Barbara Slavin describes a "revolt" underway at the Voice of America, "which is under a congressional mandate to broadcast news abroad objectively."
Slavin quotes from the petition to Congress, signed by approximately half the VOA Washington staff.
"As broadcast professionals ... we call on the U.S. Congress to conduct an immediate inquiry into the actions of the Broadcasting Board of Governors," the petition says. It goes on to accuse the board of "killing VOA" by closing its Arabic radio service, reducing English-language broadcasting and launching services with "no editorial accountability" and limited breaking news.
In response, de facto BBG supremo Norm Pattiz cites surveys which he seems to think indicate that the audience finds Sawa and al-Hurra as credible. However, only 53 percent of al-Hurra viewers found the station as either "very" or "somewhat reliable." This skeptical blogger would like to see some more details of the survey, starting with what percentage falls into which column.
Reporter Slavin did a little more than the usual he said/she said on this story. She refers to a recent survey by Brookings scholar Shibley Telhami on preferences by Middle Eastern viewers of three satellite channels: al-Jazeera, al-Arabiya, and al-Hurra. Al-Jazeera, a frequent target for criticism by US officials, was the number one choice for news. He found who found that "No one surveyed said Al-Hurra, which went on the air in February, was a first choice and only 3.8% picked it as a second choice for news...."
She also refers to a recent report by Edward Djerejian, the veteran diplomat, headed an advisory panel which published a report titled Changing Minds, Winning Peace in October 2003. The panel recommended establishement of a Corporation for Public Diplomacy modeled on the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.
No comments:
Post a Comment