Voice of America Is Dead—Trump Just Gave Dictators Exactly What They Wanted

VOA costs Americans less than a penny a day—to fund an institution that broadcasts truth into authoritarian regimes, counters global propaganda, and promotes democracy around the world

Mar 21, 2025

Introduction

The decision to shut down Voice of America (VOA) and other U.S.-funded international media outlets is more than just another reckless move by Donald Trump—it’s an all-out assault on the very idea that truth and democracy should be defended beyond America’s borders. For over 80 years, VOA has been a lifeline for people living under oppressive regimes, a rare beacon of fact in a world increasingly drowned in propaganda. Now, with the stroke of a pen, Trump has silenced it.

At a time when authoritarian powers like China and Russia are expanding their state-controlled media influence, the United States is inexplicably walking away from the information battlefield, handing its adversaries an unearned victory. This isn’t about budgets or partisanship—it’s about whether America still believes in standing up for free speech and democracy, or whether we are content to let dictators control the narrative.

Do a Deep Dive with AI: This special Perplexity AI page allows you do use AI to dig deeper on any issues or questions you might have regarding this article or the issues mentioned. No filters. No limits. Just more details, explanations and answers. Ask. Learn. Act.

VOA’s Legacy as a Voice for Freedom

For over eight decades, Voice of America and its sister outlets have been a lifeline of uncensored news to nations lacking a free press. Founded in 1942 amid World War II, VOA began with a simple promise: “The news may be good or bad. We shall tell you the truth.” That commitment to factual reporting carried through the Cold War and beyond. U.S.-funded broadcasters like VOA, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL), and Radio Free Asia (RFA) beamed behind the Iron Curtain and into closed societies, countering Nazi and Soviet propaganda with honest news.

Even after the Cold War, these outlets remained vital in countries where independent media are suppressed or nonexistent. VOA and its affiliates reach hundreds of millions of people—over 400 million weekly listeners and viewers in more than 100 countries and 60+ languages—often providing the only source of unbiased information in places like Iran, Russia, China, North Korea, Belarus, and Afghanistan.

Generations of dissidents and ordinary citizens tuned in for uncensored news and “America’s story,” from jazz music to moon landings to debates on democratic ideals. As one former Polish activist famously said of RFE’s broadcasts during communist rule, “It was our radio station… our ministry of information.” In short, these congressionally funded outlets have long been an arm of U.S. soft power, championing free expression and democratic values by shining a light into the world’s darkest corners.

The 2025 Shutdown: Silencing America’s Voice

In mid-March 2025, President Trump took the extraordinary step of signing an executive order to dismantle the U.S. Agency for Global Media (USAGM) – the federal parent of VOA – and eliminate funding for its international broadcasting networks. The order directed USAGM and its grantee organizations to reduce operations to “the minimum” allowed by law, effectively gutting VOA and terminating grants for RFE/RL, RFA, and other pro-democracy broadcasters.

Within hours, VOA’s director announced that “virtually” the entire staff had been put on leave, crippling a news organization that produces content in nearly 50 languages. Overseas services from VOA Burmese to Radio Marti, which broadcasts to Cuba, abruptly went dark. A storied institution that had operated continuously since 1942 was suddenly forced off the air. The abrupt halt of broadcasts to global audiences – many in countries where information is tightly controlled – marked a stunning reversal of America’s commitment to international press freedom.

Why did the administration do this? Trump and his allies justified the move as a cost-cutting and ideological corrective, arguing that VOA and similar outlets no longer served U.S. interests. The White House branded these news services a wasteful source of “radical propaganda” that did not deserve taxpayer dollars. Tech billionaire Elon Musk – installed as head of a new “Department of Government Efficiency” – had openly called for VOA and RFE/RL to be shut down, dismissing them as “radical crazy people talking to themselves while torching $1B/year of US taxpayer money.” That sentiment aligned with a faction of Trump’s base who viewed the foreign broadcasting agencies as biased holdovers of the Washington establishment. Trump himself had long accused VOA of speaking for “America’s adversaries – not its citizens” and railed against what he saw as unflattering coverage of his administration.

Kari Lake, President Trump’s pick to lead Voice of America, echoed his view that the agency was “unsalvageable” and vowed to radically downsize it. You know, the Kari Lake who falsely claims the 2020 election was stolen from Trump and tells the world that the January 6th insurrection was a peaceful protest.

Trump moved swiftly to install loyalists to carry out the overhaul. Kari Lake – a former TV anchor and outspoken Trump supporter – was appointed as a senior adviser to USAGM and slated to take over VOA. Lake argued that the agency was “a giant rot and burden to the American taxpayer”, declaring it “not salvageable.” She promised to shrink VOA “to its minimum possible size” and even sought to break the organization’s long-term building lease to save money.

