This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-04-627T 
entitled 'U.S. International Broadcasting: Challenges Facing the 
Broadcasting Board of Governors' which was released on April 01, 2004.

This text file was formatted by the U.S. General Accounting Office 
(GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as part of a 
longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. Every 
attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data integrity of 
the original printed product. Accessibility features, such as text 
descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes placed at the 
end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, are provided 
but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format of the printed 
version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an exact electronic 
replica of the printed version. We welcome your feedback. Please E-mail 
your comments regarding the contents or accessibility features of this 
document to Webmaster@gao.gov.

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright 
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed 
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work 
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the 
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this 
material separately.

Testimony before the Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, State, and the 
Judiciary; Committee on Appropriations; House of Representatives:

United States General Accounting Office:

GAO:

For Release on Delivery Expected at 10:00 a.m. EST:

Thursday, April 1, 2004:

U.S. International Broadcasting:

Challenges Facing the Broadcasting Board of Governors:

Statement of Jess T. Ford, Director, International Affairs and Trade:

GAO-04-627T:

GAO Highlights:

Highlights of GAO-04-627T, a testimony before the Subcommittee on 
Commerce, Justice, State, and the Judiciary; Committee on 
Appropriations; House of Representatives 

Why GAO Did This Study:

The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, were a dramatic reminder 
of the importance of cultivating a better understanding of the United 
States and our policies with overseas audiences. U.S. public diplomacy 
activities include the efforts of the Broadcasting Board of Governors, 
which oversees all nonmilitary U.S. international broadcasting by the 
Voice of America (VOA) and several other broadcast entities. Such 
broadcasting helps promote a better understanding of the United States 
and serves U.S. interests by providing overseas audiences with accurate 
and objective news about the United States and the world.

GAO has issued three reports over the past 4 years examining the 
organizational, marketing, resource, and performance reporting 
challenges faced by the Board. Our recommendations to the Board have 
included the need to address the long-standing issue of overlapping 
language services (that is, where two services broadcast in the same 
language to the same audience) and to strengthen the Board’s strategic 
planning and performance by placing a greater emphasis on results. The 
Board has taken significant steps to respond to these and other 
recommendations.

What GAO Found:

The Broadcasting Board of Governors has responded to a disparate 
organizational structure and marketing challenges by developing a new 
strategic approach to broadcasting which, among other things, 
emphasizes reaching large audiences through modern broadcasting 
techniques. The existence of five separate broadcast entities has led 
to overlapping language services, duplication of program content, 
redundant newsgathering and support services, and difficulties 
coordinating broadcast efforts. The Board’s new approach seeks to 
overcome these problems by treating all broadcast entities as part of a 
“single system” it oversees to ensure that broadcast content meets the 
needs of individual markets. Other challenges include a lack of target 
audiences within broadcast markets, outmoded program formats and 
styles, poor signal delivery in many areas, and low audience awareness 
in several major markets. The Board’s approach calls for new 
initiatives (such as Radio Sawa broadcasts to the Middle East) and 
existing language services to systematically address these 
deficiencies.

To streamline its operations, the Board has used its annual language 
service review to address such issues as how resources should be 
allocated among language services on the basis of their priority and 
impact, what degree of overlap should exist among services, and whether 
services should be eliminated because they have fulfilled their 
broadcast mission. Since 1999, the Board has identified more than $50 
million in actual or potential savings through this process.

In response to our recommendations on the Board’s strategic planning 
and performance management efforts, the Board revised its strategic 
plan to make reaching large audiences in strategic markets the 
centerpiece of its performance reporting system. The Board also added 
broadcaster credibility and audience awareness to its array of 
performance measures and plans to add a measure of whether VOA is 
meeting its mandated mission. 

What GAO Recommends:

www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-04-627T.

To view the full product, including the scope and methodology, click on 
the link above. For more information, contact Jess T. Ford at (202) 
512-4128 or fordj@gao.gov.

