All posts tagged Heritage Foundation

BBG Discussion of the 1.3 Million Dollar Deloitte Contract

As observed by Dr. Helle Dale of the Heritage Foundation, “despite having adopted a new strategic plan, the board then spent a good 10 minutes of its October 13 meeting discussing contracting an independent firm to perform a feasibility study of consolidation.” If consolidation of services is part of a plan already adopted—and to some degree already underway—” Dr. Dale asks “why does it now need to be studied? The initial cost of such an independent study by Deloitte Consulting to be delivered on November 10 (an amazingly short timeframe) is $275,000. The same firm would subsequently be responsible for an implementation plan to the tune of $1.3 million. The whole scenario suggests that the study will serve as justification and cover for decisions that have already been made.”

BBG member Ambassador Victor Ashe asked a very good question, does the proposed consolidation make sense if various broadcasting entities are successful due to their separate cultures and identities? Ashe expressed his scepticism that a quality study can be done in such a short time. He also suggested that besides studying personnel, administrative and financial issues, there is also the need to consider broader aspects of journalism, effectiveness and public image of the broadcasting entities under the proposed consolidation.

The plan, developed by the same management team that wanted to end all Voice of America radio and TV broadcasts to China, would in effect turn VOA and other broadcasting entities into a private enterprise run by bureaucrats who would be getting free money from Congress. It would also end the special role of the Voice of America of reporting on, explaining, and discussing U.S policies. The plan in effect rejects the idea that there is a difference between VOA and the so called surrogate broadcasters. The BBG wants VOA to compete with private broadcasters in the U.S. to achieve higher audience numbers promised under this plan.

The $1.3 million Deloitte contract includes $150,000 for travel expenses.

View the video on YouTube.

  • Share/Bookmark

Overhaul Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) Management – Helle Dale, Heritage Foundation

Dr. Helle Dale of the Heritage Foundation is once again calling for a comprehensive overhaul of the Broadcasting Board of Governors. “Congress should undertake much overdue oversight of the management practices and structures of the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG). U.S. international broadcasting needs professional management and a transparent structure and does not have it at the moment, Dr. Dale posted on the Heritage Foundation website: Congress Should Overhaul BBG Management. She called the BBG “consistently inconsistent” and “the U.S. government’s most dysfunctional agency.”

Dr. Dale also describes the problem of low employee morale, which had been raised at the BBG open meeting last month by BBG member Ambassador Victor Ashe.

“Employees sometimes find Web sites blocked that contain content critical of the BBG. Management is so fearful of leaks to the Hill and the media that employees have occasionally been directed not to bring notepads or pencils to staff meetings. In the case of VOA’s China service, producers were warned by management against covering any congressional hearings relating to the decision to close down the China service. VOA personnel have also been warned against contacting the State Department despite the fact that State is actually a stakeholder in international broadcasting, as the Secretary of State sits on the BBG itself.”

In conclusion of her article, Dr. Dale wrote: “The United States has to retool and reinvigorate its most important communications tools—its international broadcasters—in order to compete.”

Read full report.

  • Share/Bookmark

Bipartisan Broadcasting Board of Governors unites Democrats and Republicans in Congress against it

The bipartisan Broadcasting Board of Governors, which managed U.S. government-funded news broadcasts for overseas audiences, has managed something that no one in today’s political climate has been able to do in recent memory. This federal agency, considered the worst-managed in the federal bureaucracy, united Democrats and Republicans in Congress against itself in a spectacular fashion rarely seen in Washington.

Sure, Democrats and Republicans in Congress do sometimes unite to support some uncontroversial causes or in opposition to human rights violations abroad. This time, however, they united against a federal agency with an annual budget of more that $700 million.

The reason for this unusual bipartisan unity? As China pursues aggressive public diplomacy in the U.S. and internationally and clamps down on dissent at home, BBG bureaucrats had a bright idea to propose the termination of Voice of America radio and satellite television broadcasts to China and the firing of 45 journalists who specialize in human rights reporting.

The BBG did not get anything from China in return but promised to spend money on putting more material on the Internet, which the Chinese censors block whenever users want to access VOA political news in Mandarin and Cantonese. The Congress did not buy the BBG’s argument that the future of VOA presence in China calls for more English lessons that are not currently being censored.

The Senate Committee on Appropriations, following a similar action in the House of Representatives, told the BBG to drop its plan. “While the Committee recognizes that VOA English language and cultural programs are reaching audiences, particularly youth, via the Internet in the PRC, the Committee is concerned with the lack of clarity about the impact of the China broadcast restructuring proposal on all VOA radio and television programs broadcast to the PRC and Taiwan, and the lack of transparency of ‘the optimize BBG transmission’ proposal.”

