From Ukraine to Cuba, news outlets worldwide are suddenly begging for cash—because their “independent journalism” was actually paid for by Washington all along., global media funding crisis, independent media USAID, Trump USAID shutdown, U.S. government media influence, USAID foreign influence, USAI...
There is already a serious problem in modern discourse with the term "independent media," a phrase commonly defined as any media outlet, no matter how big an empire it is, that is not owned or funded by the state (as if that is the only form of dependence or control to which media is subject). But even at this extremely low bar, all these outlets fail. Indeed, Weimers' warning underlines the fact that none of them are independent in any meaningful way. They are, in fact, completely dependent on USAID for their very existence.
Not only that, but some USAID-backed journalists candidly admit that their funding dictates their output and what stories they do and do not cover. Leila Bicakcic, CEO of Center for Investigative Reporting (a USAID-supported Bosnian organization), admitted, on camera, that "If you are funded by the U.S. government, there are certain topics that you would simply not go after, because the U.S. government has its interests that are above all others."
While USAID specifically targets foreign audiences, much of its messaging comes back to America, as those foreign outlets are used as credible, independent, and reliable sources for newspapers or cable news networks to cite. Thus, its bankrolling of foreign media ends up flooding domestic audiences with pro-U.S. messaging as well.
Not America, the greatest country in the world according to Lemmy.world, at least they must think that to always uncritically consume their propaganda.
I used to think people who used the phrase “blue maga” were trolling a little bit, but that’s what they are politically over there. Joe Biden was the only candidate who could win, even when it was obvious that he has dementia or something.