The Smith-Mundt Act's Ban on Domestic Propaganda: An Analysis of the Cold War Statute Limiting Access to Public Diplomacy

Abstract

racy in Iraq and elsewhere, restricting information domestically undermines the strength of U.S. policies about the importance of transparency in government. As it continues to promote free flow of information abroad, the U.S. government's half-hearted commitment to domestic dissemination of certain government-sponsored information will be increasingly scrutinized and criticized. This issue is of importance not only for the policy objectives of the U.S. government but for the continued worldwide belief in the value of access to information as the basis for rational self governance. Various scholars have examined the U.S. government's international propaganda efforts. For example, one writer chronicled the subversive radio activities of the U.S. government-primarily the Central Intelligence Agency-during World War II. 6 Another researcher documented the international implications, including Cold War-related U.S. propaganda efforts overseas, of the American civil rights movement in the mid-20th century, 7 and yet another wrote about the U.S. government's efforts to destabilize and culturally infiltrate Eastern Europe's Communist Party regimes during the early years of the Cold War. 8 Other studies have focused on the impact of wartime propaganda and other government conduct on press freedom 9 and on various aspects of twentieth century U.S. propaganda. 10 Yet the literature on international U.S. propaganda has devoted very little attention to the Smith-Mundt Act's domestic dissemination ban. The researchers who have touched on the topic have not, for the most part, examined the impact of contemporary communication technologies and their policy implications. This article examines the history and intent of the Smith-Mundt Act's prohibition of domestic dissemination of U.S. propaganda aimed at international audiences, and the subsequent creation of the U.S. Information Agency as the chief propaganda arm of govern-THE BAN ON DOMESTIC PROPAGANDA 3 6

Socially mediated authenticity

“…Andrejevic (2006) warned that, despite claims of empowerment, “deployment of interactive technologies by both the commercial sector and the state remains, in many contexts, largely asymmetrical or nonreciprocal, patterned more on a panoptic version of ‘interactivity’ than on mutual transparency and accountability” (p. 395). For US government institutions, in particular, greater transparency can guard against accusations that the blog exists as a vehicle for propaganda, thus violating the Smith‐Mundt Act which prohibits the use of federal funds to influence domestic public opinion (Palmer and Carter, 2006). True transparency involves mutual dialogue and equal exchange of views, with symmetrical opportunities for influence; this condition is not satisfied merely through the use of interactive electronic communication (Oblak, 2003).…”

“…The reason for this narrow target lies in a Cold War‐era law: Smith‐Mundt Act of 1948 established funding for public diplomacy efforts, but also created an “iron fence” between domestic and international communication. This artificial boundary between public affairs and public diplomacy is largely irrelevant in today's communication environment, but institutional complexities within the US government make repealing or even revising the Act a difficult undertaking (Palmer and Carter, 2006). DipNote exists to inform the American public – not communicate strategically abroad.…”

Film as a propaganda tool: USA and USSR during the Cold War

“…Brojni će se istoričari usaglasiti da je Hladni rat bio doba straha (vidi: Gedis, 2003;Kinney, 2000;Palmer & Carter, 2006;Perucci, 2009;Pollard, 2002) -straha od gubitka sloboda, ekonomskog kolapsa, neizvjesne budućnosti i, u krajnjem, straha od novog rata. Upravo je takva atmosfera pogodno tle za populističku podjelu na "nas" i "njih", a kako će do mase najbolje doprijeti pojednostavljene poruke, što je srž populizma, film predstavlja idealno sredstvo da se takve podjele plasiraju.…”

The War on Ideas: Alhurra and US International Broadcasting Law in the ‘War on Terror’

“…Interestingly, the BBG and Alhurra can rely on other legal artifacts -laws that are still on the books -to limit American public access to their coverage. The key statute giving shape to American international broadcasting overseas, the Smith-Mundt Act of 1948, prohibited the 'domestic dissemination' of governmentsponsored news intended for foreign audiences (Palmer and Carter, 2006). It is still invoked as a prohibition against Alhurra broadcasting domestically (Pechter, 2008).…”