Rebuttal to U.S. Agency for Global Media
by: Mora Namdar
Rebuttal to Project 2025: U.S. Agency for Global Media by Mora Namdar
Mora Namdar’s vision for the U.S. Agency for Global Media (USAGM) in Project 2025 emphasizes centralized control over messaging and a focus on promoting U.S. government interests abroad. While Namdar presents this strategy as a way to strengthen U.S. influence on the global stage, her approach undermines the core mission of the USAGM: to provide unbiased, credible journalism to international audiences. By prioritizing government-controlled messaging over independent reporting, Namdar’s proposals risk turning the agency into a propaganda tool, eroding global trust in U.S. media outlets like Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL).
The USAGM was founded on the principle of providing accurate, uncensored news to global audiences, particularly in countries where free press is limited or nonexistent. Namdar’s plan, however, threatens to politicize the agency, compromising its journalistic integrity and credibility. Instead of serving as a beacon of reliable news, the USAGM under Namdar’s vision could become a mouthpiece for U.S. political interests, diminishing its effectiveness and damaging its reputation abroad.
Undermining Journalistic Independence
One of the most troubling aspects of Namdar’s vision for the USAGM is her push for more direct control over its messaging by the U.S. government. While it is true that the agency is funded by the government, its core mission is to provide independent, fact-based journalism free from political influence. Namdar’s proposals risk blurring the line between journalism and government propaganda, which would undermine the very purpose of the USAGM.
Journalistic independence is critical to the credibility of any news organization. The VOA, RFE/RL, and other USAGM entities have earned their reputations by providing balanced, accurate reporting to audiences in regions where independent media is often suppressed or tightly controlled. If these outlets are seen as tools of U.S. government policy, their credibility will suffer, and audiences will turn elsewhere for news, particularly in countries where state-controlled media already dominates the landscape.
Furthermore, Namdar’s focus on promoting U.S. foreign policy goals through USAGM content overlooks the fact that audiences around the world are increasingly skeptical of state-sponsored media. In countries where government-controlled news is the norm, people often distrust information that comes directly from official sources. The USAGM’s ability to operate independently has been one of its greatest strengths in combating disinformation and providing a reliable alternative to authoritarian media. Namdar’s vision would jeopardize this independence and make it harder for the USAGM to maintain its credibility.
Turning USAGM into a Political Tool
Namdar’s proposal to align the USAGM more closely with U.S. government messaging would effectively turn the agency into a political tool, reducing its ability to provide unbiased news. Under this model, the USAGM could be used to push specific political narratives or policy agendas, rather than focusing on delivering factual reporting. This shift would not only damage the agency’s reputation but also erode the trust of its global audience.
The USAGM was created to serve as a reliable source of information for people living under repressive regimes or in countries with limited press freedom. Its value lies in its ability to present the truth, even when that truth contradicts U.S. government positions. By compromising this neutrality, Namdar’s vision risks alienating the very audiences the USAGM was designed to reach. In a world where disinformation and propaganda are rampant, maintaining the USAGM’s independence is more important than ever.
In recent years, there have already been concerns about political interference in the USAGM, particularly during the Trump administration when the agency’s leadership sought to reshape its operations to align more closely with administration policies. This led to widespread criticism and concerns that the agency was losing its journalistic integrity. Namdar’s proposals would further entrench this politicization, turning the USAGM into little more than an extension of U.S. foreign policy rather than an independent voice for free speech and open information.
Eroding Global Trust in U.S. Media
Namdar’s focus on government-directed messaging also risks damaging the global trust that the USAGM has worked hard to build over decades. Outlets like VOA and RFE/RL have established themselves as credible news sources by adhering to high journalistic standards and providing balanced coverage. They are often viewed as reliable alternatives to state-run media in authoritarian countries, where free press is either suppressed or nonexistent.
