March 15, 2007
Christian Science Monitor
http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0315/p08s01-comv.html

The costs of winning hearts and minds

A proposed US budget increase for 'media diplomacy' to the Mideast
will cost other parts of the world.

The Monitor's View

American media is struggling to adjust to shifting audiences and
technology. Imagine what it must be like for the US government's
broadcast behemoth, which is dealing with similar issues on a global,
multilingual scale. The stakes are high for the US.

Because Uncle Sam's radio and television programs are broadcast to
other countries, many Americans might not know about them. In
diplomatic speak, the shows fall under the heading of "public
diplomacy" – US promotion of its interests abroad by informing foreign
audiences.

This media diplomacy is vital to America's national security,
especially as the US tries to win "hearts and minds" in the war on
terror. Ditto because of its battered world reputation.

But effectively carrying it off is not easy. Just as commercial news
outfits are cutting budgets in "old media" while trying to lure a new
generation of tech-savvy consumers, so is the cost-conscious Broadcast
Board of Governors that oversees the government's international media
efforts. Those include newcomers such as Alhurra, US television
programming in Arabic, and oldercomers such as Radio and TV Martí,
aimed at Cuba.

The board wants to improve the reach to "critical audiences" in places
such as the Middle East and North Korea. And it wants to move away
from its mainstay technology of shortwave radio, which it says is
declining in global use, to increasingly popular but vastly more
expensive television, Internet, and FM.

To help do that, it's proposing controversial cuts at its largest
network, Voice of America, which reaches 115 million people weekly.
That's sparked protest from a bipartisan group of 11 former VOA
directors (including John Hughes, a columnist for this paper and a
former Monitor editor).

The ex-directors implore Congress to ignore the board's suggested cuts
at VOA, which got its start when it broadcast via shortwave to Nazi
Germany in 1942. "The news may be good. The news may be bad. We shall
tell you the truth," the announcer declared. Its charter says it must
deliver accurate, objective, and comprehensive news – the only
credible way to project US values.

Now on the VOA chopping block: Its main English-language news and
feature service, which feeds VOA radio and TV worldwide; all services
in six other languages, including Cantonese; and VOA radio (but not
TV) in languages that serve the Balkans, India, and Russia.

VOA's budget overseers are right to think about new markets and
technologies.

But in the scheme of things, the ex-directors' request that lawmakers
preserve $26 million in proposed cuts is not a lot to keep an
estimated 18 million listeners in the VOA fold; to retain its main
service in English (spoken by a quarter of the world's population,
after all); to continue native language services in still shaky
democracies such as Georgia and Ukraine; and to keep VOA radio going
in Russia, which could easily pull the plug on VOA TV. Meanwhile,
about 300 million people, many in Asia, still listen to shortwave
radio.

US media diplomacy is attempting a major transition that, if done
right, will be expensive and take awhile. It can't be paid for by cuts
to a program built on shortwave that costs a mere 2.5 cents per
listener per week.

So why don't they solicit donations from listeners like other public SW
radio stations?

http://eng.soundofhope.org/helpus.aspx


"Dan Robinson" wrote in message
...
March 15, 2007
Christian Science Monitor
http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0315/p08s01-comv.html

The costs of winning hearts and minds

A proposed US budget increase for 'media diplomacy' to the Mideast
will cost other parts of the world.

The Monitor's View

American media is struggling to adjust to shifting audiences and
technology. Imagine what it must be like for the US government's
broadcast behemoth, which is dealing with similar issues on a global,
multilingual scale. The stakes are high for the US.

Because Uncle Sam's radio and television programs are broadcast to
other countries, many Americans might not know about them. In
diplomatic speak, the shows fall under the heading of "public
diplomacy" – US promotion of its interests abroad by informing foreign
audiences.

This media diplomacy is vital to America's national security,
especially as the US tries to win "hearts and minds" in the war on
terror. Ditto because of its battered world reputation.

But effectively carrying it off is not easy. Just as commercial news
outfits are cutting budgets in "old media" while trying to lure a new
generation of tech-savvy consumers, so is the cost-conscious Broadcast
Board of Governors that oversees the government's international media
efforts. Those include newcomers such as Alhurra, US television
programming in Arabic, and oldercomers such as Radio and TV Martí,
aimed at Cuba.

The board wants to improve the reach to "critical audiences" in places
such as the Middle East and North Korea. And it wants to move away
from its mainstay technology of shortwave radio, which it says is
declining in global use, to increasingly popular but vastly more
expensive television, Internet, and FM.

To help do that, it's proposing controversial cuts at its largest
network, Voice of America, which reaches 115 million people weekly.
That's sparked protest from a bipartisan group of 11 former VOA
directors (including John Hughes, a columnist for this paper and a
former Monitor editor).

