logo
In U.S. retreat from global media, Arab language network is latest casualty

In U.S. retreat from global media, Arab language network is latest casualty

Yahoo03-05-2025

The message was contrite but direct. 'I'm heartbroken. If you're receiving this letter, I'm letting you go — effective immediately.'
The email came from Jeffrey Gedmin, head of Middle East Broadcasting Networks,or MBN, the nonprofit overseeing the U.S.-government-funded, Arab-language news channel Alhurra.
It was April 12, and the email in the inbox of 500 of Alhurra's employees was another move by the Trump administration and its Elon Musk-led Department of Government Efficiency to shut down U.S.-funded media initiatives abroad. Alhurra, which received around $112 million in 2024 from Congress, joined other state-supported outlets, including Voice of America and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, which had their funding frozen.
Done in DOGE's chainsaw-signature style, the cuts have disrupted the lives of journalists both in Alhurra's Middle Eastern bureaus and its Virginia headquarters, leaving them with no severance or compensation. Dozens who had permits to work in the U.S. are unsure if they can remain in America.
When news about Alhurra filtered out — along with talk that even MBN might shut down — many observers saw it as an own goal, a misguided rollback of U.S. soft power in the Middle East.
The Committee to Protect Journalists, which is helping MBN with legal representation to restore its funding, called the cutbacks "a betrayal of the U.S.'s historical commitment to press freedom."
In a statement, Gedmin said, 'Media in the Middle East thrive on a diet of anti-Americanism. It makes no sense to kill MBN as a sensible alternative and open the field to American adversaries and Islamic extremists.'
But interviews with critics — including many from Alhurra and MBN's own ranks — reveal a more complicated story.
Though many insist they believe in MBN's mission to bring a pro-American perspective to the region, few mourn it in its current form. Others say Alhurra withered under an unclear mandate that never allowed the channel to find its identity and therefore audiences.
Some even agreed with Kari Lake, the pugnacious advisor Trump appointed to oversee the Agency for Global Media, which provides funding for news programming abroad. Lake recently described her new workplace as 'irretrievably broken,' where 'waste, fraud and abuse run rampant.'
'It was a relief to me when the grant was canceled because I didn't want my taxes, as little as they are, contributing to somebody's six-figure income that sucks in their work,' said a former employee who was involved in reviewing MBN's finances and who left last May. 'We didn't have to scratch very deep. We were finding things that were very disturbing."
Like many interviewed for this article, the former employee refused to have his name used to avoid reprisals. He accused MBN management of entering into needless, multimillion-dollar expansions of bureaus that went wildly over budget, all amid a culture of cronyism that often left the wrong people in place for too long.
The April firings continued a downsizing that began in September, when Congress mandated a $20-million cut to MBN's budget, forcing management to fire 160 employees and merge Alhurra with its Iraq-focused satellite news channel, Alhurra Iraq. In March, though Congress had approved MBN's budget through the end of the 2025 fiscal year, Lake blocked the disbursement to MBN a few hours later.
'I'm left to conclude that she is deliberately starving us of the money we need to pay you, our dedicated and hard-working staff,' he said in the email. Along with Alhurra, MBN supports other news outlets.
Rather than shut down and declare bankruptcy, Gedmin decided to keep Alhurra on-air with a truncated schedule — mostly broadcasting evergreen content and reruns — and a skeleton staff of 30 to 50 people. It was a gamble, Gedmin said in an interview this week, that would 'buy time for the courts.'
'If we win this in court and eventually have funding, we would pay some severance and restore some staff,' Gedmin said.
Read more: Trump signs executive order directing federal funding cuts to PBS and NPR
Susan Baumel, a former interview producer at MBN, said in an article published on the National Press Club website last month she and her colleagues were fired before the courts decided if the Trump administration acted legally, unlike staff at other U.S.-funded outlets which were put on leave.
(On Tuesday, a federal judge ordered the administration to release $12 million it had cut from Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. The administration, he ruled, could not unilaterally revoke funding approved by Congress.)
An email sent in March from a former employee in the finance department to top management which was reviewed by The Times said MBN had $8 million in its accounts, including $4.7 million that could have been used to cover unused annual leave and partial severance. The employee also wonders why some bureaus continued to operate despite loss of funding. By April, according to a WhatsApp conservation between former employees reviewed by The Times, the balance had fallen to $4.2 million.