[End of section]

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee:

I am pleased to be here today to provide an overview of the three 
reports we have issued over the past 4 years on the operations of the 
Broadcasting Board of Governors. [Footnote 1],[Footnote 2],[Footnote 3] 
These reports have examined a number of organizational, marketing, 
resource, and performance management challenges facing U.S. 
international broadcasting. Our two most recent reports have addressed 
the Board's principal response to these challenges--a new 5-year 
strategic approach to international broadcasting known as "Marrying the 
Mission to the Market," which emphasizes the need to reach large 
audiences by applying modern broadcast techniques and strategically 
allocating resources to focus on high-priority broadcast markets. Early 
implementation of this strategy has focused on markets relevant to the 
war on terrorism, in particular the Middle East and central Asia.

Drawing from our published reports as well as recent testimony on U.S. 
public diplomacy,[Footnote 4] I will talk today about (1) 
organizational and marketing obstacles and the Board's efforts to 
overcome them, (2) what the Board has done to manage its limited 
resources, and (3) the status of Board efforts to develop meaningful 
performance goals and measures. I will also discuss our recommendations 
to the Board and the status of its response to them. As part of our 
work to prepare for this testimony, we met with Board staff to obtain 
updated program data and current information on the steps the Board has 
taken to respond to our recommendations. The reports used for this 
testimony were conducted in accordance with government auditing 
standards.

Summary:

The Broadcasting Board of Governors faces a number of challenges, key 
among them is how to achieve large audiences in priority markets while 
dealing with (1) a disparate organizational structure consisting of 
five broadcast entities and a mix of federal and grantee organizations 
managed by a part-time Board, and (2) a collection of outdated and 
noncompetitive language services that have failed to respond to current 
market conditions. The disparate structure of U.S. international 
broadcasting has led to overlapping language services, duplication of 
program content, redundant newsgathering and support services, and 
difficulties coordinating broadcast efforts. Marketing challenges 
include the use of outmoded program formats and styles, the general 
lack of target audiences within broadcast markets, poor signal delivery 
in many areas, and low audience awareness in several major markets. The 
Board's new strategic approach addresses these issues by treating 
broadcast entities as content providers within a "single system" that 
the Board oversees to ensure that broadcast content meets the discreet 
needs of the individual markets using modern broadcasting techniques. 
Recent Board initiatives such as Radio Sawa broadcasts to the Middle 
East and Radio Farda broadcasts to Iran illustrate the Board's 
willingness both to serve as the content manager for U.S. international 
broadcasting and to adopt a market-based approach designed to attract 
large listening audiences. Although we have not validated available 
research data, the Board claims that the application of its new 
strategic approach has led to dramatic increases in audience listening 
rates in markets of key strategic interest to the United States.

Triggered by a desire to better manage its limited resources, the Board 
has used its annual language service review process to identify and 
reallocate cost savings to fund higher priority needs. The process is 
used to address such complex resource issues as how funds should be 
allocated among services based on their priority and impact, how many 
broadcast services should be carried in total, what degree of overlap 
and content duplication should exist among services, and whether 
services should be eliminated because they have fulfilled their 
broadcast mission. Since 1999, the Board has identified more than $50 
million in actual or potential savings through the language service 
review process. From 1999 through 2002, the language service review 
process resulted in the reallocation of about $19.7 million from lower 
priority or impact language services to higher priority broadcast 
needs. In response to our recommendation, the Board updated its review 
process to include a specific analysis of overlapping language 
services.[Footnote 5] In its 2003 review, the Board identified $12.4 
million in fiscal year 2004 and 2005 transmission cost savings and 
language service overlap reductions that could be reallocated to higher 
priority needs. Finally, the Board has used its language service review 
process as a vehicle for identifying which language services should be 
eliminated. For example, based on its review process, the Board's 
fiscal year 2004 budget request to Congress recommended the elimination 
of 17 Central and Eastern European language services managed by Voice 
of America (VOA) and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) saving a 
projected $20.9 million for fiscal years 2004 and 2005. While the Board 
is to be commended for making a difficult decision in this case, our 
February 2004 report did note that the language service review process 
lacks an adequate measure of whether domestic media provide accurate, 
balanced, and comprehensive news and information to national audiences-
-a condition that the Congress expressed should be met before RFE/RL 
language services are terminated.[Footnote 6]

