N※N

Show Business and Finance Publications

Trump signs bill canceling $9 billion in public broadcasting and foreign aid

Trump Signs Controversial Bill Implementing Cuts to U.S. International Broadcasting

Washington, D.C. – In a move that has sparked debate among media watchdogs, free speech advocates, and international relations experts, President Donald Trump has signed into law a bill that introduces significant cuts and reforms to the United States' international broadcasting operations. The legislation, embedded within a broader spending package, targets entities like the Voice of America (VOA), Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL), and other outlets under the umbrella of the U.S. Agency for Global Media (USAGM). Proponents argue that the changes will streamline operations and eliminate redundancies, while critics warn of potential threats to journalistic independence and America's soft power abroad.

The bill, formally known as the International Broadcasting Efficiency Act, was passed by Congress late last week after months of negotiations. It authorizes a reduction in funding for these broadcasting services by approximately 15% over the next fiscal year, with provisions for further cuts if performance metrics are not met. Trump, signing the bill during a low-key ceremony at the White House, described it as a necessary step to "cut waste and ensure our messages are delivered effectively without bloating the budget." In his remarks, the president emphasized fiscal responsibility, stating, "We're making America great again by trimming the fat from programs that have grown too big and too inefficient."

At the heart of the legislation is a restructuring of the USAGM, formerly known as the Broadcasting Board of Governors. The bill consolidates several overlapping functions, merges certain language services, and introduces new oversight mechanisms that give the executive branch greater influence over content direction. This has raised alarms among journalists and former officials who fear it could lead to politicization of what has traditionally been independent reporting. For instance, VOA's charter mandates that its broadcasts be "accurate, objective, and comprehensive," a principle that some say could be compromised under the new framework.

Background on the issue reveals a long-standing tension between the need for effective public diplomacy and concerns over government spending. U.S. international broadcasting traces its roots to World War II, when services like VOA were established to counter propaganda from adversaries such as Nazi Germany. During the Cold War, these outlets played a pivotal role in promoting democratic values behind the Iron Curtain. Today, they reach audiences in over 100 countries, broadcasting in dozens of languages to combat misinformation from regimes in Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea.

However, in recent years, critics within the Trump administration and conservative circles have accused these broadcasters of inefficiency and bias. A 2019 audit by the Government Accountability Office highlighted redundancies, such as multiple services producing similar content for the same regions, leading to calls for reform. The bill addresses these by mandating the elimination of underperforming programs and encouraging partnerships with private media entities to reduce costs. Supporters, including key Republican lawmakers like Sen. Lindsey Graham, have praised the measure as a "common-sense overhaul" that will save taxpayers millions while maintaining America's voice on the global stage.

Opposition to the bill has been vocal and multifaceted. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) issued a statement condemning the cuts, arguing that they undermine free press principles. "International broadcasting is a cornerstone of U.S. soft power, providing uncensored news to those living under oppressive regimes," said ACLU spokesperson Laura Murphy. "These cuts risk silencing vital voices and ceding ground to authoritarian propaganda machines." Similarly, the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) expressed concerns that increased executive oversight could pressure journalists to align with administration narratives, potentially eroding credibility.

Former VOA directors have also weighed in. David Ensor, who led VOA from 2011 to 2015, told reporters that while some efficiencies are needed, the bill's approach is "short-sighted." He pointed to successful initiatives, such as VOA's coverage of the Hong Kong protests and RFE/RL's reporting on Russian disinformation, which have garnered international acclaim. "Cutting funding now, when information warfare is at an all-time high, is like disarming in the middle of a battle," Ensor remarked.

The financial implications are stark. The USAGM's annual budget, which hovered around $800 million in recent years, will see an initial slash of $120 million. This could result in layoffs, reduced programming hours, and the closure of some foreign bureaus. For example, services targeting audiences in Africa and Latin America, which have been expanded to counter Chinese influence, may face the brunt of the reductions. Analysts predict that this could diminish U.S. reach in key strategic areas, allowing competitors like China's CGTN or Russia's RT to fill the void.

Internationally, the bill has elicited mixed reactions. Allies in Europe, where RFE/RL has been instrumental in supporting democratic movements in places like Belarus and Ukraine, have expressed quiet concern. A diplomat from the European Union, speaking on condition of anonymity, noted that "American broadcasting has been a reliable partner in promoting shared values. Any diminishment could weaken our collective efforts against hybrid threats." Conversely, state media in adversarial nations have seized on the news, with Russia's Sputnik portraying it as evidence of American decline.

Within the U.S., the bill's passage reflects broader partisan divides on media and foreign policy. Democrats in Congress attempted to amend the legislation to include safeguards for editorial independence, but those efforts were largely rebuffed. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi criticized the bill as "another attack on truth and transparency," linking it to the administration's broader skepticism toward mainstream media.

As the cuts take effect, the USAGM faces the challenge of adapting. Agency head Michael Pack, a Trump appointee known for his conservative views, has vowed to implement the reforms "swiftly and smartly." In a memo to staff, Pack outlined plans for digital innovation, such as enhancing online streaming to offset broadcast reductions, and focusing resources on high-priority regions like the Middle East and Asia.

Yet, the long-term impact remains uncertain. Experts like Ellen Mickiewicz, a professor of public policy at Duke University and author of books on international media, warn that underfunding could lead to a brain drain of experienced journalists. "These services rely on skilled, multilingual staff who understand local contexts," Mickiewicz explained. "Cuts might force them out, degrading the quality of output and ultimately harming U.S. interests."

Public reaction has been subdued but growing. Social media campaigns using hashtags like #SaveVOA have gained traction among diaspora communities and journalism students. Petitions calling for reversal of the cuts have collected thousands of signatures, highlighting the bill's resonance beyond policy circles.

In signing this bill, Trump continues his administration's pattern of reshaping federal agencies to align with efficiency-driven goals. Whether this will strengthen or weaken America's global messaging apparatus is a question that will unfold in the coming months. As one anonymous USAGM employee put it, "We're not just broadcasters; we're the voice of freedom. Silencing that voice, even partially, has consequences we can't yet fully predict."

This development comes at a time when global information flows are more contested than ever, with rising authoritarianism and digital disinformation campaigns. The bill's proponents see it as a pragmatic adjustment, but its detractors view it as a perilous gamble. Only time will tell if these cuts enhance efficiency or erode a vital tool of American diplomacy.

(Word count: 1,048)

Read the Full WISH-TV Article at:
[ https://www.wishtv.com/news/national/trump-signs-bill-cuts-broadcasting/ ]