WANA (Mar 17) – For nearly a century, Voice of America (VOA) has been a key instrument in broadcasting Washington’s policies to the world. But now, it has fallen silent. Thousands of journalists and employees have been placed on mandatory leave, and the budgets of US-affiliated news services have been drastically reduced.

 

As a tool of US public diplomacy, Voice of America has long played a role in projecting American policies and values. Its Persian service aimed to cover news related to Iran and global affairs. However, critics have accused it of being a mouthpiece for biased and anti-Iranian policies.

 

US President Donald Trump, through an executive order, slashed the budget of the US Agency for Global Media (USAGM) and eliminated positions that were not directly protected by law. But this was not merely an austerity measure—it signaled a shift in America’s approach to state-funded media.

 

The USAGM, the parent organization of Voice of America, operates with an annual budget of around $270 million, overseeing media outlets broadcasting in 49 languages. These include Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (Radio Farda), Radio Free Asia, and other platforms targeting nations with strained relations with the US Cutting or downsizing these services could significantly weaken America’s media influence in key regions.

 

From Rumor to Reality: General Esmail Qaani Remains on the Scene

WANA (Oct 15) – Over the past two weeks, anti-Islamic Republic media outlets and opposition-linked networks, such as Iran International, have attempted to mislead public opinion in Iran, the Resistance Axis, and even globally through various fabrications about Esmail Qaani, the commander of the Quds Force. It appears that these efforts are part of Israel’s […]

Read More...

Trump had previously ordered a temporary halt to all US foreign aid, a move that directly impacted Persian-language media and Iranian opposition groups abroad. Reports indicate that around 30 Iranian opposition organizations in the US were affected by this decision. Institutions like Tavaana, Radio Zamaneh, and the Iran Human Rights Organization lost their funding, and networks such as Iran International also felt the impact.

 

The New York Times described this move as an attempt to dismantle bureaucratic structures Trump viewed as inefficient. However, critics warned that it could severely undermine America’s media influence.

 

Christopher Walker, an analyst at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, argued: “Weakening these media outlets will leave the US trailing in the information war against China, Russia, and Iran.”

 

Trump had long distrusted state-funded media, accusing them of straying from their public relations role and becoming a “liberal stronghold.” Conversely, his critics saw this move as an attempt to reduce media oversight of the White House.

 

Michael Abramowitz, director of Voice of America, expressed deep regret, stating on LinkedIn: “For the first time in 83 years, Voice of America has gone silent.”

 

In his statement, Abramowitz acknowledged VOA’s role in countering narratives from Iran, China, and Russia but warned that the cuts would cripple its mission. “Voice of America needs careful reforms, and we have made progress. But today’s decision will prevent us from fulfilling our critical mission—at a time when America’s rivals, like Iran, China, and Russia, are pouring billions into false narratives to discredit the US”

A Shift in US Media Strategy?

The Trump administration framed this decision differently. The White House stated that it was ending taxpayer funding for media outlets that, instead of providing news, were “spreading radical propaganda.” Yet, Voice of America has long been recognized as a tool of US influence, and its shutdown is more than just an economic measure—it marks a retreat from the media battlefield.

 

Iran: Opportunity or Challenge?

In Iran, this development sparked mixed reactions. Some Iranian officials interpreted the reduction of US foreign support as a sign of the declining power of exiled opposition groups, viewing it as an opportunity to ease international pressure. Others, however, remained skeptical of Trump’s true intentions.

 

Some Iranian analysts see this as a chance to strengthen domestic media, arguing that it could reduce biased reporting and promote independent journalism.

 

On the other hand, some observers warn that, in the long run, this shift may limit the diversity of news sources and restrict access to independent information. They stress that a vibrant media landscape requires a variety of perspectives—even those that challenge prevailing narratives.

 

Trump’s decision to cut state-funded media raises critical questions about the future of US public diplomacy and the role of media in advancing American foreign policy. Was this a move toward optimizing resources and eliminating unnecessary expenses? Or a strategic retreat that will diminish America’s media influence on the global stage?

America, the Iranian Opposition, and the Financial Crisis

WANA (Feb 02) – “Is the Iranian opposition truly independent?” This question has gained more attention than ever following the disclosure of financial documents and new decisions by the Trump administration. Groups that once presented themselves as defenders of the Iranian people are now facing serious financial allegations and clear ties to foreign governments.   […]

Read More...