In response to our recommendations on the Board's strategic planning 
and performance management efforts, the Board revised its strategic 
plan to make the goal of reaching large audiences in strategic markets 
the centerpiece of its performance reporting system. Also in response 
to our recommendations, the Board added broadcaster credibility and 
audience awareness to its array of performance measures and plans to 
add a measure of whether VOA is meeting its mission. These steps will 
help the Board answer questions about the effectiveness of initiatives 
such as Radio Sawa and Alhurra (the two entities comprising the Middle 
East Television Network) in reaching mass audiences and elites in the 
Middle East, whether foreign publics perceive U.S. broadcast services 
as being independent of American foreign policy, and whether VOA is 
effectively promoting the image of the United States and educating 
foreign audiences about U.S. practices and policies.

Background:

The Broadcasting Board of Governors oversees the efforts of all 
nonmilitary international broadcasting, which reaches an estimated 
audience of more than 100 million people each week in more than 125 
markets worldwide. The Board manages the operations of the 
International Broadcasting Bureau (IBB), VOA, the Middle East 
Television Network (Alhurra and Radio Sawa), RFE/RL, and Radio Free 
Asia (RFA). In addition to serving as a reliable source of news and 
information, VOA is responsible for presenting U.S. policies through a 
variety of means including officially labeled government editorials. 
Radio/TV Marti, RFE/RL, and RFA were created by Congress to function as 
"surrogate" broadcasters, designed to temporarily replace the local 
media of countries where a free and open press does not exist. Created 
by the Bush Administration and the Board, the Middle East Television 
Network draws its mission from the core purpose of U.S. international 
broadcasting, which is to promote and sustain freedom by broadcasting 
accurate and objective news and information about the United States and 
the world to audiences overseas.[Footnote 7]

In addition to the stand-alone entities that make up U.S. international 
broadcasting, Congress and the Board have created other broadcast 
organizations to meet specific program objectives. Congress created 
Radio Free Iraq, Radio Free Iran, and Radio Free Afghanistan and 
incorporated these services into RFE/RL's operations. Under its new 
strategic approach to broadcasting, the Board and the Bush 
Administration created Radio Sawa, the Afghanistan Radio Network (ARN), 
Radio Farda, and Alhurra to replace poorly performing services, more 
effectively combine existing services, and create new broadcast 
entities where needed. Figure 1 illustrates the Board's current 
organizational structure.

Figure 1: Organizational Structure of U.S. International Broadcasting:

[See PDF for image]

[End of figure]

VOA, RFE/RL, and RFA are organized around a collection of language 
services that produces program content. In some countries, more than 
one entity broadcasts in the same language. These overlapping services 
are designed to meet the distinct missions of each broadcast entity. 
Currently, 42 of the Board's 74 language services (or 57 percent) 
target the same audiences in the same languages. While some degree of 
overlap is to be expected given the varying missions of the broadcast 
entities, the Board has concluded that this level of overlap requires 
ongoing analysis and scrutiny.

The Board's budget for fiscal year 2003 was approximately $552 million, 
with nearly half of its resources used to cover transmission, technical 
support, Board and IBB management staff salaries, and other support 
costs. Among the broadcast entities, funds are roughly equally divided 
among VOA and the four other U.S. broadcasting entities. Figure 2 
provides a breakout of the Board's fiscal year 2003 budget.

Figure 2: Broadcasting Board of Governors Funding, Fiscal Year 2003:

[See PDF for image]

Source: Broadcasting Board of Governors.