In public remarks, Lake insisted VOA wouldn’t become a partisan mouthpiece – “We won’t become Trump TV,” she told one conference – but she made clear it would no longer tolerate what she termed “Trump Derangement Syndrome” in its ranks. This rhetoric fed into the notion, popular in some conservative circles, that VOA and Radio Free Europe had drifted leftward and “no longer [lined] up with U.S. interests.” Indeed, a number of Republican lawmakers had for years complained of alleged bias at these outlets and called for drastic reform or closure.

Backed by Musk’s government-wide austerity drive, Trump’s 2025 order delivered on those calls by suspending the broadcasters’ operations indefinitely. What Trump officials hailed as a victory against “wasteful” spending, however, most of the world saw as America muzzling its own voice – with dangerous implications.

A Blow to Global Democracy and Press Freedom

Around the globe, journalists, activists, and citizens in authoritarian societies felt an immediate void. For countless people living under censorship – from Iran to Myanmar – the sudden loss of VOA, RFE/RL, and RFA is a devastating blow to democratic aspirations and the free flow of information. These U.S.-funded services have long provided an “information lifeline” in countries where independent media is banned or muzzled.

In Iran, for example, VOA Persian and Radio Farda (RFE/RL’s Persian service) are among the only uncensored news sources available. Shutting them down “would deal a major blow to press freedom … directly serving the interests of the Islamic Republic”, an Iranian journalist noted. Ordinary Iranians, who have no access to free media inside the country, now lose a vital window to the outside world.

A similar story is playing out in South and Southeast Asia: a Burmese journalist recounted how during Myanmar’s 2021 military coup, hearing VOA broadcasts amid an internet blackout “felt like a light had been switched on in the darkness.” Now that light has been extinguished. “Shutting down outlets like VOA [and] Radio Free Asia only helps dictatorship and junta regimes grow,” she said.

In places where local news is heavily censored, these services were more than just radio or TV stations – they were symbols of hope and truth. Their closure sends a chilling message to prodemocracy movements and leaves millions of people in the dark.

Authoritarian governments, unsurprisingly, are among those cheering this development. Regimes that systematically suppress free media have long viewed VOA and its sister networks as dangerous intruders to be blocked at all costs. Moscow, for instance, has labeled RFE/RL an “undesirable organization,” making it illegal for Russians to even share its content.

Beijing routinely jams RFA’s radio signals and had warned Chinese dissidents not to give interviews to VOA. One prominent Chinese journalist, Gao Yu, noted that the Communist authorities “are most afraid of these two American media outlets.” From Cuba to Cambodia, VOA correspondents and local stringers have faced harassment, and at least 10 journalists affiliated with VOA, RFE, or RFA are currently imprisoned or missing for simply doing their jobs.

By silencing these outlets, the U.S. is effectively doing the censors’ work for them – eliminating a rare source of uncensored information that authoritarian rulers could not completely control. Reporters Without Borders (RSF) warned that the decision “threatens press freedom worldwide and negates 80 years of American history in supporting a free flow of information.” Indeed, the United States has abruptly abdicated its role as a defender of global press freedom, just when independent journalism is under renewed assault in many regions. The closure of these outlets not only emboldens dictators, but also demoralizes pro-democracy voices who relied on them. As one VOA editor put it, people under tyranny have now lost “our microphone to the world.”

U.S. Soft Power and Influence Diminished

The impact on American soft power and strategic influence is equally profound. With this shutdown, the U.S. is essentially “unilaterally disarming” in the global information war, even as rival powers redouble their propaganda efforts. China, for one, has been quick to fill the void. In an editorial, the Chinese Communist Party’s Global Times rejoiced at VOA’s closure, gleefully branding the U.S. broadcaster a defeated “lie factory.”

Beijing has spent billions of dollars annually to expand its state media footprint worldwide – from launching global TV networks to buying stakes in foreign news outlets – all to push its authoritarian narrative. Now, one of the key sources challenging Beijing’s message to global audiences has gone dark. “The only people cheering for this are adversaries and authoritarians around the world,” observed Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, the ranking member of the U.S. House Select Committee on China.

Russia’s and China’s state media are indeed gloating. They see America voluntarily pulling back its “voice” just as they aggressively promote their own. A former president of RFE/RL described Trump’s move as “a massive gift to America’s enemies” and warned that without U.S. international broadcasting, “the image of the United States … will be in the hands of others, including … people who consider the United States an enemy.” In other words, by retreating from the information battlefield, the U.S. is ceding the narrative to its competitors.

