The "Free" Press: Trends in US Government Funding of Media Development Abroad

by Ryan Weber

A new study released December 7 by The Center for International Media Assistance (CIMA) examines trends in US government funding of foreign media development projects from 2007 to 2010. Africa received continued increases over the period, but the highest expenditures were 'South and Central Asia,' mostly concentrated in Afghanistan. Europe, the Caucasus, East Asia, the Middle East and Latin America all experienced gradual reductions in funding after a world-wide spike in media development in 2008.

The report, "U.S. Government Funding for Media Development: A Special Report to the Center for International Media Assistance" (full text) was written by Laura Motta, and commissioned by the National Endowment for Democracy. It considers projects tagged as either "Media Development" or "Freedom of Information" programs, with some examples including local journalist training, improved internet access, and news/communications programs for disabled, or hard to reach populations.

Specifically, the CIMA report looks at funding by two US government agencies - the Department of State and the US Agency for International Development (USAID). From State, these projects are usually carried out by the Democracy, Human Rights and Labor program (DRL), the Middle East Partnership Initiative (MEPI) or the Bureau or Europe and Euarsian Affairs. The USAID departments include Democracy & Governance (DG) and the Office of Transition Initiatives (OTI), which work in post- and on-going conflict areas.

Budgets and Figures

In total, the FY 2010 budget for the State Department included $49.9 million dedicated to media assistance, while USAID was almost double that figure, at $90.8 million. A table from the report demonstrates how this combined contribution has changed over time by region (see below)

But this is misleading for a number of reasons. First, the division of funds and the areas of focus are not evenly shared among the two organizations. In fact, different priorities and practices result in considerable disparity when the FY 2010 budgets of Dept. State and USAID are placed side-by-side and divided by region, as in the table below.

Virtually all of the Media Assistance funds from the Department of State are spent in the "Near East" (including Iraq) and in "Centrally-Managed Programs." On the contrary, USAID spending is highest in South and Central Asia, Europe and Eurasia, and Africa, with only a pittance expended in the Near East or on centrally-managed programs.

Another major difference between the two channels of funding is that the projects funded by Dept. State tend to be short-term (1-year) projects, while those funded by USAID are often designed to be multi-year endeavors. Despite these differences, and a general dearth of cross-agency strategic planning, "State Department units that engage in media development usually do so in cooperation with or through USAID and its media experts" according to Moretta's report.

The second aspect obscured by the FY 2010 figures is the allocation of funds within regions, specifically "South and Central Asia." While it is not surprising that Afghanistan receives ample US funding in pursuit of media development, it is worth noting to what degree it eclipses all other countries in the region. The CIMA report does not breakdown regional funding by country, but it does explain the dramatic increase in "South and Central Asia" media development funding by USAID, which almost doubles from 2009 to 2010. In a total increase of $28.1 million, $22 million is for the Afghanistan Media Development and Empowerment Project (AMDEP), which works to train Afghan journalists and media producers. Another $7 million is also allocated to a 1-year project called Mobil Khaban, which integrates news services with mobile phone providers. To what degree the $21.7 million directed toward the "South and Central Asia" region in 2009 exhibited this disparity is not in the CIMA report.

3rd Stream: the BBG

There is also a third US government agency that is active in foreign media, and to a certain extent should be considered 'Media Development' and/or 'Freedom of Information.' That's the Broadcasters Board of Governors, the administrative body that supplies funding to major international broadcast organizations like Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL), Voice of America (VOA), and other region-specific services. While the primary purpose of these organizations is to provide active journalism - rather than media development per se - they each engage regularly in local journalism training, media freedom advocacy, etc.

More to the point, any consideration of US government spending directed at foreign media must contend with the BBG as a major player, something the CIMA report does not (though it does register the anomaly, as well as the absence of Department of Defense spending on foreign media). The magnitude of this omission is immediate clear by adding the FY 2010 BBG budget to the Dept. State and USAID media development expenditures (at right).

Such a comparison may be fair, or may be misleading. Much of what BBG does would not be considered direct media assistance or development, but it is all dedicated to media support in some way. The BBG FY 2010 budget submission (full text) breaks down the budget by individual divisions (below).

After removing - even perhaps unfairly - the administrative, technical, and management aspects of the BBG 2010 budget, it can be more earnestly compared with the total annual expenditures of State and USAID:

A few quick notes:

1. The US government spends $32.5 million per year broadcasting to Cuba. Though unrelated to the topic of this post, that deserves a minute to sink in.
2. Radio Free Asia, targeting North Korea, China, SE Asia and Pacifica, receives just $4.1 million more than the Cuban service, or 1/3 the funding of Radio Free Europe.
3. Voice of America dominates BBG funding, larger than RFE/RL and Middle East broadcasting (Al-Hurra) combined.
4. RFE/RL runs fully-operational news organization in essentially the same footprint of USAID (Central Asia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Middle East, Caucasus, Europe, Russia - admittedly, not Africa), with approximately the same amount of money that USAID uses to sponsor occasional 'training' and 'empowerment' programs.

Conclusion

The total combined budgets for the Department of State and USAID is $47.9 billion. Of this, the combined world-wide funding they spend on foreign media development, $140.7 million, accounts for just 0.003% of that figure. With the addition of the $745.5 million spent annually by the BBG, that puts the total US contribution to foreign media at $886.2 million, or about $2.88 per US citizen.

When confronted with on-going sectarian violence, blatant human rights violations, abject poverty, and entrenched anti-democratic regimes, it is no wonder that USAID and Dept.State have other priorities, both in Central Asia and elsewhere. But expertise and freedom make dedicated local press corps one of the most powerful tools to combat these conditions over the long-term, making it well worth the investment. And likely worth a good deal more.