[End of figure]

Disparate Structure and Outmoded Broadcast Approach Hamper Efforts to 
Reach Large Audiences in Strategic Markets:

Our reviews of U.S. international broadcasting reveal that the Board 
faces the challenges of operating a mix of broadcast entities with 
varying missions and structures in an environment that provides 
significant marketing obstacles. As we reported in July 2003, the Board 
has adopted a new approach to broadcasting that is designed to overcome 
several of these challenges. The Board's key organizational challenge 
is the disparate mix of broadcast entities it is tasked with 
managing.[Footnote 8] To address this problem, the Board has adopted a 
"single system" approach to broadcasting whereby broadcast entities are 
viewed as content providers and the Board assumes a central role in 
tailoring this content to meet the demands of individual markets. The 
Board also faces marketing challenges that include the lack of a unique 
reason for listeners to tune in, the general lack of target audiences 
within broadcast markets, and poor to fair signal quality for many of 
the broadcast services. Recent Board initiatives such as Radio Sawa and 
Alhurra have addressed these deficiencies in priority markets and the 
Board has required that all broadcast services, to the extent feasible, 
address these issues as well.

Disparate Structure of Broadcast Operations Remains an Ongoing 
Challenge:

The Board's major organizational challenge is the need to further 
consolidate and streamline its operations to better leverage existing 
resources and generate greater program impact in priority markets. 
According to the Board's strategic plan, "the diversity of the 
Broadcasting Board of Governors--diverse organizations with different 
missions, different frameworks, and different constituencies--makes it 
a challenge to bring all the separate parts together in a more 
effective whole." As noted in our 2003 report, senior program managers 
and outside experts with whom we spoke supported considering the option 
of consolidating U.S. international broadcasting efforts into a single 
entity.

The Board intends to create a unified broadcasting system by treating 
the component parts of U.S. international broadcasting as a single 
system. Under this approach, VOA and other U.S. broadcast entities are 
viewed as content providers and the Board's role is to bring this 
content together to form new services or entities as needed. The single 
system approach to managing the Board's diversity requires that the 
Board actively manage resources across broadcast entities to achieve 
common broadcast goals. A good example of this strategy in action is 
Radio Farda, which combined VOA and RFE/RL broadcast content to produce 
a new broadcast product for the Iranian market. In the case of Radio 
Sawa, the Board replaced VOA's poorly performing Arabic service with a 
new broadcast entity. The Board's experience with implementing Radio 
Sawa suggests that it can be difficult to make disparate broadcast 
entities work toward a common purpose. For example, Board members and 
senior planners told us they encountered some difficulties attempting 
to work with officials to launch Radio Sawa within VOA's structure and 
were later forced to constitute Radio Sawa as a separate grantee 
organization. While this move was needed to achieve the Board's 
strategic objectives, it also contributes to the further fragmentation 
of U.S. international broadcasting.

New Initiatives Address Marketing Challenges:

The Board's strategic plan comments openly on the marketing challenges 
facing U.S. international broadcasters, including that many language 
services lack a unique reason for listeners or viewers to tune in; few 
language services have identified their target audience--a key first 
step in developing a broadcast strategy; many language services have 
outmoded formats and programs with an antiquated, even Cold War, sound 
and style; and three-quarters of transmitted hours have poor or fair 
signal quality.

Consistent with its "Marrying the Mission to the Market" philosophy, 
the Board has sought to address these deficiencies in key markets with 
new initiatives in Afghanistan, Iran, and the Middle East that support 
the war on terrorism. The first project under the new approach, Radio 
Sawa (recently added to the new Middle East Television Network), was 
launched in March 2002 using many of the modern, market-tested 
broadcasting techniques and practices prescribed in its strategic plan, 
including identifying a target audience, researching the best way to 
attract the target audience, and delivering programming in a 
contemporary and appealing format to the Middle East. The Board's other 
recent initiatives also have adhered to this new approach by being 
tailored to the specific circumstances of each target market. These 
initiatives include the Afghanistan Radio Network, Radio Farda service 
to Iran, and the Alhurra satellite service to the Middle East. Table 1 
describes the Board's recent projects supporting the war on terrorism.