The committee refused to accept the BBG proposal and included funding for the continuation of VOA broadcasts and transmissions to China and other BBG-managed programs to countries without free media.

Read more in BBG Watch’s post Senate Committee on Appropriations tells BBG: VOA radio and TV to China must continue.

Also worth reading: Senate Committee to BBG: Hands off China Broadcasting by Dr. Helle Dale of the Heritage Foundation.

The Broadcasting Board of Governors is a bipartisan board comprised of nine members. Eight, no more than four from one party, are appointed by the President and confirmed by the U.S. Senate; the ninth is the Secretary of State, who serves ex officio. The BBG manages all U.S. civilian international broadcasting, including the Voice of America (VOA), Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL), Radio Free Asia (RFA), Radio and TV Martí, and the Middle East Broadcasting Networks (MBN)—Radio Sawa and Alhurra Television.

  • Share/Bookmark

Senate Committee to BBG: Hands off China Broadcasting — Dr. Helle Dale, Heritage Foundation

Dr. Helle Dale of the Heritage Foundation, who keeps a close eye on the Broadcasting Board of Governors and U.S. international broadcasting, noted in the foundation’s blog that the Senate Committee on Appropriations put a break this week on the BBG’s plans to end Voice of America radio and television broadcasts to China.

Pointing out that at least for the moment Congress apparently has prevented the BBG from making a huge strategic mistake, Dr. Helle writes about disturbing levels of incompetence and mismanagement at the BBG:

As an organization detached from State or any other government agency, the BBG has operated with a level of unaccountability that cries out to be addressed. In surveys of job satisfaction among federal employees (including the just-released Office of Personnel Management survey), the BBG ranks 37th out of 37 government agencies, in part because the staff is consistently mystified by management decisions. The BBG’s new communications director, hired to cope with the fallout of the China cuts and reach out to think tanks, announced on Tuesday that she would be leaving as of October 7 after just a few months on the job.

Dr. Helle argues in her article for close congressional oversight and the long-term goal of reintegration of the BBG into the U.S. government’s foreign policy strategy and organization. Read more of Dr. Helle’s article.

We would like to clarify one point. In proposing to end Voice of America radio and TV broadcasts to China, the Broadcasting Board of Governors was not proposing to save U.S. taxpayers $8 million. The money recovered by VOA going silent in China was to be spent on hiring more BBG bureaucrats and private contractors.

Not only members of Congress were outraged by this plan, so were Chinese human rights activists, free media advocates, U.S. human rights NGOs, and independent journalists.

BBG media spinners tried to present its crtitics as being in love with shortwave radio and nothing else, when in fact the critics were advocating a sensible multimedia strategy, including satellite TV delivery, which the BBG wanted to end as well. The BBG strategy of confronting human rights advocates and members of Congress backfired.

The BBG plan was not about saving money, it was about wasting and spending even more money while depriving the U.S. of one of its most effective national security assets.

  • Share/Bookmark

Huchen Zhang, VOA senior editor: BBG and IBB will have 48 more managers

Radio Silence in China: VOA Abandons the Airwaves Panel at the Heritage Foundation, May 25, 2011.

While cutting $8 million from the China branch, there will be an increase of $9 million for BBG and IBB management; while eliminating 45 core journalistic positions, the BBG and IBB will have 48 more managers.

— Huchen Zhang, Senior Editor, Voice of America China Branch

On Valentine’s Day, the BBG announced to all the employees of the VOA’s China branch its proposal to eliminate VOA shortwave radio and TV broadcasts to China on October 1. By switching to Web-only operations, the BBG told us, $8 million would be saved. Forty-five journalists (38 Mandarin and seven Cantonese, 59 percent of the branch’s full-time employees) would lose their jobs.

Read transcript

  • Share/Bookmark

The Heritage Foundation BBG panel transcript is available

Radio Silence in China: VOA Abandons the Airwaves Panel at the Heritage Foundation, May 25, 2011.

Radio Silence in China: VOA Abandons the Airwaves Panel at the Heritage Foundation, May 25, 2011.

On Valentine’s Day, the BBG announced to all the employees of the VOA’s China branch its proposal to eliminate VOA shortwave radio and TV broadcasts to China on October 1. By switching to Web-only operations, the BBG told us, $8 million would be saved. Forty-five journalists (38 Mandarin and seven Cantonese, 59 percent of the branch’s full-time employees) would lose their jobs.

