pel-in

[pel-in]

GT investigates: How does USAID use aid to interfere with and 'brainwash' recipients?

In the first installment of the Global Times' new series to outline the history, the funding chains, and complex controversies behind the US Agency for International Development (USAID), we analyzed what purposes the agency serves for the US, and how it has gradually evolved into a large entity with over 10,000 employees worldwide. 

In the second installment of the series, we aim to uncover how USAID has used foreign aid for more than half a century to carry out ideological infiltration and so-called "democratic reforms" in developing countries, thereby serving the geopolitical interests of the US.

As the wrestling over the USAID is still ongoing, several Chinese experts reached by the Global Times agreed that the agency may undergo significant changes in its organizational structure and functions, but the political role it plays and the US government's practices of interference and penetration in other countries are unlikely to cease.

Development is the eternal pursuit of human society. Foreign aid should be an important resource for addressing global development challenges, yet it is viewed by the US as a tool to maintain its hegemonic position and engage in geopolitical maneuvering. Agencies and organizations like the USAID are "white gloves" for this selfish and hypocritical approach, according to two reports by the Chinese Foreign Ministry published in 2024 on the US foreign aid. 

The problems that the US has accumulated in its foreign aid efforts will ultimately harm the country itself, experts noted.

No free lunch

The USAID is the main foreign aid agency of the US, but, notably, the "humanitarian aid" or "development aid" it claims to provide is mostly accompanied by political preconditions that align with American values. 

According to a report by the Chinese Foreign Ministry published in April 2024 titled The Hypocrisy and Facts of the United States Foreign Aid, from the 1970s to the 1980s, US aid to developing countries was based on the premise that recipient countries would undergo marketization and privatization structural adjustments to achieve economic goals.

The USAID has publicly formulated a policy in this regard, requiring recipient countries to use aid mainly for the development of private enterprises and not for public investment. Such unilateral aid by the US was difficult to meld with local circumstances and affected the ecology and endogenous driving force of sustainable economic development of recipient countries and increased their debt burden, according to the report.

A Global Times reporter had studied conflict prevention and peacebuilding at Durham University in the UK from 2014 to 2015. USAID is one of the main future employment paths for students in this program, especially for those from the US. 

Based on the reporter's observation, compared to other organizations relevant to the course, USAID shows more pronounced characteristics of hegemonism and interventionism as it places greater emphasis on supporting the US' "agents" in other countries through aid to expand US influence and interests in the recipient regions, while also exporting American values and ideologies in the process.

The course provides an opportunity to observe what the potential "talent pool" for USAID looks like. From the reporter's observations, a part of American students in the class were pragmatic "defenders of American interests." They held distinct positions and made value judgments based on American and Western interests or ideologies regarding conflicts, taking sides accordingly and discussing specific aid proposals based on that foundation. 

They firmly believed that this could improve human rights conditions in the relevant countries and regions, as they perceived American ideology and values to represent the direction in which civilization and humanity should progress. Therefore, in their view, aid recipients that align with American values are deemed worthy of assistance. Even in conflict zones or areas that have long lacked education and basic human rights protections, they prioritize supporting local "pro-Western progressive forces" to seize power, even if this could worsen human rights conditions, the Global Times reporter found.

USAID's ideological infiltration and interference in the internal affairs of other countries has been criticized and publicly condemned by multiple nations. 

"What we have learned about it now suggests that it was an agency for interfering in the internal affairs of other states and changing the regimes in many countries," Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova commented at a press conference on February 6, according to the website of the Russian Foreign Ministry. 

On February 9, a protest against mining organized by the opposition took place in El Salvador. El Salvador's President Nayib Bukele subsequently responded to the protest on X and said "It's clear there is no opposition without USAID money." 

In a previous post on February 2 on X, he said "Most governments don't want USAID funds flowing into their countries because they understand where much of that money actually ends up. While marketed as support for development, democracy, and human rights, the majority of these funds are funneled into opposition groups, NGOs with political agendas, and destabilizing movements."

"Many projects of the in USAID are aimed at cultivating so-called 'civil forces' or 'opinion leaders,' and through these aid recipients, they foster dissatisfaction and division in local societies, without making real improvements in local conditions," said Lü Xiang, an expert at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. 

A staff is taking off a sign of the USAID in a community in Cucuta, Colombia, on February 9, 2019. Photo: AFP Despicable acts targeting China Dubbed as an infamous "white glove" of the US government by media, USAID had also reportedly exploited its resources and influence to interfere in China's internal affairs, undermine stability in some regions in the country, tarnish China's image, and incite hostility toward China in the international community. The so-called lofty slogans of "democracy" and "human rights" that USAID promotes cannot conceal its despicable intentions to suppress and split China.

