Voice of America: From Beacon of Freedom to Instrument of Progressive Propaganda

The Voice of America (VOA) was established in 1942 as a tool in the fight against totalitarian propaganda during World War II. Its founding mission was to deliver accurate, objective news to audiences abroad, countering the disinformation spread by authoritarian regimes like Nazi Germany. For decades, VOA served as a symbol of American values—freedom, democracy, and transparency—reaching millions in restricted environments where independent journalism was scarce. However, in recent years, particularly under the Biden administration, VOA changed directions from this core purpose and has functioned as a platform for progressive political priorities and propaganda, funded by American taxpayers yet aligned against Traditional American viewpoints and, by extension, a significant portion of the American electorate.

Historically, VOA's charter, formalized in 1976, mandates that it provide "a reliable and authoritative source of news" that is "accurate, objective, and comprehensive." This framework was designed to ensure editorial independence while promoting U.S. policies abroad without descending into overt propaganda. During the Cold War, VOA played a crucial role in broadcasting truthful information to counter Soviet narratives, earning trust among global audiences. Surveys from as recent as 2020 indicated that 84% of VOA's listeners viewed it as a credible source for understanding current events. Yet, this reputation has been eroded by shifts in content and management that prioritize ideological advocacy over balanced reporting.

Under the Biden administration, VOA's programming exhibited a clear bias for progressive policies and propaganda. For instance, coverage often celebrated initiatives on immigration, climate change, and social equity, moving from journalism to advocacy. Reports in multiple languages provided detailed guidance on accessing U.S. benefits and navigating immigration processes, which critics argued veered into promotional material rather than neutral information. This approach not only amplified the administration's agenda but also downplayed opposing perspectives, such as those held by conservatives skeptical of expansive immigration reforms.

Specific examples highlight this bias. In 2020, VOA shared content perceived as overly favorable to then-presidential candidate Joe Biden, including videos that emphasized his outreach to Muslim-American voters without equivalent scrutiny of Republican positions. The network downplayed the Hunter Biden laptop story, suggesting allegations of Russian involvement undermined its credibility, aligning with narratives that protected the Democratic nominee. Additionally, VOA employed individuals with controversial affiliations, such as a Russian anti-U.S. propagandist in 2019 and staff with ties to the Chinese Communist Party, raising concerns about external influences compromising its integrity. Internal directives instructed staff not to refer to Hamas members as terrorists except in quotes, a decision that softened coverage of geopolitical conflicts in ways that favored progressive interpretations of international affairs.

Multiple VOA reporters posted anti-Trump content on social media, violating the network's impartiality policies and prompting investigations into bias. These incidents were not isolated; they reflected a broader pattern where VOA's output echoed the priorities of the progressive wing of the Democratic Party. A 2022 lawsuit alleged infiltration by anti-American and pro-Islamic state interests, claiming the network's messaging had been compromised. Such developments transformed VOA from a defender of American ideals into a megaphone for one side of the political spectrum.

This shift has profound implications for American taxpayers, who fund VOA through the U.S. Agency for Global Media (USAGM) to the tune of approximately $1 billion annually. While VOA is prohibited from targeting domestic audiences under the Smith-Mundt Act, its content inevitably influences U.S. discourse through online accessibility and secondary dissemination. When programming targets conservative figures like former President Donald Trump—framing his policies as divisive while promoting progressive alternatives—it effectively uses public funds to undermine a substantial portion of the American public. This is not the neutral "telling of America's story" envisioned by its charter but a form of soft power turned inward, eroding trust in government institutions.

The entrenchment of this bias was facilitated by structural changes during the Biden era. Reforms insulated VOA leadership from direct presidential oversight, vesting authority in a Senate-confirmed advisory board that includes the Secretary of State. This setup delayed transitions, allowing holdover appointees like Director Michael Abramowitz—a former Washington Post editor with ties to establishment media—to maintain influence. Abramowitz's tenure exemplified the media-political nexus, where progressive viewpoints dominated, resisting efforts to realign the agency with electoral outcomes.

VOC critiques, including from the Heritage Foundation, argue that VOA's liberal bias intensified under Biden, with mismanagement allowing partisan content to flourish. The network's handling of sensitive topics, such as not publishing articles critical of Trump or altering them post-publication, further underscores this concern.

By March 2025, the Trump administration defunded and shut down VOA, citing its role in spreading "radical propaganda." This drastic measure highlights the extent to which VOA had become a partisan tool of propaganda.