“USAID has long functioned as a geopolitical instrument, using media funding“

As the Trump administration began reorganizing and cutting major funding to the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), revelations emerged that the organization financed groups, including some media outlets, engaged in smear campaigns and censorship against dissident voices.

The agency, known as a front for U.S. intelligence operations, has financed regime change and other American interests worldwide. It also funds news organizations that are aligned with U.S. foreign policy objectives.

This includes large international organizations that, in turn, fund smaller media organizations like BBC Media Action and the International Fund for Public Interest Media, chaired by the former head of The New York Times.

USAID also directly funds smaller media organizations and even runs its own media initiatives to undermine regimes the U.S. deems problematic.

Reporters Without Borders, which lamented the Trump cuts to USAID, reported that in 2023 the agency funded 6,200 journalists, 707 non-state news outlets and “supported 279 media-sector civil society organizations dedicated to strengthening independent media.”

Recent reporting by journalists such as Sayer Ji of GreenMedInfo, Lee Fang, and Michael Shellenberger and Alex Gutentag of Public News has linked that funding to the smearing and censoring of independent journalists and platforms within the U.S. and internationally.

“USAID has long functioned as a geopolitical instrument, using media funding to shape narratives favorable to Western governmental and corporate interests,” Ji told The Defender.

“While it presents itself as a development agency, its deep ties to intelligence operations and state-sponsored influence campaigns are well-documented,” Ji said. “Media organizations receiving USAID funding are not independent — they are extensions of state power, laundering government-sanctioned narratives under the guise of journalism.”

Ji reported on Substack that BBC Media Action, the BBC’s international charity, received substantial funding from USAID — 8% of its 2023-2024 budget, according to a BBC press statement.

He said BBC Media Action has faced accusations of engaging in censorship under the guise of “combating misinformation,” and that it leverages the BBC brand to shape media narratives, including about public health, vaccines and pharmaceutical products.

Ji said this is concerning given that BBC has expanded its influence through projects like the Trusted News Initiative (TNI), a self-described “industry partnership” that worked with Big Tech forms to identify “misinformation” and “disinformation” on their platforms.

Claiming to combat misinformation about COVID-19, TNI’s work has been tied to suppressing viewpoints that contradict the mainstream pharmaceutical and governmental stance on public health, like those of GreenMedInfo and Children’s Health Defense (CHD).

“The revelations regarding USAID’s funding of BBC Media Action and its role in the Trusted News Initiative (TNI) further solidify what many of us have long suspected: Censorship is no longer a covert operation but a fully integrated transnational enterprise designed to suppress dissent and monopolize narratives,” Ji told The Defender.

CHD is one of several plaintiffs in a lawsuit against TNI, alleging the initiative violated antitrust laws and the U.S. Constitution when its members collectively colluded with tech giants to censor online news.

Fang reported on Substack about other “anti-disinformation” groups financed by the “sprawling” USAID that have targeted American journalists and politicians. These include the Zinc Network, which he said targeted reporter Max Blumenthal, politician Vivek Ramaswamy, and Rep. Andy Biggs, R-Ariz.

According to Fang, the USAID also funded v-Fluence, a pesticide industry public relations consultant, which dug up dirt on American food journalists — including Michael Pollan and Mark Bittman — who criticized industrial agriculture.

v-Fluence also ran a campaign to intimidate critics of toxic pesticides, targeting environmentalists Vandana Shiva and Nnimmo Bassey and reporter Carey Gillam as part of its broader effort “to downplay pesticide dangers, discredit opponents, and undermine international policymaking harmful to the pesticide industry,” The New Lede reported.

USAID also financed news outlets in Ukraine, including The New Voice of Ukraine, VoxUkraine, Detector Media, and the Institute of Mass Information, which spread rumors that Americans who favor peace negotiations with Russia are agents of the Kremlin, Fang wrote. The media outlets targeted Jeffrey Sachs, Tucker Carlson, Glenn Greenwald and John Mearsheimer, Fang reported.

Fang said the influence of those groups “extends far beyond” Ukraine. VoxUkraine is an official Meta fact-checking partner, he said, and Detector Media produces disinformation reports that circulate widely in Western media.

“Despite branding as independent outlets, these organizations are heavily reliant on USAID,” Fang wrote.

USAID also funds the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP), a major — if largely unknown – organization that works with dozens of major newspapers to publish major investigative stories.

Drop Site News revealed in an investigative report published in December 2024 that OCCRP, which it called “one of the world’s most influential global investigative news organizations,” has received more than half of its funding from the U.S. government, largely through USAID.

The investigation found that funding gives the U.S. government direct influence over editorial and personnel decisions at the outlet.

Fang also reported that USAID’s sister nonprofit, the National Endowment for Democracy funds Coda Story, an anti-disinformation news outlet in New York.

Shellenberger said in a video posted on X that USAID’s work also extended beyond funding news agencies to promote ideas favorable to U.S. interests. It also included developing intelligence tactics abroad that it then used domestically to counter misinformation.

Shellenberger said:

“To combat alleged misinformation, the censorship industrial complex used counter-terrorism and intelligence tactics developed abroad, including psychological operations and repurposed them to shape domestic opinion and thought. …

“USAID has, in recent years, been funding censorship worldwide through its countering disinformation program, which is part of its consortium for elections and political process strengthening. This work has included funding for so-called fact-checking organizations.”

Claims about Politico may be overblown, but USAID must be investigated

As the revelations about USAID’s funding to journalism went viral, former Fox News producer Kyle Becker reported on X that Politico had received $8.1 million from the agency and that USAID’s funding freeze had led to a payroll problem at the outlet.

His claims went viral and provoked dismissive fact-checks by mainstream media organizations.

Fang said that according to USAID contract records, the agency paid $44,000 for subscription services to the news service. Politico, like other outlets including Bloomberg and LexisNexis, offers high-priced data-industry news subscriptions for tens of thousands of dollars.

The $8.1 million figure came from all government subscription payments to Politico — not just from USAID — and there is no evidence the USAID funding freeze was related to the payroll issue at the outlet.

The $8.1 figure, however, has highlighted the fact that most mainstream news organizations, including The New York Times, Reuters, and The Associated Press receive significant income from various government agencies through subscriptions and other funding.

And USAID does fund many “questionable news operations,” globally that ought to be subject to scrutiny, Fang wrote:

“And unlike Politico, there is actual evidence that the freeze on USAID spending is impacting the American government’s quasi-shadowy constellation of news operations all over the world.

“Voice of America reported ‘independent news outlets’ in more than 30 countries, including Austria, Ukraine, and Myanmar, are facing cuts or are at risk of shutting down over the USAID freeze. Ironically, of course, Voice of America is also funded by American taxpayers.”

Ji said that subjecting these organizations to scrutiny and defunding them is an important step, “but only if it leads to widespread public awareness and systemic resistance.”

Organizations like BBC Media and others can find new sources of funding, “unless there is mass rejection of their authority.”

“The key is decentralization — building alternative platforms, supporting independent journalism, and challenging censorship through legal and political action. The exposure of these ties is a wake-up call: free speech is under siege, and only a vigilant, informed public can reclaim it,” he said.

Related articles in The Defender

• Biden Administration Funding AI Tools to Censor Americans’ Speech
• CHD Sues Major Media Organizations Alleging Free Speech and Antitrust Violations