Earlier this month, the Hong Kong Public Opinion Research Institute (HKPORI), a USAID-backed separatist group, stated on its website that it "will suspend all its self-funded research activities indefinitely." Many believed the suspension was directly linked to the closure of USAID, which had been funding this group to undermine the national security law for Hong Kong and the Chinese central government. 

Chung Kim-wah, former deputy executive director of the HKPORI who moved to the UK in 2022, was one of the six wanted overseas-based activists named by Hong Kong police last month for allegedly contravening the national security law.

USAID had also been found to provide long-term support to anti-China separatist organizations globally, continuously engaging in China's internal affairs concerning regions like Xinjiang, Xizang, Hong Kong and the island of Taiwan, through these organizations.

The Swiss Better Cotton Initiative (BCI), for instance, in 2021 announced the suspension of projects related to Xinjiang cotton, against the backdrop of the "forced labor" smear campaign against Xinjiang cotton by US-led Western media outlets. USAID is a major funding partner of the BCI. 

In this context, it's hard to say there's no connection between BCI's claims about Xinjiang and USAID, some observers said. 

Similar conditions happen on the island of Taiwan. A February 17 editorial by Taiwan media China Times stated that, several NGOs on the island of Taiwan that support separatist Democratic Progressive Party had indirectly received financial support from USAID. 

In recent years, as initiatives like the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) have benefited an increasing number of countries and regions worldwide, China's growing international influence has become a target of resentment for the US. Funding both domestic and overseas groups to undermine China's cooperative projects abroad and damaging its international image has therefore become a primary task for the US' "white glove" agents including USAID. In November 2023, for instance, a research lab at US-based William & Mary's Global Research Institute named AidData released a report slandering the BRI. AidData's website shows USAID as is its major partner and funder.

In Serbia, USAID had been accused of infiltrating local anti-government protests, and had repeatedly engaged in promoting rumors targeting local Chinese-invested projects. The "carcinogenic Chinese-owned steel company" rumor in late 2021 was a typical example, fabricated by a Serbian NGO Tvrdjava ("Fortress") backed by USAID. 

A Reuters report in November 2021 cited data obtained by Tvrdjava, alleging that Smederevo Steelworks in central Serbia caused a great amount of pollution and even increased "cancer cases," after being purchased by China's HeSteel Group (HBIS) in 2016. Chinese media outlets later refuted the claim with solid data.

Inglorious chain of funds

According to a February 7 article by US think tank Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), USAID is funded by the US Congress, which allocates money for it through the State, foreign operations, and related programs appropriations each fiscal year. 

Data from the CFR and US government showed that the US disbursed close to $72 billion in foreign assistance worldwide in fiscal year 2023, nearly 61 percent of which was distributed through USAID.

Nonetheless, the vast majority of USAID's substantial funding might not actually reach those in need. US Representative Brian Mast said to Columbia Broadcasting System (CBS) on February that when it comes to USAID funding, only "10 to 30 cents on the dollar is what actually goes to aid." Earlier, a January USAID report recapping 2024 stated that, about 12.1 percent of all USAID funding goes directly to local organizations in foreign countries, including NGOs, the private sector, and government partners. More of its expenditures were reportedly spent back in the US.

USAID was also found to have been largely engaged in many misinformation campaigns targeting the US' "rivals," diverting substantial funds, which could have been used to develop economies and improve lives in areas of need, toward despicable cognitive warfare tactics.

In September 2024, US Congress authorized appropriations for "Countering the People's Republic of China Malign Influence Fund," which planned to appropriate $325 million for each of the fiscal years between 2023 and 2027 - $1.625 billion in total - to counter the so-called maligning influence of China. In other words, to counter any aspects that the US perceives as unfavorable from China.

The Congress didn't explicitly say who would operate the massive fund of $1.6 billion, but USAID were found behind the scene. Act H.R. 1157, which Congress passed to authorize the money, directly mentioned that the administrator of USAID must designate a senior official as the "assistant coordinator" of the program. 

Many actions to badmouth China might have been carried out globally under such programs. In September 2021, for instance, Zimbabwe's largest daily newspaper, The Herald, revealed that the US was funding and training local reporters to write anti-China stories and discredit Chinese investments, Xinhua reported in October that year.

