Propaganda and deception used on all of us.
SMITH-MUNDT ACT REPEALED
There is a high probability that you have never heard of the Smith-Mundt Act of 1948 (SMA). Which would comport with not knowing (or caring) about the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012 (SMMA). Both these laws are critically important and impact your lives directly, so time to get up to speed.
The Smith-Mundt Modernization Act (SMMA) was buried in the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act for good reason – because it repealed the 1948 Smith-Mundt Act. The Smith-Mundt Act is also known as the U.S. Information and Education Act, which authorized the State Department to engage in propagandizing foreign countries as a form of public diplomacy.
The SMA established that via the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG), Voice of America (VOA), and Radio Free Europe (RFE), the U.S. State Department and Office of Public Affairs were authorized to disseminate propaganda to foreign publics, but were strictly prohibited from releasing that same propaganda in America for public consumption. Put simply, our government was permitted to lie to people in other countries, but not to us here at home.
This prohibition was lifted in 2012, when the SMMA was signed into law by President Obama, allowing the same propaganda disseminated by our government to foreign publics, to now be released in the U.S. for the very first time.
And yes, our government is also now allowed to create propaganda tailored specifically for U.S. public consumption, using any media as it sees fit, while remaining anonymous as the source of the material being reported.
This covert activity by our government’s state department (Public Diplomacy) and Public Affairs department can only occur with corporate media’s full complicity, for which it is well compensated, thanks to the tax dollars appropriated by the SMMA. It means that when our own government’s propaganda is presented to we the American people as news, we are none the wiser that it is scripted, orchestrated, and fully supported with the invisible USBS (United States BullS—) seal of approval.
The SMMA provides for ample funding for U.S. propaganda programming, incentivizing the corporate-media cartel to partner with the BBG for a new source of revenue to backstop its operational budgets that have been declining due to years of increasingly low ratings, social media competition, loss of relevance, and the public’s growing loss of confidence in media’s reporting veracity regardless of political affiliation.
The SMMA promotes unholy alliances between the U.S. State Department and America’s corporate media that unbinds reporters and news departments from the solemn responsibility to verify information.
Traditional “news,” based on reliable, verifiable fact-based evidence is slowly giving way to “newz” – an ersatz form of information dissemination via broadcasting and/or publishing that enjoys specialized immunity for libel, misinformation, false or fraudulent information, misrepresentation, and anything else previously prohibited by the SMA. If serving a national security purpose(s), the media cartel has a government-sanctioned license to lie.
This certainly explains a lot of newz masquerading as legitimate news these days. Revoking the restrictions once enforced under Smith-Mundt has opened the floodgates on active, former, and retired federal government defense, military, and intelligence agency personnel, hiring on as experts by broadcast and cable news networks, in an attempt to bring gravitas to what amounts to no more than a continuum of guided speculation.
Congress expressed concerns over corrupted information by media while considering the SMMA, but instead of inserting protections, it left the legislation wide open for interpretation.
Consumers of news can’t deny the departure from traditional fact-based news as of 2012. What else explains the growing amount of grossly unsubstantiated and/or blatantly biased reporting, the unprecedented anonymous or hearsay sourcing, or the glaringly irresponsible lack of citing sources at all? Just two decades ago, such unprofessionalism in journalism would have been a career breaker, and rendered complicit news organizations moot.
Generally speaking, however, there remains a stubborn residual belief among Americans that media would never be permitted to knowingly deceive people. There are laws against such abhorrent conduct, aren’t there? Media broadcasters would lose their broadcasting licenses, and publishers would lose their standing as providers of news that is reliable or trustworthy. More importantly, our government is forbidden to propagandize Americans using deception, especially via a free press, right?