Comments on: VoA will no longer speak Hindi…but learns more Bangla http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2006/03/26/voa_will_no_lon/ All that flavorful brownness in one savory packet Sat, 30 Nov 2013 11:11:28 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: JayV http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2006/03/26/voa_will_no_lon/comment-page-1/#comment-52080 JayV Mon, 27 Mar 2006 18:57:12 +0000 http://sepiamutiny.com?p=3202#comment-52080 <p>The actual utility of a blatantly advertised propaganda outlet is certainly up for debate. Does anybody in the middle east actually listen to the arabic channel paid for by the us govt?</p> <p>Having said that, as a journalistic outreach program of the govt I think there is probably justification in dropping coverage. Like ennis (#1) I am under the impression that voa considers itself a news org and different from outlets like radio marti, sawa and other outlets that are propaganda. I think the long term plan may be to drop "news" altogether in favor of propaganda broadcasts. If the us govt needs a propaganda tool in hindi it will probably create one. At this time there is no need for one, hence the cuts.</p> <p>Radio marti was created because the interested parties felt that voa wasn't doing enough of a job shovelling the official anti castro line. My friend who used to work there complained about the strict controls and about how close to treason it was to back off the anti-castro line even a hair (this was during the jorge mas canosa years, I have no idea about it these days).</p> <p>I agree with byteword (#3). The beeb was the paradesi broadcast of choice when I was listening to the radio (which wasn't much). When I was in madras I got my us propaganda straight from the 'merican embassy and copies of "span" that used to show up in our mail regularly (this was in the usia days).</p> The actual utility of a blatantly advertised propaganda outlet is certainly up for debate. Does anybody in the middle east actually listen to the arabic channel paid for by the us govt?

Having said that, as a journalistic outreach program of the govt I think there is probably justification in dropping coverage. Like ennis (#1) I am under the impression that voa considers itself a news org and different from outlets like radio marti, sawa and other outlets that are propaganda. I think the long term plan may be to drop “news” altogether in favor of propaganda broadcasts. If the us govt needs a propaganda tool in hindi it will probably create one. At this time there is no need for one, hence the cuts.

Radio marti was created because the interested parties felt that voa wasn’t doing enough of a job shovelling the official anti castro line. My friend who used to work there complained about the strict controls and about how close to treason it was to back off the anti-castro line even a hair (this was during the jorge mas canosa years, I have no idea about it these days).

I agree with byteword (#3). The beeb was the paradesi broadcast of choice when I was listening to the radio (which wasn’t much). When I was in madras I got my us propaganda straight from the ‘merican embassy and copies of “span” that used to show up in our mail regularly (this was in the usia days).

]]> By: bytewords http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2006/03/26/voa_will_no_lon/comment-page-1/#comment-52029 bytewords Mon, 27 Mar 2006 06:45:07 +0000 http://sepiamutiny.com?p=3202#comment-52029 <p>abhi: "WhatÂ’s happening here is that the powers that be are shifting their dollars away from many of the countries in which VoA is popular and arguably effective,"</p> <p>well, i would be seriously surprised if voa had a big audience in india. i had no clue abt voa back then, never heard it mentioned ever in the 3 cities i grew up in---kolkatta, chennai, and blore. admittedly none are in the hindi heartland, but i doubt that voa was popular anywhere. i know bbc is/was.</p> <p>don't know abt the other countries though.</p> abhi: “WhatÂ’s happening here is that the powers that be are shifting their dollars away from many of the countries in which VoA is popular and arguably effective,”

well, i would be seriously surprised if voa had a big audience in india. i had no clue abt voa back then, never heard it mentioned ever in the 3 cities i grew up in—kolkatta, chennai, and blore. admittedly none are in the hindi heartland, but i doubt that voa was popular anywhere. i know bbc is/was.

don’t know abt the other countries though.

]]> By: Abhi http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2006/03/26/voa_will_no_lon/comment-page-1/#comment-52006 Abhi Mon, 27 Mar 2006 05:10:29 +0000 http://sepiamutiny.com?p=3202#comment-52006 <p>Also note that Kenneth Tomlinson who is the Chairman of the BBG recently got <a href="http://mediamatters.org/items/200506220009">in trouble</a> for his conservative meddling over at NPR.</p> Also note that Kenneth Tomlinson who is the Chairman of the BBG recently got in trouble for his conservative meddling over at NPR.

]]> By: Ennis http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2006/03/26/voa_will_no_lon/comment-page-1/#comment-52004 Ennis Mon, 27 Mar 2006 05:02:13 +0000 http://sepiamutiny.com?p=3202#comment-52004 <p>The issue has to do with the independence of the VOA - the VOA sees itself as a legitimate news agency and not simply as a propaganda broadcaster. They think the best thing to do for the united states is to present it, warts and all, to the outside world and to expemplify the virtues that it calls for in others. Many within this administration feel that, instead, the VOA should be shrunk and the money reallocated to more positive, upbeat, arabic language television (for example). The problem is that it comes across as advertising, and so has little credibility, whereas the VOA had more.</p> The issue has to do with the independence of the VOA – the VOA sees itself as a legitimate news agency and not simply as a propaganda broadcaster. They think the best thing to do for the united states is to present it, warts and all, to the outside world and to expemplify the virtues that it calls for in others. Many within this administration feel that, instead, the VOA should be shrunk and the money reallocated to more positive, upbeat, arabic language television (for example). The problem is that it comes across as advertising, and so has little credibility, whereas the VOA had more.

]]>