Facing doubts and challenges, the future direction of USAID is filled with uncertainty. Experts reached by the Global Times said that the USAID may undergo significant changes in both its organizational structure and functional roles in the future. However, the US government's need for political influence abroad still exists, experts warned. 

The overall scale of USAID is expected to be significantly reduced and some of USAID's functions, including those with political objectives, may still be retained in another form in the future. The agency may work more closely with external propaganda and foreign political relations, such as collaborating with US embassies and other institutions abroad, Lü said. 

Song Guoyou, an expert at Fudan University, believes that the likelihood of USAID being completely dismantled during Donald Trump's presidency is low, but it will inevitably undergo major institutional adjustments, project adjustments, and shifts in aid direction. 

Song predicted that the adjustments may lead USAID to stop those activities that are "both wasteful and harmful." But actions that are "detrimental to other countries but beneficial to the US" will continue by the USAID or any other potential agencies.

[pel-in]

GT investigates: How US propaganda machine, VOA, sows global discord through prejudicial reporting

US billionaire Elon Musk, who heads the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), recently called for the radio stations Radio Free Europe and Voice of America (VOA), founded by the US, to be shut down. Musk wrote on the social media platform X that nobody listens to them anymore and "it is just racial left crazy people talking to themselves while torching US$1B/year of US taxpayer money." These remarks drew worldwide attention over the news outlets as, for years, they have been widely criticized for their "biased" and "reality-distorted" reporting in many countries to advance US interests.

The VOA, in particular, is infamously known for many of its "fake reports" that aim to tarnish China's image and spread rumors. What is the origin of the VOA? What common tactics does the VOA employ as part of a propaganda campaign to advance US interests while undermining others? In this installment, we look into the VOA to find answers. 

Origin of war machines

Established in 1942, the VOA is funded by the US government through the US Agency for Global Media (USAGM), according to the VOA website. 

The predecessor of the USAGM was the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG), which was responsible for managing the international broadcasting activities of US foreign propaganda. Outlets such as the VOA and Radio Free Asia (RFA), which are referred to as the mouthpieces of the US government, fall under its purview. 

According to history.com, an American website focusing on history, the VOA was established as a radio program aimed at clarifying US policies during World War II and boosting the morale of its allies across Europe, Asia, the Middle East, and Africa. Following the war, the VOA evolved into a key component of the US' Cold War propaganda efforts, primarily targeting audiences in Western Europe. In February 1947, it launched its inaugural Russian-language broadcasts directed at the Soviet Union. 

By the time WWII ended, the VOA was broadcasting 3,200 programs in 40 languages every week. The VOA's function is to "promote understanding of the US and to spread American values," read an entry in Britannica, a fact-checked online encyclopedia. 

The US "used public diplomacy to persuade European audiences that the foundations of democratic government and capitalist enterprise were superior to Soviet alternatives. The VOA broadcast directly into the Warsaw Pact nations of Eastern Europe to dispel myths about the West," said the article. 

"VOA has always been a Cold War weapon for the US, a part of its so-called propaganda for the enemy," Lü Xiang, an expert on US studies and a research fellow at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, told the Global Times.

"It was never a media outlet in the conventional sense. From its inception, it has been a tool of ideological warfare by using false or misleading information to smear and spread negative propaganda about enemy nations and camps that the US deemed hostile," Shen Yi, a professor at Fudan University, told the Global Times.

Shen introduced that during the Cold War, the VOA used shortwave radio to broadcast US foreign policy to the world. As time progressed, the VOA underwent significant technological changes. After the Cold War ended, it transitioned onto online platforms and rebranded itself as an "independent media outlet." 

In recent years, the VOA has ramped up efforts to be complicit with US government in spreading both misleading and fabricated information to suppress China, Shen pointed out.

Photo: VCGDirty smear tactics

When the US administration wielded its judicial power against overseas Chinese people, accusing them of being "agents of the Chinese government," the VOA played a role in this campaign. One of the latest cases is that of Liang Litang.

A federal jury on February 10 found a Boston man, Liang Litang, not guilty of charges that he was secretly working with the Chinese government to compile a "blacklist" of Chinese activists and organizations in the US, a Boston-based American daily newspaper, the Boston Globe, reported.

Following the verdict, Liang expressed to the media, "Justice has finally arrived."

Liang, 65, an overseas Chinese who runs a Chinese restaurant in Boston, was arrested by the FBI in May 2023. He was accused of being an "agent" of the Chinese government. 