Table 1: The Board's Recent Initiatives that Support the War on 
Terrorism:

Initiative: Radio Sawa; 
(recently added to the Middle East Television Network); 
Launch date: March 2002; 
Project description: A modern Arabic-language network that broadcasts 
music, news, and information to 17-28 year olds in the Middle East via 
a combination of FM, medium wave, short wave, digital audio satellite, 
and Internet transmission resources. Separate streams are targeted to 
Iraq, Jordan and the West Bank, the Persian Gulf, Egypt, and Morocco. 
All five streams have a differentiated music program; however, the news 
is similar on the four non-Iraq streams. Radio Sawa broadcasts 10 to 15 
minutes of news each hour.

Initiative: Afghanistan Radio Network; 
Launch date: August 2002; 
Project description: Afghanistan Radio Network is a coordinated stream 
of VOA Dari and Pashto and RFE/RL's Radio Free Afghanistan radio 
programming. The network targets the broad Afghani population and 
currently broadcasts 24 hours,7 days a week on FM and the Internet. It 
broadcasts 12 hours in Dari and 12 hours in Pashto daily. It features 
hourly regional and global news and information coverage as well as 
reports on issues such as health, education, politics, human rights, 
women's rights, and economic reconstruction.

Initiative: Radio Farda; 
Launch date: December 2002; 
Project description: Radio Farda combines the efforts of VOA and 
RFE/RL into a single service managed by RFE/RL. Radio Farda targets its 
broadcasts to the under-30 youth in Iran. It broadcasts a combination 
of popular Persian and Western music and a total of 8 hours of news and 
information content daily, focusing on regional coverage and 
developments relating to Iran. News updates are given at least twice an 
hour, with longer news programming in the morning and evening. It 
broadcasts 24 hours a day, 7 days a week via medium wave, digital audio 
satellite, and the Internet, as well as 21 hours a day via short wave.

Initiative: Alhurra; 
(part of the Middle East Television Network); 
Launch date: February 2004; 
Project description: With a focus on attracting large audiences in the 
Middle East, the Alhurra satellite TV channel provides news, current 
affairs, and entertainment programming on a 24 hours, 7 days a week 
basis. Programming focuses on news and information, including hourly 
news updates, daily hour-long newscasts, and current affairs talk 
shows. The channel also broadcasts information or educational shows on 
subjects including health and fitness, entertainment, sports, and 
science and technology. 

Source: Broadcasting Board of Governors.

[End of table]

Although we have not validated available research data, the Board 
claims that implementation of these marketing improvements has led to 
dramatic increases in audience listening rates. For example, the Board 
notes that Radio Sawa is now the number one international broadcaster 
in the Middle East, with a weekly audience of over 30 percent of the 
target audience in countries where it is broadcast on FM. In addition 
to these new initiatives, the Board has tasked all language services 
with adopting the tenets of its new approach, such as identifying a 
target audience and improving signal quality, to the maximum extent 
possible within existing budget constraints.

Language Service Review Used to Reallocate Millions to Higher Priority 
Broadcast Needs:

The Board manages its limited resources through its annual language 
service review process which is used to address such issues as how 
resources should be allocated among services based on their priority 
and impact, how many broadcast services should be carried in total, 
what degree of overlap and content duplication[Footnote 9] should exist 
among services, and whether services should be eliminated because they 
have fulfilled their broadcast mission. This process responds to the 
congressional mandate that the Board periodically review the need to 
add and delete language services. The Board has interpreted this 
mandate to include the expansion and reduction of language services. 
Since 1999, the Board has identified more than $50 million in actual or 
potential savings through the language service review process by moving 
resources from lower to higher priority services, by eliminating 
language services, and by reducing language service overlap and 
transmission costs.