MBN leadership, including Gedmin and the MBN board chair, former Ambassador Ryan Crocker, insist the networks will pay annual leave and end-of-service to all employees terminated last month.
Many of those laid off resent the decision to continue broadcasting, saying Gedmin knew Lake was unwilling to deal with current management, and that he and his colleagues should have stepped down weeks earlier.
'I consider that the money they used to continue [operating] was supposed to be for us, and we were neglected and our professional life destroyed so they could keep on broadcasting,' said one correspondent who worked in the Beirut bureau for six years. 'We weren't given a safe exit, to have one or two months to search for a new job. We were thrown out on the street — that's how I see it.'
Another correspondent who worked with Alhurra Iraq since 2008 characterized the firings differently.
MBN managers "basically took us as hostages so they could face the Trump administration,' he said.
Meanwhile, around 40 Alhurra employees in the U.S. on work visas must leave the country before May 12. All U.S.-based staff lost healthcare benefits at the end of April.
When President George W. Bush began Alhurra in 2004, he said it would "cut through the barriers of hateful propaganda" and act as a counterweight to what U.S. officials considered the pernicious coverage of Al Jazeera.
But launched one year after the disastrous invasion of Iraq, it faced an uphill battle.
"It was tainted, in the first place, as the mouthpiece of the American administration, placed before audiences that are already skeptical of political affiliations of any media,' said Zahera Harb, an expert on Arab media at City University in London.
'The idea you can win hearts and minds through propaganda and information by telling people how good the U.S. is — it was never going to work,' said Shibley Telhami, a University of Maryland professor and an Arab polling data expert.
'It was not a main source of news," said Telhami, who served on a Bush-era commission evaluating Alhurra's performance. "Our research showed that less than 2% of people watched it. And that's probably charitable.'
MBN claims Alhurra and its other outlets reach a combined 33.5 million people per week, but a 2023 study from the University of San Diego's Center for Public Diplomacy found that it never exceeded 27 million weekly views for the last decade.
The same study found Alhurra's share of adult Arab audiences shrank by half, from 17% in 2005 to 8.8% in 2022.
At the same time, complaints of corruption have long dogged the network. A 2009 ProPublica investigation found much of the hiring based on cronyism and office politics rather than on qualifications — a scenario all former employees interviewed for this article say still persists.
Alhurra is subject to the same forces afflicting all TV networks, with audiences increasingly finding their news on TikTok and YouTube. But even during big news events, including the war in Gaza, Alhurra live broadcasts never managed more than 167 viewers, said one former employee in the Dubai bureau.
'And 100 of those screens are people inside our studios. So who is really watching you, 20, 25 people?' she said. 'And that's probably the censors.'
Read more: Between censorship and chaos: Syrian artists wary of new regime
Gedmin, who became interim head of MBN last April and took the reins in October, acknowledges MBN's defects, but said he believed the networks were on the path to a turnaround before Lake's intervention.
None of the former employees interviewed had faith MBN's current leadership could improve.
Others question the very premise of a government-funded channel being independent.
James O'Shea, who served as chairman of MBN's board between 2022 until 2024, said, "One of the things I walked away with is I don't know if you can do this with government.'
O'Shea, a former editor of The Times, remembered how at one news meeting, Alhurra journalists were chastised for talking to Hamas representatives, because such interviews drew the ire of congressional officials.
'You can't ignore a major part of the story. Alhurra was set up to be independent, but it wasn't,' he said. He added that the 'tragedy' of Alhurra was that 'an Arabic-language news operation, with an objective, journalistic voice is really needed in the region.'
"The best thing you can do is promote the American kind of journalism: Not controlled by any government, and which adheres to the principles of the 1st Amendment."
Sign up for Essential California for news, features and recommendations from the L.A. Times and beyond in your inbox six days a week.
This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump-Musk split could leave Tesla politically homeless
Trump-Musk split could leave Tesla politically homeless

