this post was submitted on 19 Feb 2025
152 points (88.8% liked)

World News

33436 readers
811 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

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.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] njm1314@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago

American soft power has been crippled worldwide. You really have to ask yourself when the moderators of Wikipedia are going to go ahead and edit the Cold War page.

[–] mlg@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago

People have been joking about fake as hell NGOs being used for espionage and misinformation for decades, but its weird they they're actually throwing away their leverage across the board.

Unless they plan to just move the funding to another organization like the CIA.

[–] coolusername@lemmy.ml 30 points 2 days ago (1 children)

i love mintpressnews. their links were and probably still are banned on facebook and instagram and probably more places. the great firewall of the US is too good

[–] geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml 27 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Their links are banned on .world as well.

[–] Grapho@lemmy.ml 10 points 1 day ago

.stormfront Putting the Fed in fediverse as always.

[–] BillWigly@kbin.earth 11 points 2 days ago

the only media i care about is people or outlets supported by small donations from regular people & lots of transparency about their sources. if otherwise, they can go fuck off

[–] Corgana@startrek.website 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

"any media outlet, no matter how big an empire it is, that is not owned or funded by the state" is not the common definition of "independent media" (it's not even the definition given in the hyperlinked definition). "Independence" in this context refers to journalistic independence.

[–] nothingcorporate@lemmy.today 32 points 2 days ago (1 children)

This was an incredible read. All the liberal media lamenting the loss of USAID, but an estimated 90% of the funds were actually used to further CIA goals. Crazy. 10/10 would read again.

[–] coolusername@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 days ago

now read their articles on tiktok, twitter, facebook, etc

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 30 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Though I’m sure some of them will find new funding through whatever new channels the Trump administration builds.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.org 9 points 2 days ago (24 children)

I wonder if they're really that stupid to give up this super-efficient means of soft power over some progressive things they've done or intentionally handing influence in parts of the world to Russia for a bit of money for themselves while taking a calculated risk of maybe having to retake control militarily (which is more costly but could be a problem for the next admin).

[–] Zaleramancer@beehaw.org 5 points 2 days ago

Part of the problem is that sufficient wealth seems to destroy people's understanding of consequence. They don't experience them very often, and so reach a point where they can simply pursue whatever their feelings tell them to do and the world magically restructures itself to allow them to do so.

Combine this with how the incentives of the social system result in the people who are most likely to pursue a selfish course being the most financially successful- you get a recipe for short-sighted, ignorant and self-important nonsense.

load more comments (23 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›