Allies and observers fear that this decision undermines U.S. credibility and influence at a critical moment. Even some of Trump’s fellow Republicans objected that gutting RFA, VOA, and the rest “counters the principles of freedom our nation was founded on and cedes leverage to the Chinese Communist Party, North Korea, and other regimes.” These U.S.-funded outlets were not mere propaganda tools; their very strength was the trust and goodwill they earned by practicing real journalism, often covering stories local state media wouldn’t dare. Shutting them sends a message, intentional or not, that the United States is stepping back from the arena of ideas. “Without [VOA and RFE/RL], it will be that much harder for [America] to get its messages to the world,” noted Thomas Kent, a former Radio Free Europe CEO.

The vacuum will be filled by others – not only by China and Russia’s well-funded channels, but also by extremist and anti-Western voices that thrive in unchallenged spaces. We are already seeing authoritarian figures applaud the move: Cambodia’s strongman Hun Sen praised the VOA/RFA shutdown as a “major contribution to eliminating fake news, disinformation… and chaos” – effectively thanking Trump for silencing outlets that had reported on his regime’s abuses. Such reactions underscore how much U.S. international media mattered to those who oppose democracy.

In the grand strategic competition between democratic openness and authoritarian control of information, many analysts see the 2025 VOA closure as an unforced error by Washington – a retreat that weakens the free world’s hand and strengthens its rivals’.

International and Human Rights Backlash

The response from allied governments, journalists, and human rights groups has been swift and overwhelmingly negative. America’s allies in Europe have voiced dismay and are even scrambling to save what they can of the U.S.-funded outlets. The Czech Republic’s foreign minister, Jan Lipavský, lamented the decision, calling RFE/RL (which has its headquarters in Prague) “a beacon” for people under totalitarian rule. He noted that from Belarus to Iran and Afghanistan, “RFE and Voice of America are among the few free sources for people living without freedom.” Lipavský announced he would raise the issue with fellow European Union ministers, exploring ways the EU might help keep these broadcasts alive, at least in part.

Poland’s foreign minister, Radosław Sikorski, confirmed that the EU is considering options to support RFE/RL, calling VOA and its sister stations “worthy institutions whose mission should continue.” This kind of extraordinary step – U.S. allies potentially funding American-branded media – highlights how critical these services are seen in bolstering democracy, especially in Eastern Europe. However, stopgap measures by the EU cannot easily replace U.S. leadership. The prevailing sentiment among allied democracies is one of bewilderment and concern: they see the United States turning its back on a shared principle of press freedom, right when coordinated support for truthful reporting is most needed to counter propaganda and misinformation.

Global press freedom advocates have likewise sounded the alarm. The Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) blasted the move as “outrageous,” noting the White House is gutting a Congress-funded agency that provides uncensored news in countries where the press is restricted. CPJ urged U.S. lawmakers to intervene and protect USAGM’s critical journalism mission. Reporters Without Borders (RSF) condemned the mass suspensions at VOA as an “abandonment of the U.S.’s historic role as a defender of free information”, calling on Congress and the international community to mobilize against this “unprecedented move.” The National Press Club in Washington, D.C. said the cuts undermine America’s longstanding commitment to a free and independent press, especially since “for decades, Voice of America has delivered fact-based, independent journalism to audiences worldwide, often in places where press freedom does not exist.”

Individual journalists have been outspoken as well. VOA’s own staff were devastated at being suddenly unable to report. “All I’ve ever wanted to do is shoot straight and tell the truth… If that’s a threat to anyone, so be it,” posted William Gallo, VOA’s Seoul bureau chief, after being locked out of his systems. Michael Abramowitz, VOA’s director (and a former human rights organization leader), wrote that he was “deeply saddened” to see the iconic broadcaster silenced “for the first time in 83 years,” noting that VOA has played an indispensable role “in the fight for freedom and democracy around the world.”

Those on the front lines of human rights struggles are also speaking out: for example, Uyghur activists have decried the defunding of Radio Free Asia’s Uyghur service as “devastating to the Uyghur cause and a gift to their oppressors.” Many such advocates are now publicly calling on U.S. officials – including those in the Trump administration – to reverse course.

Notably, President Trump’s own Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, is a staunch supporter of broadcasting atrocities in Xinjiang; human rights groups have appealed for his help in restoring RFA’s work. From NGOs to foreign ministries, the chorus of concern highlights a common theme: this decision is a colossal mistake, one that empowers authoritarian censorship and weakens the global cause of democracy.

Legal and Political Challenges to the Shutdown

Can anything be done to challenge or reverse the shutdown of VOA and its fellow outlets? In Washington, the battle is not necessarily over.

