BBC, CNN and Fox News are actually Propaganda Networks.

#Media #News #ElectronicMedia #NewsChannel #BBC #CNN #FoxNews #opinion #thought

Electronic Media for Humanist Community Building

Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen (Edited by Richard Dowsett, Humanist Association of Toronto Coordinator and Treasurer)

Publication (Outlet/Website): Jacobsen’s Jabberwocky (Humanist Association of Toronto)

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2018/07/21 (Submission Date)

Electronic media can facilitate the future of humanist communities. Most Canadians use communications technologies. That is, many humanists across Canada could garner greater opportunities for community building compared to any prior time with the flexibility afforded by electronic media.

The Computer Age characterizes the late 20th and early 21st century as much as vacuum tubes and the transistor in the middle of the 20thcentury, or the fossil fuels throughout the 20th.

With this Computer Age, this Information Technology Era, we work within the patterns of the old media. However, these processes become more efficient with asynchronous and geographical possibilities – time and place are not problems.

The old form of organizing during the height, while alive, of Paul Kurtz, Bertrand Russell, Niels Bohr, John Dewey, R. Buckminster Fuller, Karl Popper, Carl Sagan, Albert Einstein, Isaac Asimov, and other humanist luminaries; the world of the eary and middle 20th century seemed more difficult to organize in, to humanize – so to speak.

The nature of community organizing was harder. The founding of organizations, coalitions, and groups was more difficult. The reasons are numerous, but some are the limitations in travel and the cost of the both one’s self and simple information too, especially compare to the modern era. Others are the limits in outspoken formal non-religion.

Things go “viral” now. The Internet makes for the greater possibilities of online communities of mind to build. Humanists amount to such a group. If I survey some of the landscape in the nation, Canada contains a variety of organizations, which seem to organically grow and evolve with online communities.

As the digital technology progresses and becomes better, the communities become more robust at-a-distance and at different times. People can post articles, comments, host Facebook chats, host groups online, debate and discussions through fora, create multimedia presentations and promotional videos for a variety of humanist causes.

The benefit from these electronic media comes from the basis for a more robust and inclusive environment for those humanists from more remote areas; those tacitly humanistic Canadians who could not come into the fold. Why? Technology limitations of the time; financial limitations to purchase technology, recently.

However, technology becomes cheaper and the platforms for engagement become cheaper or free. If humanists on a campus want to organize, they can form a secular student alliance or a formal humanist group on campus. Then they function electronically.

The online environment can provide the similar communal experience as in person communities. Take, for example, the university environment and the communities built with student groups. 

It is important to incorporate the in-person meetings and debates and hosting tables in campus areas to let people know about the group. At the same time, we can rest assured the online community building is as or more important now. 

This gives a solid basis to join and contribute at any stage of life. For example, an individual can respond to a forum post of an online group within minutes or months. 

Also, the online community provides a particular filtration for the debates and discussions on some issues as comments can be screened according to previously set codes of conduct and standards of behavior set by the humanist organization for their online group.

Screening can provide potentially interested humanists with a more inclusive environment and an appropriate safe, respectful state of mind when they first approach the community from the outside. 

Humanists are a disparate group. They are minorities within a minority of the non-religious. There is a negative perception of the non-religious. However, this perspective is changing over time. The need for a safe, respectful space is important in the light of the negative public perception of humanists. 

Back to the university example, we can see the Secular Student Alliance working for the furtherance of a secular space for students. These efforts mean a lot to individual students. In a similar manner, spaces for other adults – humanists – could perform the same function in a similar way. 

The modern period provides a firmer foundation with better and more ubiquitous technology, greater use of the technology, and ergonomic appeal (its ease of use for people). Why not take advantage of it?  

With these powerful tools for community building at their fingertips, who knows what the humanist geniuses of today can accomplish?

Last updated May  3, 2025. These terms govern all In Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices.  In Sight Publishing by Scott  Douglas  Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In Sight Publishing by Scott  Douglas  Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: [email protected]. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.

#computerAge #electronicMedia #humanistCommunities #onlineCommunities #secularStudent

The US Agency For Global Media’s Dissolution Could Lead To A Revival Of American Soft Power

The US Agency For Global Media’s Dissolution Could Lead To A Revival Of American Soft Power

By Andrew Korybko

American soft power operations in this new era that’ll likely follow USAID and USAGM’s far-reaching reforms under Trump 2.0 will be more creative, appealing, and effective than all that came before.