Review Process Used to Address Complex Resource Issues:

As noted in our July 2003 report, the Board's strategic plan concludes 
that if U.S. international broadcasting is to become a vital component 
of U.S. foreign policy, it must focus on a clear set of broadcast 
priorities. The plan notes that trying to do too much at the same time 
fractures this focus, extends the span of control beyond management 
capabilities, and siphons off precious resources. As discussed in our 
report, the Board determined that current efforts to support its 
broadcast languages are "unsustainable" with current resources given 
its desire to increase impact in high priority markets. Our survey of 
senior program managers revealed that a majority supported 
significantly reducing the total number of language services and the 
overlap in services between VOA and the surrogate broadcasters. We 
found that 18 of 24 respondents said that too many language services 
are offered. When asked how many countries should have more than one 
U.S. international broadcaster providing service in the same language, 
23 of 28 respondents said this should occur in only a few countries or 
no countries at all.

The Board's annual language service review process serves as the 
Board's principal tool for managing these complex resource questions. 
This process has evolved into an intensive program and budget review 
that culminates with ranked priority and impact listings for each of 
the Board's 74 language services. These ranked lists become the basis 
for proposed language service reductions or eliminations and provide 
the Board with an analytical basis for making such determinations using 
measures of U.S. strategic interests, audience size, press freedom, and 
a host of other factors. Since the first language service review 
process began in 1999 and up through 2002, the Board has reduced the 
scope of operations of over 25 language services based on their 
priority and impact rankings and reallocated about $19.7 million to 
help fund higher priority broadcast needs such as Radio Sawa and Radio 
Farda.

As discussed in our February 2004 report, a clear example of the 
language service review process in action was the Board's recent 
proposal to eliminate 17 Central and Eastern European language services 
which served to reduce the overall number of language services and 
eliminate several overlapping services where the Board believed each 
broadcast entities mission had been completed. This decision resulted 
in non-recurring budget savings of about $8.8 million for fiscal year 
2004 and recurring annual savings of about $12.1 million. Our only 
criticism of this decision was that the Board's language service review 
process did not include a measure of press freedom that gauges whether 
the press acts responsibly and professionally.[Footnote 10] This is a 
significant omission in the Board's current measure, given the 
congressional concern that RFE/RL's broadcast operations not be 
terminated until a country's domestic media meet this 
condition.[Footnote 11] Board officials acknowledged that their 
existing press freedom measure could be updated to include information 
on media responsibility and professional quality, and work is under way 
to develop a more comprehensive measure for the Board's 2004 language 
service review.

Overlapping Language Services Addressed Remains an Issue of Concern:

In our September 2000 report, we cited the Board's concerns about 
overlapping language services and its plans to address this issue in 
subsequent iterations of the language service review process. In our 
July 2003 report we again raised the issue of language service overlap 
and content duplication between VOA and the surrogates. We also noted 
that while the Board's strategic plan identified overlap as a 
challenge, it failed to answer questions about when it is appropriate 
to broadcast VOA and surrogate programming in the same language.

The Board has responded to our observations and recommendations by 
incorporating a review of overlapping services in its language service 
review process for 2003. The Board developed several approaches to 
dealing with overlap. For example, services can be "merged" by having 
one service subsume another (as was the case Radio Farda). A second 
approach is to run alternating services as is the case with the 
Afghanistan Radio Network, which runs VOA and RFE/RL programming on a 
single broadcast stream. Another approach is to simply terminate one or 
both overlapping services. All of the Board's overlapping services were 
assessed with these different approaches in mind. As a result of this 
analysis, the Board identified an estimated $4.9 million in fiscal year 
2004 and 2005 savings from overlap services that could be redirected to 
higher priority broadcasting needs, such as expanded Persian language 
television for Iran and expanded Urdu language radio for 
Pakistan.[Footnote 12]