Legal and political challenges are already underway, as critics argue that Trump’s executive order overstepped his authority. One key issue is that funding for VOA, RFE/RL, and RFA is appropriated by Congress – meaning the money has been legally allocated for these programs by law. By effectively freezing or redirecting those funds, the administration may be violating legislative intent or even the law. “I consider the freeze in their funding illegal because the money is congressionally appropriated and RFE/RL’s mission is congressionally mandated,” said Lisa Curtis, a former National Security Council official, adding that those concerned “will sue the Trump administration to get it restored.”

Indeed, there is precedent: the National Endowment for Democracy (a nonprofit that likewise receives direct funds from Congress) has filed a lawsuit accusing the White House of unlawfully withholding its congressionally approved budget. USAGM’s situation could provoke similar legal action if the administration refuses to carry out Congress’s funding directives. In short, the courts may yet weigh in on whether a president can unilaterally pull the plug on U.S. international broadcasters that Congress has chosen to support.

On Capitol Hill, there are signs of bipartisan pushback. While some of Trump’s political allies applauded shrinking these media agencies, many influential lawmakers – including Republicans with national security and foreign policy backgrounds – have expressed deep misgivings. “Gutting Radio Free Asia and other USAGM platforms … cedes leverage to the Chinese Communist Party,” warned Rep. Young Kim, a California Republican who chairs a House subcommittee on the Indo-Pacific.

Likewise, members of the Senate from both parties have extolled VOA and RFE/RL’s contributions to U.S. interests over the years. There is a growing effort in Congress to find ways to restore or protect the broadcasts, whether through new legislation, budget maneuvers, or conditions placed on funding. Back in the 1990s, when a post-Cold War administration considered slashing these broadcasts, Congress worked across party lines to save them, ultimately passing the International Broadcasting Act of 1994 which preserved VOA and RFE/RL under a reformed structure.

That history is not lost on today’s legislators. CPJ and RSF have explicitly urged Congress to step in and assert its authority. Lawmakers could mandate the reinstatement of services or refuse to confirm Trump’s nominees (like the proposed USAGM CEO) unless certain guarantees are made. Oversight hearings may also be on the horizon, putting a spotlight on how this decision harms U.S. strategic interests.

Outside the halls of government, advocacy groups and diaspora communities are mobilizing as well. Petitions, public awareness campaigns, and media attention are aiming to pressure the administration to reconsider or at least to signal that a future administration should rebuild what is being torn down. In the meantime, U.S. allies stepping into the breach – such as the EU exploring funding for RFE/RL – could bolster the case that these outlets are too valuable to abandon and encourage Congress to find a solution. The path to reversal is admittedly steep amid a polarized political climate, but the combination of legal action and sustained political advocacy could yet keep the flame of these broadcasters alive.

Conclusion: Why It Matters for the World

The silencing of Voice of America and its sister stations in 2025 is far more than a bureaucratic reshuffle – it is a global event with far-reaching repercussions. At stake is the principle that truth and open dialogue should transcend borders.

For decades, people living under dictatorships knew they could turn to the likes of VOA, RFE, and RFA to hear a different story than the one their oppressors spun. Now, that trusted voice has been dimmed. This decision marks a retreat of the United States from its role as a champion of free information, and the world is already feeling the loss. Authoritarian regimes are celebrating and seizing the narrative high ground.

Democracy activists and independent journalists, from Eastern Europe to the Far East, are left stunned and heartbroken to see America “mute” itself at the very moment information warfare is intensifying. The consequences will be felt in the daily lives of millions who relied on these broadcasts – villagers in Myanmar who used to huddle around shortwave radios for uncensored news, young Iranians surreptitiously downloading VOA videos, or Central Asian listeners learning about corruption in their countries via RFE/RL. The symbolic damage is just as severe: the United States has ceded a moral high ground and a strategic tool that cost relatively little (about $0.25 per American per year) yet delivered immense value in goodwill and enlightenment abroad.

Is this outcome fated to be permanent? History suggests not. American values of free speech and democracy have a way of resurfacing, even if temporarily submerged. The backlash at home and abroad shows that many believe this experiment in silence should not stand.

It will require public pressure, support from allies, and political will in Washington to reverse the course – whether under the current administration or a future one. The world is watching to see if Americans will rally to restore their country’s voice. Because ultimately, this issue cuts to the core of what the United States wants to be on the global stage: a beacon of liberty, or a silent bystander.

The shutdown of VOA and its sister outlets is a stark reminder that the hard-won freedoms of press and expression can never be taken for granted. It is significant for every citizen of the world who believes in the power of truth over tyranny. As one advocate implored, allowing these networks to die out would be “a gift to the oppressors,” whereas saving them would signal that the light of free information will not be so easily extinguished.

The hope among supporters is that America’s voice – and America’s values – will soon ring out again, louder and clearer than before.

That’s my uncensored objection to Trump and his administration cancelling VOA and I’m sticking to it.

Mitch Jackson, Esq. | links