Trump’s Executive Order last week eliminating the US Agency for Global Media (USAGM), the rationale of which was explained here as regards to stopping the state’s funding of ideologically radical propaganda, has been condemned by critics as a deathblow to American soft power. That body is responsible for Voice of America, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, and Radio Free Asia, among several other foreign-focused outlets. It’s therefore understandable why some are concerned about the consequences.

The reality though is that their operations will probably resume after some time, albeit through what’ll likely be public-private partnerships abroad instead of purely state-run enterprises inside the US, and only with like-minded partners that share Trump 2.0’s populist-nationalist worldview. To elaborate, the $950 million that the USAGM requested for this year could be put to more effective use funding foreign experts, influencers, media, etc. who are from the places whose public the US wants to influence.

That was already happening through USAID, which is also being gutted and transformed as was explained here in early February, so it’ll either return to its original focus on physical development projects or divide information warfare responsibilities with whatever remains of USAGM. In any case, the point is that USAGM’s influence operations and USAID’s more direct meddling ones are expected to be less centralized than before and outsourced to a much greater degree as a result of Trump 2.0’s reforms.

They’ll also be optimized by replacing their ideologically radical agenda with his team’s much more pragmatic one, which resonates with a much wider audience, and relying a lot more on informed figures abroad who have a better sense of the local pulse than DC-based bureaucrats do. The end result is that American soft power will be less visibly connected to the US, more effectively fine-tuned for targeted audiences, and promoted by what can be described as many more “agents of influence” than before.

It’s this final point that captures the essence of Trump’s reforms. As a successful businessman, Trump appreciates the free market, ergo why he envisages liberating the so-called “marketplace of ideas” from what he considers to be USAID and USAGM’s overbearing influence. Instead of keeping that marketplace “unfree” by letting them continue dictating editorial preferences, he wants to reduce their roles mostly to funding and supervising like-minded foreign contractors who’ll then function as “agents of influence”.

The problem though is that their host countries could replicate the US’ FARA like Georgia recently did to identify which broadcasters, influencers, media, etc. are receiving foreign funding and then obligate them to inform their audience of this so that they can keep it in mind when consuming their content. Additional responsibilities could also be mandated to make such arrangements too onerous for many to agree to, such as regular and detailed reporting of their activities, thus hamstringing this plan.

It’s here where the Georgian precedent is one again relevant since this example shows how aggressively the US will push back against even friendly governments that use the US’ own FARA as the model for their respective foreign agents legislation. Of course, it goes without saying that such a reaction strongly suggests that America is indeed guilty of intending to clandestinely fund foreign figures for influencing their societies, but not all targeted governments are as strong as Georgia’s to resist this pressure.

Moreover, USAID and USAGM’s ties to the CIA can lead to their successors indirectly funnelling money to these same figures to help them evade scrutiny if they live in countries that have their own version of FARA, which can occur via crowdfunding as well as ad revenue from US platforms like YouTube and X. Governments could legislate that crowdfunding sites restrict foreign donations for their nationals if they want to still operate in their jurisdiction, however, and produce the names of donors upon court order.

By contrast, cracking down on US funding that might be indirectly funnelled to foreign figures by the CIA via YouTube and X ad revenue at USAID and/or USAGM’s behest is more difficult, with the only realistic option being to legally treat all influencers above a certain number of followers as foreign agents. Under those circumstances, the US might encourage its “agents of influence” to flee abroad on the pretext that this infringes on their freedoms, after which they’ll continue producing their content with impunity.

The aforesaid pretext might be sufficient for the targeted audience not to negatively judge the figures who leave to avoid complying with their government’s FARA-like legislation, thus ensuring that they still retain most of their supporters despite living abroad and therefore saving the influence operation. In that case, it wouldn’t matter if the authorities requested that YouTube or X ban those figures’ accounts from being accessed within their jurisdiction since their audience could then just use free VPNs instead.

By hook or by crook, the US’ “agents of influence” – some of whom might even operate as such without their knowledge if the CIA indirectly funnels funds to them via YouTube or X to financially incentivize them to continue creating their content – are expected to expand their audience and sway. American soft power operations in this new era that’ll likely follow USAID and USAGM’s far-reaching reforms under Trump 2.0 will therefore be more creative, appealing, and effective than all that came before.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Voice of East.

7 Courses in 1 – Diploma in Business Management

#CIA #DonaldTrump #electronicMedia #Geopolitics #MainstreamMedia #USA #USAGM #USAID