If these outlets are perceived as merely parroting U.S. government positions, they will lose their ability to serve as credible sources of information. Audiences will no longer trust their reporting, and the USAGM’s influence will diminish. This would be particularly damaging in regions where the USAGM plays a critical role in countering disinformation and propaganda, such as in Russia, China, and the Middle East.
Moreover, turning the USAGM into a government-controlled messaging outlet would put it on the same level as the state-controlled media in countries like Russia and China, which are often seen as instruments of government propaganda. The U.S. should be setting an example of free and independent media, not mimicking the tactics of authoritarian regimes. Namdar’s approach undermines this principle and risks equating U.S. international broadcasting with the very propaganda machines it aims to counter.
Neglecting the Importance of Credibility in Global Media
In today’s information landscape, credibility is everything. The USAGM’s outlets have built their reputations by providing reliable, unbiased news in regions where trust in local media is low. Namdar’s vision fails to appreciate the importance of this credibility, focusing instead on short-term gains in promoting U.S. foreign policy objectives. However, without a foundation of trust, no media organization can be effective in reaching its audience, especially in regions where skepticism of government-backed news is high.
One of the most significant challenges facing global media today is the proliferation of disinformation, particularly from authoritarian regimes. Russian and Chinese state-controlled media, for example, regularly push misleading or false narratives to shape global public opinion. The USAGM has played a crucial role in countering these narratives by providing fact-based journalism that audiences can trust. Namdar’s proposal to integrate U.S. government messaging into USAGM’s content risks compromising the agency’s ability to act as a credible alternative to authoritarian disinformation.
If the USAGM’s outlets are seen as no different from state-controlled media in authoritarian countries, they will lose their audience, and their ability to combat disinformation will be severely weakened. Namdar’s vision jeopardizes the very qualities that make the USAGM effective: its independence, credibility, and commitment to journalistic integrity.
The Role of the USAGM in Promoting Free Press and Democracy
The USAGM’s mission goes beyond simply promoting U.S. government policies—it is about promoting the values of free press, democracy, and open information. These are principles that transcend political agendas and are critical to the agency’s global impact. Namdar’s vision, however, prioritizes advancing U.S. political interests over these broader values, reducing the agency’s role to that of a state-run propaganda outlet.
In countries where free press is under attack, the USAGM serves as a lifeline for accurate, unbiased information. Its value lies in its ability to uphold journalistic principles, even when those principles conflict with the political goals of the U.S. government. By shifting the USAGM’s focus away from independent journalism and toward promoting U.S. policy, Namdar’s proposals risk undermining this vital role.
Rather than turning the USAGM into a tool for advancing political agendas, the U.S. should be investing in the agency’s ability to promote press freedom and counter disinformation worldwide. This means ensuring its editorial independence, supporting its journalists, and reinforcing its mission of providing accurate, unbiased news. The USAGM’s success depends on its ability to operate free from political interference, and Namdar’s vision fails to recognize the importance of this independence.
Conclusion: A Threat to Journalistic Integrity and Global Credibility
Mora Namdar’s vision for the U.S. Agency for Global Media in Project 2025 represents a dangerous departure from the agency’s mission of providing independent, credible journalism to global audiences. By prioritizing government-directed messaging and aligning the USAGM more closely with U.S. foreign policy objectives, Namdar’s proposals risk turning the agency into a propaganda tool, undermining its journalistic integrity and eroding the trust it has built over decades.
The USAGM’s outlets, like VOA and RFE/RL, are respected around the world because they provide reliable, unbiased news in regions where free press is limited. Namdar’s vision jeopardizes this credibility by introducing political control over the agency’s content, which would weaken its effectiveness and reduce its global influence. In an age of disinformation and propaganda, the U.S. needs strong, independent media to counter authoritarian narratives—not state-run outlets that mimic the very regimes they seek to challenge.
The U.S. should be strengthening the independence of the USAGM, not undermining it. Namdar’s proposals represent a step backward for press freedom and global journalism, and they should be firmly rejected in favor of a vision that upholds the agency’s core mission: providing accurate, unbiased information to audiences around the world, free from political interference.