Strategic Planning and Performance Management System Revised to Place a 
Greater Focus on Results:

Mr. Chairman, the Board has revised its strategic planning and 
performance management system to respond to the recommendations in our 
July 2003 report aimed at improving the measurement of its results. In 
that report, we recommended that the Board's new strategic plan include 
a goal designed to gauge progress toward reaching significant audiences 
in markets of strategic interest to the United States. Our report also 
recommended that the Board establish key performance indicators 
relating to the perceived credibility of U.S. broadcasters, whether 
audiences are aware of U.S. broadcast offerings in their area, and 
whether VOA is achieving its mission of effectively explaining U.S. 
policies and practices to overseas audiences.[Footnote 13]

Reaching Large Audiences in Key Markets:

In response to our recommendation for a goal that would measure 
progress in reaching large audiences in markets of strategic interest 
to the United States, the Board replaced the seven strategic goals in 
its plan with a single goal focused on this core objective.[Footnote 
14] The goal is supported by a number of performance indicators (at the 
entity and language service level) that are designed to measure the 
reach of U.S. international broadcasting efforts and whether 
programming is delivered in the most effective manner possible. Weekly 
listening rates at the entity level and target audience numbers by 
language service provide key measures of the Board's reach. Other 
program effectiveness measures include program quality, the number of 
broadcast affiliates, signal strength, Internet usage, and cost per 
listener.

Broadcaster Credibility:

In response to our recommendation for a measure of broadcaster 
credibility to identify whether target audiences believe what they 
hear, the Board added such a measure to its performance management 
system. Reaching a large listening or viewing audience is of little use 
if audiences largely discount the news and information portions of 
broadcasts. Our survey of senior program managers and discussions with 
Board staff and outside groups all suggest the possibility that U.S. 
broadcasters (VOA in particular) suffer from a credibility problem with 
foreign audiences, who may view VOA and other broadcasters as biased 
sources of information. InterMedia, the Board's audience research 
contractor, told us that it was working on a credibility index for 
another customer that could be adapted to meet the Board's needs and, 
when segmented by language service, would reveal whether there are 
significant perception problems among key target audiences. However, to 
develop a similar measure, Intermedia told us that the Board would need 
to add several questions to its national survey instruments.

Audience Awareness:

In response to our finding that the Board lacked a measure of audience 
awareness, the Board has added such a measure to its performance 
management system. We determined this measure would help the Board 
answer a key question of effectiveness: whether target audiences are 
even aware of U.S. international broadcasting programming available in 
their area. Board officials have stated that having this measure would 
help the Board understand a key factor in audience share rates and what 
could be done to address audience share deficiencies. We found that the 
Board could develop this measure since it already collects information 
on language service awareness levels in its audience research and in 
national surveys for internal use.

VOA Mission Effectiveness:

Finally, in response to our finding that the Board lacked a measure of 
whether target audiences hear, understand, and retain information 
broadcast by VOA on American thought, institutions, and policies, Board 
officials we spoke with told us that they are currently developing this 
measure for inclusion in the Board's performance management system. The 
unique value-added component of VOA's broadcasting mission is its focus 
on issues and information concerning the United States, our system of 
government, and the rationale behind U.S. policy decisions. Tracking 
and reporting these data are important in determining whether VOA is 
accomplishing its mission. Officials from the Board's research firm 
noted that developing a measure of this sort is feasible and requires 
developing appropriate quantitative and qualitative questions to 
include in the Board's ongoing survey activities.

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared statement. I would be happy to 
respond to any questions you or other members of the subcommittee may 
have at this time.

Contacts and Acknowledgments:

For future contacts regarding this testimony, please call Jess Ford or 
Diana Glod at (202) 512-4128. Individuals making key contributions to 
this testimony included Janey Cohen, Rick Barrett, Melissa Pickworth, 
and Michael ten Kate.