However, during the period of Liang's arrest and prior to the trial, the VOA published several stories attacking him, suggesting that he was guilty without the need for a trial. These articles included videos featuring some Chinese Americans with anti-China sentiments to play "people in the know," listing Liang's "crimes" and asserting that the FBI's surveillance of Liang is justified. Expressing their pure hate emotions, these people condemned Liang in front of the camera. The videos, while emotionally charged, lacked substantive evidence and appeared to be driven by a one-sided agenda.

The VOA certainly did not miss the verdict in Liang's case, but in its report on his acquittal, all the interviews cited were from individuals expressing disappointment with the not guilty verdict.

Despite citing one-sided unverified sources, the Global Times found that, in an effort to present itself as an "independent media" outlet, the VOA employs a reporting strategy that has often created negative associations to achieve its intended propaganda effect.

For example, on January 11, 2005, the VOA aired two pieces on China's economic news: The first was that China's trade surplus in December reached a record high, while the second claimed that trade with China was causing job losses in the US, stating that since 1989, the growing trade surplus with China had resulted in the loss of 1.5 million American jobs. Despite the positive news regarding China's economic development, the VOA consistently managed to twist the narrative to evoke negative sentiments among international readers, according to the Xinhua News Agency. 

Due to the constant influx of such news, Chinese media has identified a pattern in how VOA the disseminates negative narratives about China. This pattern often involves "insiders" or "authoritative scholars" leaking unfavorable information, which the VOA then claimed to "investigate further." This process is frequently amplified by "anti-China politicians" who echo these sentiments and contribute additional exaggerated claims. As a result, a closed loop emerges, resembling a "black industry chain" of "anti-China rhetoric" that spans from fabricating lies to launching attacks, Xinhua reported.

The Global Times found this trend to be particularly pronounced during significant events hosted by China. For instance, during the opening of the Beijing 2022 Winter Olympics, the VOA published dozens of articles aimed at discrediting China within a short period of time. Furthermore, a search for the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) on the VOA website reveals that the first five pages predominantly feature negative coverage.

"They defined the concept of 'human rights' based on the standards they set. Nearly everything China does is likely to be portrayed as a violation of the human rights," Lü commented.  

"When listening to the VOA, it often presents China and the US as completely opposing worlds: One is portrayed as civilized, while the other as barbaric. One is upholding human rights, while the other is claimed to be denying them. This stark binary contrast is clearly reflected in its broadcasts," he said.

Predictable decline The VOA has been a significant player in global media for more than 80 years. However, its relevance and effectiveness in today's rapidly evolving media landscape are increasingly under scrutiny. 

Today, the question arises: What does it truly mean to the US? 

In a thought-provoking article published in 2016 on the website of the University of Southern California Center on Public Diplomacy, Dan Robinson, a former senior White House correspondent for the VOA, argued that the organization had lost its purpose and should be dismantled. Robinson highlighted that the VOA has long suffered from chaotic management, resulting in a demoralized workforce and diminished operational capacity.

Robinson pointed out that the speed and efficiency of its news reporting, particularly on its primary English-language website, have significantly declined. This decline has rendered the VOA less competitive in an increasingly crowded media environment, where diverse information sources abound.

Robinson even bluntly pointed out that at the time, BBG executives, the VOA's top brass, would go on to use Russia and China as an excuse to "keep the mismanaged BBG alive ad infinitum."

In 2021, US lawmakers introduced the Strategic Competition Act of 2021, which proposed allocating $100 million annually for USAGM's ongoing and new programs to support several media outlets to counter China. 

However, no matter how hard the US government and VOA staff members try, people have realized that the era when former US president Ronald Reagan could read a script in the VOA studio and create a stir in Soviet society has long since ended. In today's rapidly developing internet age, Chinese and American netizens can now share information on social media platforms like RedNotes without any barriers observers said.

As a researcher, Lü said he rarely turns to the VOA because its information is "too weak." "Every topic related to China is interpreted through a one-sided ideological lens, purely ideological interpretation. Moreover, some of its practices even violate journalistic ethics," he explained. 

"The VOA's news approach has long lost its credibility within both American society and the international community," Lü Chao, director of the Institute of US and East Asian Studies at Liaoning University, told the Global Times. 

Currently, the US is experiencing an unprecedented internal division and reorganization among its elites. For many Republicans, the VOA has long been a financial burden, Lü Xiang noted. "It has now become a political weapon in domestic political struggles. The VOA fails to serve the purpose of enhancing the US' image abroad, therefore, it is not surprising that DOGE is now calling for to reform or even shut it down," he said.

