In a revelation that has sparked controversy and raised questions about the role of taxpayer funds in shaping global media, WikiLeaks has uncovered documents detailing a secretive initiative by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) to channel nearly $500 million to an organization known as the Internews Network (IN). The organization, which operates in over 30 countries, has been accused of extending a “censorship industrial complex” through its alleged promotion of state propaganda and suppression of dissenting narratives. The report highlights a tangled web of connections to Democratic political figures, including ties to Hillary Clinton and major donors, raising further concerns about the transparency and intent of this taxpayer-funded initiative.

USAID propped up artificial sources of journalism to further censor the truth

• USAID funneling funds: Over $472.6 million in taxpayer money has been funneled to Internews Network, a non-governmental organization (NGO) that describes itself as empowering local media around the world.

• Global reach: IN has “worked with” 4,291 media outlets, producing 4,799 hours of broadcasts annually and reaching up to 778 million people. It also trained over 9,000 journalists in 2023 alone.

• Censorship initiatives: The organization has supported social media censorship programs, raising concerns about its role in shaping narratives and suppressing alternative viewpoints.

• Leadership ties: IN is led by Jeanne Bourgault, a former USAID employee with ties to Democratic political figures, including serving on the Clinton Global Initiative (CGI) and receiving funding support from Hillary Clinton.

• Financial opacity: IN has six subsidiaries, including one based in the Cayman Islands. Over 95% of its budget since 2008 has been sourced from the U.S. government, with funding surging during the Trump administration.

The rise of a propaganda machine

Founded in the early 1990s, Internews Network began as a small NGO with a stated mission to empower local media. Over the years, it has grown into a sprawling global operation with offices in the U.S., London, Paris, Kiev, Bangkok, and Nairobi. Its leadership includes Jeanne Bourgault, who has held significant roles in both the U.S. government and corporate media outlets, including positions at Wired and The Guardian. Bourgault’s tenure at IN has been marked by a focus on expanding media operations in conflict zones and politically sensitive regions.

The organization’s activities include training journalists, producing broadcasts, and advising media outlets on content strategy—all with an emphasis on disseminating information deemed “critical” to democratic processes. However, critics argue that this mission has evolved into a tool for advancing specific ideological narratives, particularly those aligned with progressive political agendas.

The WikiLeaks revelations have reignited debates about the role of U.S. government funding in shaping global media. IN’s operations amount to a form of state-sponsored propaganda, with taxpayer dollars being used to suppress alternative viewpoints and disproportionately benefit corporate media outlets with left-leaning perspectives.

“The American taxpayer should be appalled to learn their hard-earned money is being used to propagate a global censorship matrix,” tweeted Elon Musk, echoing broader concerns about the misuse of public funds for ideological purposes. Musk’s comments highlight a growing sentiment among conservatives that U.S. media funding programs, including those administered by USAID, are skewed toward advancing a partisan agenda.

Historically, the U.S. government has used media funding as a tool for influence, particularly during the Cold War, when it supported outlets that advocated for pro-American policies. However, the scale and opaqueness of IN’s operations, combined with its ties to major political figures and corporations, have raised new questions about the ethics and efficacy of such initiatives.

A network of sordid influence and control

One of the most striking aspects of IN’s operations is its extensive network of subsidiary organizations and media partnerships. Public records reveal that IN has subcontracted its activities to numerous third-party entities, some of which are registered in offshore financial centers like the Cayman Islands. This structure has led to accusations of money laundering and an attempt to obscure the true sources and uses of U.S. taxpayer funds.

IN’s involvement in social media censorship initiatives, have targeted conservative voices and media outlets. These efforts, while framed as measures to combat “misinformation,” have been interpreted by some as part of a broader strategy to silence dissent and control the narrative on critical issues, including the origins of COVID-19, vaccine injury, and the actions taken by totalitarian governments.

For American taxpayers, the revelations are a stark reminder of how their money is being used to shape global discourse. As IN’s operations continue to expand, the debate over government-funded media will likely intensify, with calls for greater transparency and accountability.

Sources include:

Zerohedge.com

NaturalNews.com

Brighteon.ai