FOOTNOTES

[1] U.S. General Accounting Office, U.S. International Broadcasting: 
Strategic Planning and Performance Management System Could Be Improved, 
GAO/NSIAD-00-222 (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 27, 2000).

[2] U.S. General Accounting Office, U.S. International Broadcasting: 
New Strategic Approach Focuses on Reaching Large Audiences but Lacks 
Measurable Program Objectives, GAO-03-772 (Washington, D.C.: July 15, 
2003).

[3] U.S. General Accounting Office, U.S. International Broadcasting: 
Enhanced Measure of Local Media Conditions Would Facilitate Decisions 
to Terminate Language Services, GAO-04-374 (Washington, D.C.: Feb. 26, 
2004).

[4] U.S. General Accounting Office, U.S. Public Diplomacy: State 
Department and the Broadcasting Board of Governors Expand Efforts in 
the Middle East but Face Significant Challenges, GAO-04-435T 
(Washington, D.C.: Feb. 10, 2004).

[5] Overlap exists when a VOA and a surrogate service, such as RFE/RL, 
broadcast in the same language to the same target audience. Some degree 
of overlap is appropriate given the varying missions of U.S. broadcast 
entities. However, in its new strategic plan, the Board identified a 40 
percent overlap in its language services as excessive.

[6] With passage of the Fiscal Year 2004 Consolidated Appropriations 
Act, House and Senate conferees adopted the Board's proposal to 
terminate service to those Central and Eastern European nations that 
have been invited to become new member states of the European Union or 
the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and have received a 
Freedom House (a non-profit group reporting on economic, political, and 
press freedom issues around the world) rating equal to that of the 
United States. Conferees expressed the expectation that broadcast 
services would continue in Romanian and Croatian.

[7] The U.S. International Broadcasting Act of 1994 states that U.S. 
international broadcasting efforts should, among other things, be 
consistent with the broad foreign policy objectives of the United 
States; provide a balanced and comprehensive projection of U.S. thought 
and institutions; and provide accurate and objective news and 
information about developments in significant regions of the world.

[8] Our July 2003 report discusses additional organizational issues, 
including the potential need for a Chief Executive Officer or Chief 
Operating Officer to handle day-to-day operations for the Board and 
whether VOA and Radio/TV Marti should be reconstituted as grantees to 
put them on the same footing as other U.S. broadcast entities. 

[9] Content duplication occurs when VOA and another U.S. broadcast 
entity provide the same type of information to the same audience. Board 
analysis shows that VOA carries more information about America than the 
surrogates and surrogates carry more local news than VOA. However, 
there are areas of overlap in content since each broadcast entity 
carries news about America and international, regional, and local 
events.

[10] The Board's current press freedom measure index relies heavily on 
Freedom House's press freedom index, which focuses on free speech 
issues, the plurality of news sources, whether media are economically 
independent from the government, and whether supporting institutions 
and laws function in the professional interest of the press. The 
Freedom House index is used and respected by media groups around the 
world. However, it does not assess whether domestic media provide 
accurate, balanced, and comprehensive news and information. 

[11] See Title III of P.L. 103-236, as amended by P.L. 106-113, 
Appendix G, Section 503.

[12] The Board also identified an estimated $7.5 million in fiscal year 
2004 and 2005 savings from transmission reductions during its 2003 
language service review.

[13] This Board's strategic planning and performance management system 
includes its 5-year strategic plan, Results Act reporting (annual 
performance plans and reports), the Office of Management and Budget's 
new Program Assessment Rating Tool, the annual language service review 
process, and annual program reviews of individual language services. 

[14] We also reported that efforts to assess the effectiveness of the 
Board's new approach to broadcasting may be hampered by the lack of 
details on how the Board intends to implement each of its program 
objectives. Our September 2000 and July 2003 reports both noted that 
the Board's performance plans lacked specifics on implementation 
strategies, resource requirements, and project time frames. The Board 
acknowledged these deficiencies and said that major changes are slated 
for future planning efforts.