While cutting $8 million from the China branch, there will be an increase of $9 million for BBG and IBB management; while eliminating 45 core journalistic positions, the BBG and IBB will have 48 more managers.

— Huchen Zhang, Senior Editor, Voice of America China Branch

Transcript from “Radio Silence in China: VOA Abandons the Airwaves” has been posted on the Heritage Foundation website. It includes the powerful statement from Huchen Zhang, Senior Editor, Voice of America China Branch.

BBG claims it is “the leader in circumventing Internet censorship.” The fact is, although the number of Internet users in China has increased exponentially, research results show that from 2007 to 2010, annual visits to VOA’s Chinese Web site remained virtually unchanged (except a short period in 2008 during the Beijing Olympics when the Chinese government temporarily lifted its ban on the Internet). Even though the BBG’s circumvention technology might work to a certain extent, the circumvention tools would endanger on-the-ground activists, as pointed out by many Internet-freedom groups.

Unlike surfing the Internet, the beauty of listening to shortwave radio broadcasting is that it cannot be detected. By the same token, any attempt to measure the exact listenership in China is bound to be futile, as we know the Chinese government has designated VOA as an “enemy station.”

Other panelists included Dan Dicky, CEO, Continental Electronics Corporation who pointed out that authoritarian regimes can block the Internet but they cannot completely block shortwave.

Here in the U.S., it is easy to believe that satellite and Internet delivery are ubiquitous. Because these methods of delivery appear less expensive we cling to the mistaken belief that they are also better. But in the regions of the world where our message will have the greatest impact, these so-called cheaper delivery systems are not accessible. Many areas of the world have no infrastructure to support these technologies. Shortwave radio, either in analog or digital formats, requires no special infrastructure. Shortwave does not require any special skills or training on the part of the listener. We have to recognize that even in countries that have ubiquitous Internet or satellite coverage our message can be easily interrupted by choke points established by the local government for that specific purpose. Shortwave broadcasts are much more robust.

The third panelist, David S. Jackson, a consultant for Burson-Marsteller and Turner and a former Voice of America director, had three main arguments against putting all of U.S. international broadcasting and public diplomacy eggs into the Internet basket:

The first is that a strategy of reducing VOA’s China outreach to a Web-only, new media platform makes VOA too vulnerable to censorship or blocking. Our broadcasters are very good at evading blocking efforts, but the Chinese are also very good at throwing up new ones. VOA’s broadcasting to China has always relied on a strategy of diversifying our outreach as much as possible so as to minimize the chances that we could be cut off entirely. A Web-only strategy would be high risk.

My second concern is that the plan to cut the Mandarin-speaking staff by more than half, as this proposal would do, will jeopardize VOA’s ability to cover China and to effectively compete with other media for audiences there.

Lastly, I worry about the message that will be sent by VOA halting all radio and TV broadcasts, especially at a time when China is launching an international television network to broadcast to the U.S. and other countries.

All panelists pointed out that keeping radio and satellite TV should not prevent VOA from continuing to expand Internet outreach. Huchen Zhang made a point that firing 45 journalists who specialize in human rights reporting will undermine any effort to provide substantive news to China through any platform.

By stressing the importance of shortwave radio and satellite TV broadcasts, I am not saying that we should not further develop our Internet capabilities. On the contrary, I believe we should strengthen our broadcasting and Web site at the same time. Our Web site is supported by all the content created by radio and TV journalists. To eliminate our radio and TV broadcasts and cut 59 percent of the staffers is like “taking away the firewood from under the cauldron.”

“Radio Silence in China: VOA Abandons the Airwaves” panel was on May 25, 2011 at the Heritage Foundation. The panel was moderated by Dr. Helle Dale, Senior Fellow for Public Diplomacy.

  • Share/Bookmark

Helle Dale, Heritage Foundation: Support Continued Voice of America Broadcasting to China

Dr. Helle Dale, Senior Fellow for Public Diplomacy in the Douglas and Sarah Allison Center at The Heritage Foundation.

Unless Congress steps in, there is a real danger that a strategic asset of great value to the United States and to freedom-loving listeners around the world will be wasted. The battle for hearts and minds did not end with the Cold War (which broadcasting can help win, by the way). Far from it.

