this post was submitted on 16 Mar 2025
537 points (99.1% liked)

World News

44255 readers
3922 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

US President Donald Trump has signed an order to strip back the federally-funded news organisation Voice of America, accusing it of being "anti-Trump" and "radical".

A White House statement said the order would "ensure taxpayers are no longer on the hook for radical propaganda", and included quotes from politicians and right-wing media railing against the "leftist", "partisan" VOA.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] CosmicCleric@lemmy.world 24 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (3 children)

As someone who used to listen to a lot of shortwave radio, this just bums me out.

I know foreign people who listened to VoA, and now it won't be there anymore for them.

Makes me wonder who they'll listen to, who will fill the void, with the VoA being gone.

~This~ ~comment~ ~is~ ~licensed~ ~under~ ~CC~ ~BY-NC-SA~ ~4.0~

[–] NOT_RICK@lemmy.world 47 points 3 days ago (3 children)

I know foreign people who listened to VoA, and now it won't be there anymore for them.

Stuff like this is a perfect example of how little Trump understands soft power. That was an outlet for American ideals (ok, propaganda) and American culture to diffuse across the world. Seeing how power abhors a vacuum, I won’t be surprised when China increasingly fills this void.

[–] NJSpradlin@lemmy.world 12 points 2 days ago

Remember, Trump isn’t dancing by his own tune. Who stands to benefit the most from the US undoing their relationships, contracts, defense agreements, and soft power agendas?

Then also remember that at the rate we’re moving, the 1st amendment is or will be dead very soon. Even this comment could end up with me being blacked bagged after not too long.

[–] shani66@ani.social 10 points 2 days ago

Right wingers are generally too stupid to think that abstractly.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 6 points 2 days ago (3 children)

I won’t be surprised when China increasingly fills this void.

The language barrier makes that unlikely. I think this one is going to remain empty for a while.

[–] Kazumara@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voice_of_America#Languages

Though they have less immigration, a bunch of those languages originate closer to China than the USA, I bet they can find staff equally well, if they really aim for a 1-to-1 replacement.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 1 points 2 days ago

Fair enough. Now the question is whether China can get their foot in the door in the same way America did, but if they play up the anti-imperialism aspect it should ve possible.

[–] Bgugi@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago

These big propaganda stations broadcast in dozens of languages.

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

DW still does very limited shortwave in Africa, I guess they'll be happy to take over time/frequency slots but let's face it the amount of people that you can only reach via short wave is dwindling, they mostly switched to satellite. They rather feed into the local FM broadcast network, and of course you can stream over the internet.

[–] CosmicCleric@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

but let’s face it the amount of people that you can only reach via short wave is dwindling, they mostly switched to satellite. They rather feed into the local FM broadcast network, and of course you can stream over the internet.

You would actually be surprised how many poor regions in Central and South America as well as in Africa and Central Asia actually rely on shortwave still.

A lot of it is Christian and right-wing broadcasts, but still, it's used more than you would think. Not everyone can afford expensive satellite rigs to receive.

~This~ ~comment~ ~is~ ~licensed~ ~under~ ~CC~ ~BY-NC-SA~ ~4.0~

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

The point is rather if you're operating an FM transmitter, you not only have the money for a satellite dish and DVB-S decoder you already have one, and FM radios are dirt cheap. The electronics for short wave certainly aren't more expensive but you'll need a proper antenna. Meanwhile, much of Africa actually has quite decent mobile phone coverage, there's some piss-poor countries and large areas of nothing, generally desert, but overall, if there's people, there's probably reception. Their whole banking system works via mobile phone.

[–] CosmicCleric@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

The point is rather if you’re operating an FM transmitter, you not only have the money for a satellite dish

Talking about people who listen, receive, not transmit, and who do not have ready funds available.

Also, FM reception distances is much shorter than shortwave, something you didn't mention.

~This~ ~comment~ ~is~ ~licensed~ ~under~ ~CC~ ~BY-NC-SA~ ~4.0~

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 0 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Point being FM coverage is almost universal in any area where there's a significant number of people, not just lone homesteaders, uncontacted tribes, suchlike. Yes there may be people there that could be reached but the total number is small and if they want any news, they're getting them from the town over once a month.

Contrast that to the situation when those shortwave broadcasts were originally set up where you had whole cities with actual population that had no electricity, no radio, and certainly no internet. You'll still find settlements like that, but, as said, not a large amount of people. Alternatively, people behind the iron curtain: You don't need short-wave to get into North Korea and any Chinese or Russian who cares can access any western media, anyway.

The purpose of these broadcasts isn't "play some music to 20 evangelical homesteaders 100km away from the next road". Those people aren't the kind of people who might, one day, protest in front of the president's palace.

[–] CosmicCleric@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Point being FM coverage is almost universal in any area where there’s a significant number of people, not just lone homesteaders, uncontacted tribes, suchlike. Yes there may be people there that could be reached but the total number is small and if they want any news, they’re getting them from the town over once a month.

[Citation required]

There's no need for us to keep arguing this point, I totally agree that the coverage of listeners of shortwave radio today is a lot less than what it was in the past, but my point is that it's a lot more still than you're imagining.

https://lemmy.world/post/26940489/15761443

~This~ ~comment~ ~is~ ~licensed~ ~under~ ~CC~ ~BY-NC-SA~ ~4.0~

[–] superkret@feddit.org 5 points 3 days ago (1 children)
[–] CosmicCleric@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago (2 children)
[–] superkret@feddit.org 8 points 2 days ago

Russia Today.
It's basically the Russian Voice of America

[–] intelisense@lemm.ee 2 points 3 days ago