The ex-directors implore Congress to ignore the board's suggested cuts
at VOA, which got its start when it broadcast via shortwave to Nazi
Germany in 1942. "The news may be good. The news may be bad. We shall
tell you the truth," the announcer declared. Its charter says it must
deliver accurate, objective, and comprehensive news – the only
credible way to project US values.

Now on the VOA chopping block: Its main English-language news and
feature service, which feeds VOA radio and TV worldwide; all services
in six other languages, including Cantonese; and VOA radio (but not
TV) in languages that serve the Balkans, India, and Russia.

VOA's budget overseers are right to think about new markets and
technologies.

But in the scheme of things, the ex-directors' request that lawmakers
preserve $26 million in proposed cuts is not a lot to keep an
estimated 18 million listeners in the VOA fold; to retain its main
service in English (spoken by a quarter of the world's population,
after all); to continue native language services in still shaky
democracies such as Georgia and Ukraine; and to keep VOA radio going
in Russia, which could easily pull the plug on VOA TV. Meanwhile,
about 300 million people, many in Asia, still listen to shortwave
radio.

US media diplomacy is attempting a major transition that, if done
right, will be expensive and take awhile. It can't be paid for by cuts
to a program built on shortwave that costs a mere 2.5 cents per
listener per week.

Because they are a cult and have a minimal following. Now if Tom Cruise
would kick in some of his hard earned bucks they might last a year or two
more.
B

"HD Radio²" wrote in message
...
So why don't they solicit donations from listeners like other public SW
radio stations?

http://eng.soundofhope.org/helpus.aspx


"Dan Robinson" wrote in message
...
March 15, 2007
Christian Science Monitor
http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0315/p08s01-comv.html

The costs of winning hearts and minds

A proposed US budget increase for 'media diplomacy' to the Mideast
will cost other parts of the world.

The Monitor's View

American media is struggling to adjust to shifting audiences and
technology. Imagine what it must be like for the US government's
broadcast behemoth, which is dealing with similar issues on a global,
multilingual scale. The stakes are high for the US.

Because Uncle Sam's radio and television programs are broadcast to
other countries, many Americans might not know about them. In
diplomatic speak, the shows fall under the heading of "public
diplomacy" - US promotion of its interests abroad by informing foreign
audiences.

This media diplomacy is vital to America's national security,
especially as the US tries to win "hearts and minds" in the war on
terror. Ditto because of its battered world reputation.

But effectively carrying it off is not easy. Just as commercial news
outfits are cutting budgets in "old media" while trying to lure a new
generation of tech-savvy consumers, so is the cost-conscious Broadcast
Board of Governors that oversees the government's international media
efforts. Those include newcomers such as Alhurra, US television
programming in Arabic, and oldercomers such as Radio and TV Martí,
aimed at Cuba.

The board wants to improve the reach to "critical audiences" in places
such as the Middle East and North Korea. And it wants to move away
from its mainstay technology of shortwave radio, which it says is
declining in global use, to increasingly popular but vastly more
expensive television, Internet, and FM.

To help do that, it's proposing controversial cuts at its largest
network, Voice of America, which reaches 115 million people weekly.
That's sparked protest from a bipartisan group of 11 former VOA
directors (including John Hughes, a columnist for this paper and a
former Monitor editor).

The ex-directors implore Congress to ignore the board's suggested cuts
at VOA, which got its start when it broadcast via shortwave to Nazi
Germany in 1942. "The news may be good. The news may be bad. We shall
tell you the truth," the announcer declared. Its charter says it must
deliver accurate, objective, and comprehensive news - the only
credible way to project US values.

Now on the VOA chopping block: Its main English-language news and
feature service, which feeds VOA radio and TV worldwide; all services
in six other languages, including Cantonese; and VOA radio (but not
TV) in languages that serve the Balkans, India, and Russia.

VOA's budget overseers are right to think about new markets and
technologies.

But in the scheme of things, the ex-directors' request that lawmakers
preserve $26 million in proposed cuts is not a lot to keep an
estimated 18 million listeners in the VOA fold; to retain its main
service in English (spoken by a quarter of the world's population,
after all); to continue native language services in still shaky
democracies such as Georgia and Ukraine; and to keep VOA radio going
in Russia, which could easily pull the plug on VOA TV. Meanwhile,
about 300 million people, many in Asia, still listen to shortwave
radio.

US media diplomacy is attempting a major transition that, if done
right, will be expensive and take awhile. It can't be paid for by cuts
to a program built on shortwave that costs a mere 2.5 cents per
listener per week.