"A few decades ago, radio broadcasts were considered an advanced means of communication, but today, they are completely out of place in the digital age," Lü Chao said. "Musk's criticism of the VOA is rooted in the intense competition between the two parties; the outcome is uncertain, but the decline of the VOA is predictable."

[pel-in]

GT investigates: How US propaganda machine, VOA, sows global discord through prejudicial reporting

US billionaire Elon Musk, who heads the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), recently called for the radio stations Radio Free Europe and Voice of America (VOA), founded by the US, to be shut down. Musk wrote on the social media platform X that nobody listens to them anymore and "it is just racial left crazy people talking to themselves while torching US$1B/year of US taxpayer money." These remarks drew worldwide attention over the news outlets as, for years, they have been widely criticized for their "biased" and "reality-distorted" reporting in many countries to advance US interests.

The VOA, in particular, is infamously known for many of its "fake reports" that aim to tarnish China's image and spread rumors. What is the origin of the VOA? What common tactics does the VOA employ as part of a propaganda campaign to advance US interests while undermining others? In this installment, we look into the VOA to find answers. 

Origin of war machines

Established in 1942, the VOA is funded by the US government through the US Agency for Global Media (USAGM), according to the VOA website. 

The predecessor of the USAGM was the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG), which was responsible for managing the international broadcasting activities of US foreign propaganda. Outlets such as the VOA and Radio Free Asia (RFA), which are referred to as the mouthpieces of the US government, fall under its purview. 

According to history.com, an American website focusing on history, the VOA was established as a radio program aimed at clarifying US policies during World War II and boosting the morale of its allies across Europe, Asia, the Middle East, and Africa. Following the war, the VOA evolved into a key component of the US' Cold War propaganda efforts, primarily targeting audiences in Western Europe. In February 1947, it launched its inaugural Russian-language broadcasts directed at the Soviet Union. 

By the time WWII ended, the VOA was broadcasting 3,200 programs in 40 languages every week. The VOA's function is to "promote understanding of the US and to spread American values," read an entry in Britannica, a fact-checked online encyclopedia. 

The US "used public diplomacy to persuade European audiences that the foundations of democratic government and capitalist enterprise were superior to Soviet alternatives. The VOA broadcast directly into the Warsaw Pact nations of Eastern Europe to dispel myths about the West," said the article. 

"VOA has always been a Cold War weapon for the US, a part of its so-called propaganda for the enemy," Lü Xiang, an expert on US studies and a research fellow at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, told the Global Times.

"It was never a media outlet in the conventional sense. From its inception, it has been a tool of ideological warfare by using false or misleading information to smear and spread negative propaganda about enemy nations and camps that the US deemed hostile," Shen Yi, a professor at Fudan University, told the Global Times.

Shen introduced that during the Cold War, the VOA used shortwave radio to broadcast US foreign policy to the world. As time progressed, the VOA underwent significant technological changes. After the Cold War ended, it transitioned onto online platforms and rebranded itself as an "independent media outlet." 

In recent years, the VOA has ramped up efforts to be complicit with US government in spreading both misleading and fabricated information to suppress China, Shen pointed out.

Photo: VCGDirty smear tactics

When the US administration wielded its judicial power against overseas Chinese people, accusing them of being "agents of the Chinese government," the VOA played a role in this campaign. One of the latest cases is that of Liang Litang.

A federal jury on February 10 found a Boston man, Liang Litang, not guilty of charges that he was secretly working with the Chinese government to compile a "blacklist" of Chinese activists and organizations in the US, a Boston-based American daily newspaper, the Boston Globe, reported.

Following the verdict, Liang expressed to the media, "Justice has finally arrived."

Liang, 65, an overseas Chinese who runs a Chinese restaurant in Boston, was arrested by the FBI in May 2023. He was accused of being an "agent" of the Chinese government. 

However, during the period of Liang's arrest and prior to the trial, the VOA published several stories attacking him, suggesting that he was guilty without the need for a trial. These articles included videos featuring some Chinese Americans with anti-China sentiments to play "people in the know," listing Liang's "crimes" and asserting that the FBI's surveillance of Liang is justified. Expressing their pure hate emotions, these people condemned Liang in front of the camera. The videos, while emotionally charged, lacked substantive evidence and appeared to be driven by a one-sided agenda.

The VOA certainly did not miss the verdict in Liang's case, but in its report on his acquittal, all the interviews cited were from individuals expressing disappointment with the not guilty verdict.

