Voice of America US President Donald Trump's administration on March 15 put journalists at Voice of America and other US-funded broadcasters on leave, abruptly freezing decades-old outlets long seen as critical to countering Russian and Chinese information offensives. Image: Bonnie Cash/AFP
Image: BONNIE CASH / AFP
IN a move that has rocked the media landscape, US President Donald Trump halted funding to Voice of America (VOA), deeming it a propaganda tool that failed to uphold American interests.
This decision placed 1 300 employees, including the VOA director, on leave. While framed as cost-cutting, critics saw it as retaliation against VOA’s criticism of authoritarian regimes and narratives that conflicted with Trump’s agenda.
VOA, established in 1942, has long been linked to US government propaganda. Funded by the US Agency for Global Media (USAGM), it has historical ties to CIA operations. Despite a congressional mandate for “independent journalism”, VOA has never fully shed its propaganda roots.
Trump’s move acknowledged this legacy, effectively silencing a platform that had criticised his administration. He had repeatedly accused VOA of being a mouthpiece for the “deep state” and failing to represent US values.
While VOA’s US operations were curtailed, its global influence remains intact, continuing to shape narratives on democracy, governance, and “countering disinformation”.
The CIA’s historical involvement in media manipulation extends beyond VOA. USAID, another US government agency, has funded various media initiatives under the guise of “democracy promotion”. These efforts have often been criticised for promoting US geopolitical interests rather than genuine press freedom.
This influence extends to South African media, including eNCA, which has faced claims of colluding with VOA to marginalise independent voices. Karen Maughan, a prominent journalist, has been criticised for aligning with Western-backed narratives, often amplifying perspectives that serve US interests while dismissing alternative viewpoints.
Pack journalism—where reporters regurgitate identical narratives—has amplified VOA’s propaganda in South Africa. This practice stifles diverse perspectives and entrenches power imbalances. It has been weaponised against Independent Media, which challenges historically white-owned conglomerates such as Naspers (News24) and eMedia Investments (eNCA).
Pack journalism fosters journalistic laziness, where reporters bypass original investigation, allowing dominant narratives to go unchallenged. It also enables agenda-setting, where minor stories become national crises while critical issues are ignored.
Defamation campaigns have been used to discredit Independent Media’s voices, relying on sensationalism and character assassination rather than factual reporting. Censorship is also evident in selective reporting by mainstream outlets, which often mirror VOA’s framing of key issues.
VOA’s influence on journalism extends beyond news coverage. It has provided journalist training programs ostensibly for “ethical reporting”. However, these often align local media with US foreign policy objectives, creating an echo chamber that amplifies narratives hostile to independent voices.
The impact is evident in coordinated attacks on alternative media outlets. Outlets such as eNCA and Daily Maverick, often aligned with dominant Western narratives, have used pack journalism to undermine independent reporting.
This assault exposes deeper fissures in South Africa’s media landscape. VOA’s alignment with US interests perpetuates media colonialism, where Western narratives dictate African discourse. This stifles local voices and undermines journalism’s democratic function.
Journalists who challenge these narratives face pressure to conform or risk ostracisation. This fosters self-censorship and erodes public trust. The lack of balanced reporting from mainstream outlets exacerbates the perception of bias.
The continued operation of VOA’s influence in South Africa, despite its defunding in the US, highlights the need for media accountability. South Africans must demand transparency on foreign media influence and its role in shaping public discourse. The fight against propaganda is not just about preserving media diversity—it is about safeguarding democracy.
The consequences of unchecked media influence extend beyond South Africa. Across Africa, international news agencies have often dictated narratives that serve geopolitical interests rather than local realities. The same mechanisms used against independent media—agenda-setting, censorship, and economic marginalisation—have been applied to other African media organisations that challenge dominant Western perspectives.
As Africa seeks to reclaim its narrative sovereignty, it must prioritise strengthening independent journalism. Media literacy, investment in local news agencies, and regulatory measures to counter undue foreign influence are critical to achieving a balanced media ecosystem.
Trump’s decision to cut VOA’s funding was a rare moment of accountability, yet this did not extend to its global operations. The double standard is glaring: VOA was defunded at home but remains fully operational abroad.
The struggle against propaganda is a global fight for truth and accountability in journalism. As media landscapes evolve, vigilance against misinformation is essential. Independent Media’s resilience stands as a beacon, proving the fight for a free and pluralistic press is far from over.
The need for diverse voices in media is more urgent than ever. As South Africa and the broader African continent continue to grapple with media manipulation, it is crucial for media consumers to question dominant narratives and seek out independent sources. Only through a commitment to media diversity can true journalistic integrity be preserved.