It seems like there's no reason to doubt the US Archive's internal records on this regard. You say surely things have changed, but there's little in the way of compelling evidence that that's the case, right? Propaganda doesn't mean an absence of factual reporting, it means slanted, biased reporting, and it's not exactly a stretch by any means to suggest that VOICE OF AMERICA might have an agenda in their reporting, right? Pretty much every country that disseminates its own media employs propaganda because it's a proven means of control. I understand you respect the service they provide but consider the purpose of propaganda, its intended effect, and how it might be influencing your stance on this matter.

[–] Veraticus@lib.lgbt -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There's a ton of compelling evidence that VOA is not propaganda.

I linked a bunch of media bias and fact checkers earlier: in case you missed them, here they are again. So... yeah, it seems from the available evidence it has in fact changed in a hundred years.

Unless, of course, you think that every media fact checker is wrong. In which case, again, it must be easy to provide some kind of source or evidence that either they are, or that VOA is in fact merely propaganda.

[–] CurseBunny@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I said propaganda isn't necessarily at odds with facts, and for what it's worth I saw the bias reports, but they're talking about Left/Right bias and we're talking about nationalistic bias. Propaganda isn't an inherently left/right concept. There's also no reason to suggest I think "every media fact checker is wrong", you're arguing against something no one here has said.

[–] Veraticus@lib.lgbt -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Other people have said it, apologies for pinning it on you. :)

Those don't talk just about left/right bias, but also about accuracy and correctness, which is more why I was referencing the fact checkers.

I guess this depends on what you mean by "propaganda" to a certain extent. The usual usage of the term is to refer to information that is simply biased or misleading, advanced in service of a particular political point of view. In that definition, I would say VOA is not propaganda; it reports truth, even when the truth is uncomfortable to the United States or its government.

That said, it is certainly doing so in espousing the values of freedom of journalism and information and hoping to inculcate those values in its listeners by virtue of example. If you think that mission is itself American nationalistic propaganda then I guess yeah, you could say VOA is propaganda. I don't think this is a commonly-accepted definition of the term however.

[–] CurseBunny@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 1 year ago

My understanding of propaganda doesn't require the information to necessarily be misleading (don't get me wrong, blatant propaganda frequently is), just presented with an intention to promote a certain group's interests. I can see where the contention comes from, and I'm sure we could both have a lengthy discussion about it, but I don't think it's really the time or place, and it sounds like we aren't too far off from understanding one another anyways. Hope you have a good day/night wherever you are!