Helle C. Dale, Senior Fellow for Public Diplomacy at The Heritage Foundation has written a number of articles in support of continued use of radio and television by the Voice of America. In her latest article, she points out that the BBG Inspector General argued against the BBG strategy last summer: “Since access to the Internet is more easily controlled than access to shortwave radio, international radio, and satellite—broadcasts such as VOA’s remain the only dependable source of political news, especially during crises.”

How one gets from this analysis to the decision in favor of a wholesale cut in broadcasting remains a mystery, Dr. Dale observed.

Link to Support Continued Voice of America Broadcasting to China

  • Share/Bookmark

Heritage Foundation Panel Discusses Radio Silence in China: VOA Abandons the Airwaves

Radio Silence in China panel at the Heritage FoundationParticipants in a panel discussion held in Washington in May by the Heritage Foundation criticized the Broadcasting Board of Governors’s (BBG) plan to end Voice of America (VOA) radio and TV broadcasts to China in Mandarin and Cantonese as a retreat for U.S. international broadcasting, public diplomacy, and journalism in support of human rights.

A video of the discussion is available at the Heritage Foundation website.

The panel was moderated by Dr. Helle Dale, Senior Fellow for Public Diplomacy (photo). The panelists were: former Voice of America Director David Jackson, VOA Chinese Branch Senior Editor Huchen Zhang, and Dan Dickey, President of Continental Electronics.

From the Heritage Foundation website — On October 1, Voice of America’s Chinese radio service will go silent, as U.S. international broadcasting abandons the airwaves and moves to the Internet. In the burgeoning age of new media, many, including Voice of America, seem to be questioning the continued relevance of shortwave radio. Yet, while the Internet offers great potential, U.S. public diplomacy cannot rest exclusively on the use of a single platform. This is particularly true where the prevalence of internet censorship is high. Just this month, for instance, China announced the creation of its State Internet Information Office (SIIO), intended to further expand and enhance China’s information dissemination policy, and leading many to question whether abandoning the airwaves is truly the best way to reach America’s audiences throughout the world. Join us as our guests discuss current U.S. strategy and the way forward in international broadcasting.

On Valentine’s Day, the BBG announced to all the employees of the VOA’s China branch its proposal to eliminate VOA shortwave radio and TV broadcasts to China on October 1. By switching to Web-only operations, the BBG told us, $8 million would be saved. Forty-five journalists (38 Mandarin and seven Cantonese, 59 percent of the branch’s full-time employees) would lose their jobs.

While cutting $8 million from the China branch, there will be an increase of $9 million for BBG and IBB management; while eliminating 45 core journalistic positions, the BBG and IBB will have 48 more managers.

— Huchen Zhang, Senior Editor, Voice of America China Branch

Transcript from “Radio Silence in China: VOA Abandons the Airwaves” has been posted on the Heritage Foundation website. It includes the powerful statement from Huchen Zhang, Senior Editor, Voice of America China Branch.

BBG claims it is “the leader in circumventing Internet censorship.” The fact is, although the number of Internet users in China has increased exponentially, research results show that from 2007 to 2010, annual visits to VOA’s Chinese Web site remained virtually unchanged (except a short period in 2008 during the Beijing Olympics when the Chinese government temporarily lifted its ban on the Internet). Even though the BBG’s circumvention technology might work to a certain extent, the circumvention tools would endanger on-the-ground activists, as pointed out by many Internet-freedom groups.

Unlike surfing the Internet, the beauty of listening to shortwave radio broadcasting is that it cannot be detected. By the same token, any attempt to measure the exact listenership in China is bound to be futile, as we know the Chinese government has designated VOA as an “enemy station.”

Other panelists included Dan Dicky, CEO, Continental Electronics Corporation who pointed out that authoritarian regimes can block the Internet but they cannot completely block shortwave.

Here in the U.S., it is easy to believe that satellite and Internet delivery are ubiquitous. Because these methods of delivery appear less expensive we cling to the mistaken belief that they are also better. But in the regions of the world where our message will have the greatest impact, these so-called cheaper delivery systems are not accessible. Many areas of the world have no infrastructure to support these technologies. Shortwave radio, either in analog or digital formats, requires no special infrastructure. Shortwave does not require any special skills or training on the part of the listener. We have to recognize that even in countries that have ubiquitous Internet or satellite coverage our message can be easily interrupted by choke points established by the local government for that specific purpose. Shortwave broadcasts are much more robust.

