S. international broadcasting in the hands of a singular agency head appointed by and answerable to the President, and required to \u201cconsult regularly\u201d with the Secretary of State for \u201cforeign policy guidance,\u201d possibly weakening the structural independence of the broadcasters. \nPossible Issues for Congress\nCongress confronts potential legislative and oversight issues related to the role and the structure of U.S. international broadcasting as it responds to alleged foreign government, particularly Chinese, disinformation and lack of transparency, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic. China\u2019s expanding official foreign media empire, cooperative programming with foreign media, and various forms of pressure on foreign media, reportedly have helped to support its propaganda and policies around the world. Some policy observers argue that VOA suffers from a lack of direction and funding, and a sufficiently aggressive approach toward countering Chinese propaganda. Others suggest that the Trump Administration\u2019s recent accusations that VOA supports Chinese propaganda are overblown, and that VOA\u2019s independence from U.S. government pressure should be protected.", "type": "CRS Insight", "typeId": "INSIGHTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "https://www.crs.gov/Reports/IN11365", "sha1": "56973513c033beb49a04089c00ffaa54bdf2ab73", "filename": "files/20200428_IN11365_56973513c033beb49a04089c00ffaa54bdf2ab73.html", "images": {} }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "https://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/IN11365", "sha1": "f2a1d0838b06ec14278e11120d46b55e15194262", "filename": "files/20200428_IN11365_f2a1d0838b06ec14278e11120d46b55e15194262.pdf", "images": {} } ], "topics": [ { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4911, "name": "East Asia & Pacific" } ] } ], "topics": [ "CRS Insights" ] }