Despite citing one-sided unverified sources, the Global Times found that, in an effort to present itself as an "independent media" outlet, the VOA employs a reporting strategy that has often created negative associations to achieve its intended propaganda effect.

For example, on January 11, 2005, the VOA aired two pieces on China's economic news: The first was that China's trade surplus in December reached a record high, while the second claimed that trade with China was causing job losses in the US, stating that since 1989, the growing trade surplus with China had resulted in the loss of 1.5 million American jobs. Despite the positive news regarding China's economic development, the VOA consistently managed to twist the narrative to evoke negative sentiments among international readers, according to the Xinhua News Agency. 

Due to the constant influx of such news, Chinese media has identified a pattern in how VOA the disseminates negative narratives about China. This pattern often involves "insiders" or "authoritative scholars" leaking unfavorable information, which the VOA then claimed to "investigate further." This process is frequently amplified by "anti-China politicians" who echo these sentiments and contribute additional exaggerated claims. As a result, a closed loop emerges, resembling a "black industry chain" of "anti-China rhetoric" that spans from fabricating lies to launching attacks, Xinhua reported.

The Global Times found this trend to be particularly pronounced during significant events hosted by China. For instance, during the opening of the Beijing 2022 Winter Olympics, the VOA published dozens of articles aimed at discrediting China within a short period of time. Furthermore, a search for the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) on the VOA website reveals that the first five pages predominantly feature negative coverage.

"They defined the concept of 'human rights' based on the standards they set. Nearly everything China does is likely to be portrayed as a violation of the human rights," Lü commented.  

"When listening to the VOA, it often presents China and the US as completely opposing worlds: One is portrayed as civilized, while the other as barbaric. One is upholding human rights, while the other is claimed to be denying them. This stark binary contrast is clearly reflected in its broadcasts," he said.

Predictable decline The VOA has been a significant player in global media for more than 80 years. However, its relevance and effectiveness in today's rapidly evolving media landscape are increasingly under scrutiny. 

Today, the question arises: What does it truly mean to the US? 

In a thought-provoking article published in 2016 on the website of the University of Southern California Center on Public Diplomacy, Dan Robinson, a former senior White House correspondent for the VOA, argued that the organization had lost its purpose and should be dismantled. Robinson highlighted that the VOA has long suffered from chaotic management, resulting in a demoralized workforce and diminished operational capacity.

Robinson pointed out that the speed and efficiency of its news reporting, particularly on its primary English-language website, have significantly declined. This decline has rendered the VOA less competitive in an increasingly crowded media environment, where diverse information sources abound.

Robinson even bluntly pointed out that at the time, BBG executives, the VOA's top brass, would go on to use Russia and China as an excuse to "keep the mismanaged BBG alive ad infinitum."

In 2021, US lawmakers introduced the Strategic Competition Act of 2021, which proposed allocating $100 million annually for USAGM's ongoing and new programs to support several media outlets to counter China. 

However, no matter how hard the US government and VOA staff members try, people have realized that the era when former US president Ronald Reagan could read a script in the VOA studio and create a stir in Soviet society has long since ended. In today's rapidly developing internet age, Chinese and American netizens can now share information on social media platforms like RedNotes without any barriers observers said.

As a researcher, Lü said he rarely turns to the VOA because its information is "too weak." "Every topic related to China is interpreted through a one-sided ideological lens, purely ideological interpretation. Moreover, some of its practices even violate journalistic ethics," he explained. 

"The VOA's news approach has long lost its credibility within both American society and the international community," Lü Chao, director of the Institute of US and East Asian Studies at Liaoning University, told the Global Times. 

Currently, the US is experiencing an unprecedented internal division and reorganization among its elites. For many Republicans, the VOA has long been a financial burden, Lü Xiang noted. "It has now become a political weapon in domestic political struggles. The VOA fails to serve the purpose of enhancing the US' image abroad, therefore, it is not surprising that DOGE is now calling for to reform or even shut it down," he said.

"A few decades ago, radio broadcasts were considered an advanced means of communication, but today, they are completely out of place in the digital age," Lü Chao said. "Musk's criticism of the VOA is rooted in the intense competition between the two parties; the outcome is uncertain, but the decline of the VOA is predictable."

[pel-in]

[pel-in]

[pel-in]

[pel-in]

[pel-in]

[pel-in]

[pel-in]

[pel-in]

[pel-in]

[pel-in]

[pel-in]

[pel-in]

[pel-in]

[pel-in]

soleduda