The third panelist, David S. Jackson, a consultant for Burson-Marsteller and Turner and a former Voice of America director, had three main arguments against putting all of U.S. international broadcasting and public diplomacy eggs into the Internet basket:

The first is that a strategy of reducing VOA’s China outreach to a Web-only, new media platform makes VOA too vulnerable to censorship or blocking. Our broadcasters are very good at evading blocking efforts, but the Chinese are also very good at throwing up new ones. VOA’s broadcasting to China has always relied on a strategy of diversifying our outreach as much as possible so as to minimize the chances that we could be cut off entirely. A Web-only strategy would be high risk.

My second concern is that the plan to cut the Mandarin-speaking staff by more than half, as this proposal would do, will jeopardize VOA’s ability to cover China and to effectively compete with other media for audiences there.

Lastly, I worry about the message that will be sent by VOA halting all radio and TV broadcasts, especially at a time when China is launching an international television network to broadcast to the U.S. and other countries.

All panelists pointed out that keeping radio and satellite TV should not prevent VOA from continuing to expand Internet outreach. Huchen Zhang made a point that firing 45 journalists who specialize in human rights reporting will undermine any effort to provide substantive news to China through any platform.

By stressing the importance of shortwave radio and satellite TV broadcasts, I am not saying that we should not further develop our Internet capabilities. On the contrary, I believe we should strengthen our broadcasting and Web site at the same time. Our Web site is supported by all the content created by radio and TV journalists. To eliminate our radio and TV broadcasts and cut 59 percent of the staffers is like “taking away the firewood from under the cauldron.”

“Radio Silence in China: VOA Abandons the Airwaves” panel was on May 25, 2011 at the Heritage Foundation.

SourcedFrom Sourced from: Events – The Heritage Foundation

  • Share/Bookmark

Don’t Silence Voice of America | The Heritage Foundation

Although diplomats and pundits have crowned Web 2.0 as the new communications king, radio remains the globe’s most trusted source for information. Consequently, America should ensure its public diplomacy strategy continues to commit resources, as well as congressional oversight, to developing its radio capabilities.

The author of this article, Helle C. Dale, is Senior Fellow for Public Diplomacy in the Douglas and Sarah Allison Center for Foreign Policy Studies, a division of the Kathryn and Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for International Studies, at The Heritage Foundation.

Don’t Silence Voice of America | The Heritage Foundation

  • Share/Bookmark

President Obama, We Are Very Sorry That Hitler Had Invaded Poland Before Labor Day Weekend

Hitler_Stalin Pact

President Obama with Prime Minister PutinTedLipien.com Helle Dale has written two articles on how the Obama Administration is still unable to get its public diplomacy act together. I don’t think that there was a deliberate attempt to snub Poland over the 70th anniversary observances of the start of World War II, but as the Heritage Foundation scholar points out, Poland has a lot of reasons to be unhappy with the White House and the State Department.

 

“The Polish government sent out the invitation three months ago to the White House, but an answer was received only on Wednesday, a mere five days before the ceremony. Repeated attempts over the summer by the Poles to contact the White House and the State Department met with a long period of silence. One White House aide actually replied that everyone was on vacation until after Labor Day, which caused a Polish official to say he apologized that Adolf Hitler had invaded his country on Sept. 1.

 

The initial answer from the White House almost defied belief. The head of the official U.S. delegation was not to be a member of the Obama administration but former Clinton Defense Secretary William J. Perry. Over the weekend, a change was announced, and the U.S. delegation is to be headed by National Security Adviser Gen. James L. Jones. Gen. Jones will head the U.S. delegation, rather than President Obama, Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. or Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton. Gen. Jones will stand alongside Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and British Prime Minister Gordon Brown. Anyone want to play ‘who doesn’t belong in this picture?’” Read more…

 

In another article, Helle Dale asks whether “Putin is outcharming Obama.”

 

“When Russia threatens to outdo the United States on public diplomacy in a place like Poland, something is seriously amiss in the way the State Department and the White House is conducting the relationship with one of the United States’ most loyal allies. Unfortunately, this is exactly what may happen at the commemorations of the 70th anniversary of the beginning of World War II, which will be taking place tomorrow (Sept. 1) in the Polish port city of Gdansk.

 

While the Obama administration has been insultingly negligent in responding to the invitation from the Poles, and only this weekend gave the final word on participation, Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin is using the occasion for a charm offensive of his own. (Whether Mr. Putin succeeds is of course another matter – Russia has a lot of history with Poland to overcome, including the Katyn forest massacre in which Soviet secret police killed thousands of Polish officers in 1940.)” Read more…

 

There is more on this topic in my earlier post With Putin in Poland for WW II Anniversary, Many Poles Feel Snubbed by Obama.

  • Share/Bookmark