Berman Questions Slant of War Coverage by Voice of America

Rep. Howard L. Berman said Wednesday he is “highly inclined to believe” there was a distinctly anti-American slant to coverage of the Persian Gulf War by the taxpayer-funded Voice of America in its Mideast broadcasts.

Berman (D-Panorama City), who recently became chairman of a House subcommittee that oversees the VOA, raised the issue during a hearing this week on the agency’s 1992 budget authorization. Similar criticisms have been raised by U.S. allies in the war against Iraq.

The VOA, which broadcasts 15 1/2 hours daily in Arabic to listeners in the Middle East, denied that the service showed any bias in its war coverage. Even so, it has initiated two outside audits of its coverage.

Berman, chairman of the international operations subcommittee of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said he will withhold final judgment until the independent reviews and an assessment by his panel are completed in the next few weeks.

At a subcommittee hearing on Tuesday, Berman read excerpts from a list of stories on a VOA program, “U.S. Media Mideast and North Africa Watch,” broadcast on Feb. 4. The articles, selected from major American newspapers and translated into Arabic, were summarized as follows:

“Moroccans and Egyptians Show Increasing Support for Iraq,” “Egypt Reported Warning U.S. About Impact of a Long War,” “Syria Profits While America’s Back Is Turned,” “Israel Tries to Deal with an Old War and a New One,” “U.S. Wants a New Order but Israel Wants the Old” and “Bush Said Violating a Set of Principles by Warring.”

“The point is not about any one of these stories,” Berman said. But, he added, “Where were the stories about the broad base of U.S. support for the war? . . . When I listen to one of the very objective, hard-hitting stations that have no desire to push a U.S. government line and I can hear a far more balanced presentation,” it raises questions.

Berman, who supported the war effort and is a strong backer of Israel, said his questions were not prompted by disagreement with VOA’s editorial positions but rather by the “level of evenhandedness and objectivity” in its broadcast selections.

“There is no pattern of problem here,” VOA Deputy Director Robert T. Coonrod responded at the packed subcommittee hearing.

“There are examples where editorial judgments were faulty,” he acknowledged. “The important thing to look at is whether there was any pattern of abuse. I am not aware of any.”

The VOA’s mission has been controversial almost since its inception in 1942. Debate has raged between those who contend that it should provide credible and independent coverage in its radio broadcasts in 43 languages worldwide and those who maintain that it should be a mouthpiece of the U.S. government. Despite his concerns, Berman said he is in the former camp.

Coonrod said the agency, a branch of the State Department, had requested outside program audits for the first time since the mid-1970s because of “a number of unspecific complaints” about the Mideast coverage.

Berman noted that the contracts for the audits were awarded without competitive bidding and that both organizations had previously done work for the U.S. Information Agency, which oversees VOA and other broadcast, publication and educational programs.