I just posted on Facebook that I fear this is potentially the most Goebbels-esq move in the Trump years. If Trump can be defeated, it will take a decade at least to restore some of our positive presence amongst many around the world. TJ
============================================ Tom Johnson - [email protected] Institute for Analytic Journalism -- Santa Fe, NM USA 505.577.6482(c) 505.473.9646(h) *NM Foundation for Open Government* <http://nmfog.org> *Check out It's The People's Data <https://www.facebook.com/pages/Its-The-Peoples-Data/1599854626919671>* ============================================ On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 12:20 PM Steve Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > I was caught off guard this morning when I saw these latest headlines: > > > https://www.theguardian.com/media/2020/jun/18/voice-of-america-independence-fears-after-trump-ally-purges-senior-officials > > I went straight to USAGM's website to get oriented on the full scope of > USAGM, of which I have only been vaguely aware. I have heard plenty of > anecdotes about Voice of America during WWII and Radio Free Europe > during the Cold War as well as Armed Forces Network (especially during > the Vietnam War). I was shocked (but not surprised) that the website > was already reflecting the "new management" and if I were not so lazy > (incompetent), I might go search for a snapshot from yesterday/last-week > of the website and see *just what all* was changed with the changing of > the guard. > > I'm hoping Tom (and others) have some better understanding of the > implications of this. > > As a child (6-12 years) my parents allowed me use of their classic > (circa 1950) Zenith "Wave Magnet" Transoceanic multiband short-wave > radio in my bedroom. We lived in an isolated location in the mountains > of western NM where there was no "normal" radio (or TV) reception. The > ionosphere provides an interface for RF to reflect off of allowing > "skip" of signals around the curvature of the earth, oftentimes > *multiple* skips allowing *literally* reception from nearly halfway > around the world. In more of a technical fascination with this idea > than with the sounds and in fact, voices and even messages coming out of > the speaker in front of the warmly glowing tubes as I tweaked the tuning > dial and waved the "magnet" (removeable antenna) around, I *did* listen > to what was dribbling out of the speaker (turned way down to avoid > disturbing the household). > > WWV (time) was the most reliable signal to find (on several bands?), > partly because it was so easily recognized. I doubt I knew what > languages I was hearing, but there were any number of foreign language > broadcasts fading in and out. I was most fascinated by the BBC which > (like WWV) seemed to show up on multiple bands, and possibly also > because these sources may have been (and were sometimes identified) as > coming from the south Pacific. I don't think I ever actually heard the > voice of Hanoi Hannah, or even knew of her. I occasionally picked up a > whiff of Radio Free Europe or one of it's affiliates elsewhere in the > world, but never enough quantity to really follow much they were saying > (and I *was* just a kid). What I understood was that THIS was the US's > voice to the world (or the other side of the Iron Curtain?). The BBC > world service was perhaps *most* fascinating because British English of > course, but also because I seemed to understand that they were not > "censored" by the same assumptions our own media would be. I thought > that because the BBC served so many colonial/commonwealth regions that > their message would somehow be "cleaner" or provide better "parallax" > than our own (implied to be?) singular voice. Meanwhile i was getting > my first/only taste of broadcast news "on the hour" whilst trying to > listen to KOMA, KOA, or more interestingly one of the Pirate stations > along the US/MX border. I didn't know what 50,000 Watts meant, but It > was pounded into my head by the announcers. > > I was careful what I said to or asked of my parents, because like many > parents of that era, they could be fickle. While they seemed to *want* > me to play with their radio, I knew implicitely that they wouldn't like > that I sometimes took the back off the radio, defeated the lockout > switch and layed in bed watching the tubes glow like they were TV, and > trying to "visualize" the radio signals impinging on the "wave Magnet" > and flowing through the wires, being rectified (a term I learned later) > and amplified by those glowing tubes before feeding the speaker. I > also knew that what I might be hearing coming out of the speaker might > not be something they wanted me to hear. I did ask them about he > various foreign languages which made me acutely aware that the whole > world (or the whole technologically advanced world) were not English > speakers. I also asked them about the BBC which lead them to explain a > lot more about the Commonwealth and British Colonial power (past and > present). > > When I asked them about Radio Free ?Europe, they were a little cagey... > indicating that their message wasn't intended for the US ears... it was > specifically crafted for the "poor fools living behind the Iron > Curtain", they tried to indicate that because of the conditions of > people living under the iron fist/boot of the Soviet Union were so > sparse, so dire, and because they had no access to "open information", > we had to be "careful" what and how we told them. I think they likened > it to helping a starving person recover, giving them only the smallest > amounts of the blandest food (water and crackers) to start out, and > build them up. It seemed reasonable. I also didn't ask them why the > BBC seemed to talk about all kinds of things that I wasn't hearing in > the 5 minutes of news from the AM Mega Stations I could sometimes get. > I guessed it was because The UK commonwealth was so geographically > spread, they were worried about a broader array of issues (which was > likely true) but I Intuited that the BBC and the CBC were saying things > about the US that the US would never say about ourselves.... nothing > terribly harsh or critical... just things that probably didn't make us > look that good. Most of what I heard was really a jumble of ideas, of > names and places I knew little of... but I think I was sensitive to the > "shape" or the "tone" of these different sources. I couldn't watch > their lips/jaws move though. > > The first thing I ran into on *today's* version of the USAGM website was > that it was implied that their content was "illegal to consume in the > US" up until 2013 with the Smith-Mundt modernization bill. Best I can > tell, what that bill really did was allow USAGM resources to make their > materials available to domestic outlets. But as with my parent's > description, I do imagine that the content is significantly different > (hopefully not directly contradictory) with that which is pointed > inward. Aside from the President's Press Secretary (and the equivalent > for the other branch's offices?) that we don't have a strong (overt) > message shaping out of our government? > > - Steve > > > > > - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam > un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ > FRIAM-COMIC <http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/FRIAM-COMIC> > http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ >
- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
