Arlington, Virginia
July 19, 2007

Mr. James K. Glassman
Chairman
Broadcasting Board of Governors
330 Independence Avenue S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20237

Dear Mr. Glassman:

Thank you for convening the Town Meeting of IBB and VOA employees on July 10. During the meeting you said that, in U.S. international broadcasting, journalism is the “foundation.” Beyond that, however, that there must be “journalism with purpose … journalism that contributes towards freedom.”

I would like to offer reasons why, in successful international broadcasting, journalism is its own purpose.

I have been involved in international broadcasting audience research since 1977. In the survey and focus groups results I’ve seen since then, the message has been consistent: people use international broadcasting to get the reliable news, especially about their own countries, that is not provided by their state controlled domestic media. They turn to international broadcasts as the antidote to propaganda. They can detect even subtle attempts to emphasize this or downplay that. If unsatisfied, they will tune elsewhere.

Preferably, U.S. international broadcasting would be conducted by the private sector. This would give USIB the independence necessary to achieve credibility. But because there is little prospect for commercial success in international broadcasting in languages such as Pashto, Burmese, or Creole, the government must provide the funds for international broadcasting.

Why would the U.S. government want to pay for an international broadcasting effort if it cannot dictate its content? There are at least four reasons….

1) It is necessary to attract an audience, for reasons mentioned above.

2) It provides the news and information that bolsters the audience against the misinformation and disinformation of dictators and terrorists. Audiences then have the information they need to form their own opinions about current events. This is necessary to build and to maintain democracy, and to understand international events and U.S. policies.

3) Independent journalism provides an example of democracy in action. It reports on the deliberations of government and opposition.

4) Even if audiences do not agree with U.S. policies, they will appreciate that the United States is providing them with an independent and useful news service. On the other hand, subjecting them to propaganda may give them another reason to dislike of the United States.

Certainly, the United States should advocate its policies abroad, but that is the job of public diplomacy. Public diplomacy is an activity separate from, and complementary to, international broadcasting, for reasons stated on page 3 of the 2002 BBG annual report.

One manifestation of U.S. public diplomacy is the website usinfo.state.gov, now available in seven languages. Instead of U.S. international broadcasting competing with itself in 22 languages, I think it would be preferable for U.S. international broadcasting and U.S. public diplomacy to complement each other in at least those 22 languages.

The mission of successful international broadcasting is defined not by us, but by the audience. If U.S. international broadcasting adheres to this market-based strategy, the outcome will be well-informed audiences and good will towards the United States.

Yours sincerely,



Kim Andrew Elliott is an audience research analyst in the International Broadcasting Bureau.

cc: BBG members

See also "Put the News Here and the Propaganda There," USC Center on Public Diplomacy, November 13, 2006.