• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Voice of the Regime?

    Voice of America

    Voice of America is finding itself in the news again, and not for reasons that should please the leadership of the institution. This time the spotlight has landed on VOA’s Persian News Network.

    Over the years, VOA has on occasion strayed from good judgment and allowed voices on the air that have no business being represented on a U.S. government funded network. Back in the 1990s, VOA raised Congressional hackles by putting the families of Palestinian suicide bombers on the air. In 2007, another U.S. broadcasting service, Al Hurra television, came under severe criticism from Capitol Hill for airing views that actively support terrorism and for failing to challenge Arab autocratic regimes. Congress, as a consequence, withheld funding 11 million in funding for Al Hurra.

    Now Voice of America’s Persian News Network (PNN) is under scrutiny by members of Congress for much the same reason. Even though the PNN has been cut to just one hour a day, that precious air time is clearly not spent as well as it should be.

    According to an editorial in The Washington Times, “The Voice of America is becoming the Voice of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Recent programming choices have revealed a creeping bias toward opponents of the pro-democracy movement and de facto supporters of the regime.”

    These complaints have become increasingly vocal and have reached Capitol Hill, where 69 members of Congress on March 17 sent a letter to the White House initiate an investigation of PNN.

    The lawmakers cited “the apparent lack of oversight regarding the management, staffing, mission and content of VOA-PNN broadcasting.” The letter notes that the service “may have harmed the plight of those seeking human rights, rather than helping it.”

    Two recent VOA broadcasts have given preferred treatment to pro-regime messages. On March 29, VOA-PNN interviewed Hooshang Amir-Ahmadi, an anti-sanctions activist who expressed the view that Iran’s belligerent posture and nuclear program are the results of the U.S. aggressive posture towards Tehran. And on April 1, VOA gave airtime to Trita Parsi, head of the National Iranian American Council (NIAC), which has received millions of dollars in federal funds to promote democracy in Iran, who was given uninterrupted airtime on a call-in show airing various anti-U.S. views. Mr. Parsi has previously been investigated by the Senate federal financial management subcommittee for misusing the federal funds received by NIAC.

    It should be noted that these complaints are not new. Almost a year ago, in March 2009, a State Department inspector general substantiated charges of political bias, cronyism and lack of language skills at PNN. Little if any thing has happened to correct the situation in the meantime.

    That PNN would actively advocate for the ruling regime in Iran is not the likeliest explanation for these problems. More likely, the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) and the executive leadership of PNN do not want to be too controversial to the regime for fear that PNN’s signals would be blocked.

    Many employees at PNN would like to give the pro-democracy movement more exposure. But when we rely less on short-wave and more on in-country medium-wave affiliates, or systems that are easily jammed, self-censorship becomes a real issue.

    Furthermore, the Obama administration has dragged its feet when it came to installing new members of the BBG. For the past year, the board has been functioning at only half capacity, with board members whose three year terms had expired, and without a new chairman. This despite the fact that U.S. international broadcasting has an operating budget of $1.1 billion and is a critically important part of U.S. public diplomacy in many areas of the world. This week most of the new board was finally voted out of committee, under the chairmanship of Walter Isaacson, formerly of Time magazine and CNN.

    By unanimous vote, the committee voted out Dennis Mulhaupt, Victor H. Ashe, Michael Lynton, S. Enders Wimbush and Sue McCue, the latter being Harry Reid’s former chief of staff. Two nominees are still pending: Democrat Michael Meehan, who made news while working on the campaign of Democratic Senate candidate Martha Coakley by shoving a reporter from the Weekly Standard, and former White House spokesman Republican Dana Perino, who is being held in a Democrat-Republican tit-for-tat.

    Dealing with the accusations against the VOAs Persian News Network should be top on the new board’s list of things to do. Of critical importance is also formulating a long-term global strategy the preserves valuable short-wave assets of the U.S. government even as AM, FM, Internet and television become more prominent. Most important, though, should by the commitment of the board members to freedom of expression, to democracy and human right for all their listeners.

    Posted in International [slideshow_deploy]

    3 Responses to Voice of the Regime?

    1. David Borgida, VOA says:


      A couple of points of clarification…

      Your statement that the OIG substantiated charges of political bias and cronyism at VOA’s Persian News Network (PNN) is false. The March 2009 inspection report from the OIG states: “The OIG inspection team heard about perceptions of unfairness, charges of political bias,” but it does not substantiate them. What the report does state as a key judgment is: “Persian News Network (PNN) is performing a vital function. It is the only platform from which the U.S. Government can reach an Iranian audience with unbiased news and information about U.S. foreign policy and American life.”

      Also, PNN has NOT been cut to “just one hour a day,” as you state; it airs 7 hours of original television programming and 5 hours of radio daily. PNN programming, by the way, draws some of the biggest audiences of U.S. international broadcasting and is seen weekly by almost 30% of Iranian television viewers.

      You seem to have accepted The Washington Times’ claim that PNN “is becoming the Voice of the Islamic Republic of Iran”. That is simply not supported by the facts. VOA Director Danforth W. Austin responded to the paper’s allegations the same day with a statement that The Washington Times has yet to publish. The statement is posted in full on our website, VOANews.com, at http://bit.ly/ceAo4k.

      In brief, there is no preferred treatment of any messages in VOA PNN programs. Allowing a wide range of voices and opinions underscores VOA’s commitment and adherence to a Congressionally-approved charter that requires VOA programming to be accurate, objective, and comprehensive. The two guests selectively cited represent only a small part of what PNN offered its audience that particular week, and each has appeared on, or written articles for, a wide variety of media.

      As is the policy at any reputable journalistic entity, PNN does not guarantee regular coverage to any individual or group. Each day, VOA receives compelling calls, e-mails, and letters from inside Iran or from members of the Iranian Diaspora, thanking PNN for bringing them information about the world and events in Iran that their local news media do not cover. It provides Iranian citizen journalists and cell phone videographers with an outlet for airing events that they witness first-hand, but that are not publicized by Iranian television.

      In order to keep its people from seeing PNN content, the Iranian government attempts to block our websites and jam our broadcasts. Why go to such lengths if it didn’t find the content objectionable?

      David Borgida
      Acting Director of Public Relations
      Voice of America

    2. C Hartwell, SoCal says:


    3. Maziar, Iran says:

      As a long term viewer of VoaPNN while living in Iran, I agree completely with the article. It is as though VoAPNN has become a tool in the psychological warfare against the Iranian people. Its routine is now clear to many. Its bias towards the pro reform faction of the regime is too obvious. It claims to be impartial and to present both sides of an argument, but most often it matches a weaker presenter opposed to the regime with one who is is a pro Islamist regime reformer. By doing so it discredits those who are true opposition to the Islamic Republic. Key opposition figure rarely if ever appear on VoAPNN. I wonder if the American Tax Payer would knowingly sanction such an organization?

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.