E&E News

time11 minutes ago

  • E&E News

Trump-Musk split could leave Tesla politically homeless

The spectacular breakup between Elon Musk and President Donald Trump threatens to leave Tesla with few political friends. Musk has spent the past few months alienating the electric automaker's base of climate-minded car buyers by moonlighting as Trump's government-slasher-in-chief. Now, the billionaire's fixation on the GOP megabill has opened a dangerous rift with the president, who threatened Thursday to end all subsidies to Musk's companies. Tesla's stock had its largest one-day drop in history Thursday as Musk and Trump sniped at each other from their respective social media platforms. The share price fell more than 14 percent, lopping off more than $150 billion from Tesla's market value — and, according to Bloomberg, tanking Musk's personal net worth by $34 billion. Advertisement The core of the argument between the two men — whether the Republican spending package is a 'big, beautiful bill' or a 'MOUNTAIN of DISGUSTING PORK' — is a side concern for people whose main priority is Tesla. 'The CEO of that company needs to spend his time focused on the company's success,' said Nick Nigro, the head of Atlas Public Policy, which analyzes the electric vehicle market. 'Whether his interest in federal policy comes from a good place, it's a distraction from what Tesla shareholders and drivers need, which is his full attention.' Seth Abramson, a vociferous Musk critic who is writing a book about the entrepreneur, wrote on X that 'Musk will go the rest of his life without a political home or patron, shunned by politicians of both parties and therefore unable to effectively operate as a CEO of any company.' The breakup between the world's richest man and one of its most powerful could have far-reaching impacts for Musk's companies. Investor optimism about Tesla has been based on the assumption that Musk's proximity to power would lead to a national policy on autonomous vehicles that would ease the arrival of Tesla's robotaxi, which is supposed to hit the roads of Austin, Texas, this month. Musk could also lose leverage on other issues important to Tesla, such as Trump's tariffs on China's critical minerals. Meanwhile, his space company SpaceX has billions of dollars of federal defense and space contracts — now at risk — while its satellite subsidiary Starlink is angling for billions more in federal broadband subsidies. 'Attack mode' Tesla is still the country's largest electric automaker. But the Trump-Musk split comes at a vulnerable moment for both Tesla and electric vehicles writ large. The company is facing declining sales around the world, as its vehicle lineup has grown stale and Musk's political activities have turned off many EV buyers in Europe and North America. Meanwhile, federal support for EVs is hanging by a thread. The House's version of the megabill would drastically scale back Biden-era tax incentives meant to stimulate EV manufacturing and sales. The fight between Trump and Musk escalated on Thursday after Trump told reporters that Musk was 'upset' about the House-passed bill's proposal to remove EV tax credits and other incentives. Musk took to X to deny that narrative, writing: 'Keep the EV/solar incentives cuts in the bill, also cut all the crazy spending increases in the Big Ugly Bill so that America doesn't go bankrupt!' The president's repeated attacks on EVs and vows to repeal the Biden administration's subsidies certainly didn't seem to trouble Musk much during last year's campaign, when the megabillionaire spent more than $270 million and countless hours to help put Trump back into the White House. (Trump did concede at the time that Tesla made a 'great product.') Musk's apparent willingness to sacrifice federal incentives was unwelcome news to clean energy and EV advocates who hope Republican senators will save some of the tax credits from the Democrats' 2022 climate law. Republicans can afford to lose only three votes in the Senate, and some GOP senators have indicated they think the bill's rollbacks go too far. The war of words between Trump and Musk ended any hopes that the Tesla CEO would have the leverage with the White House to tip the scales. 'Elon was 'wearing thin,' I asked him to leave, I took away his EV Mandate that forced everyone to buy Electric Cars that nobody else wanted (that he knew for months I was going to do!), and he just went CRAZY!' Trump posted on his social media site, Truth Social. That statement was a far cry from three months ago, when Trump made a show of buying a Tesla in front of the White House. That gesture raised hopes among some Tesla shareholders that Republicans would embrace Tesla and compensate for its diminished popularity among Democrats, many of whom had taken to staging protests outside its showrooms. 'I'm going to buy because No. 1, it's a great product, as good as it gets. And No. 2, because this man has devoted his energy and his life to doing this, I think he's been treated very unfairly by a very small group of people,' Trump said at the time about Musk. Now, that's all changed. 'Trump no longer has to say nice things about Tesla and EVs,' said Loren McDonald, an EV analyst at Paren, an EV data shop. 'He and the admin can go back to EVs are evil attack mode.' Critical minerals and beyond The fizzled bromance could also have far-reaching ripple effects on myriad, complex relationships that Tesla has across the globe, as well as its business before the federal government. Musk, for example, will presumably hold no sway over the administration's intended move to impose steep tariffs on imports of Chinese graphite used to make EV batteries. The Commerce Department concluded last month that imported Chinese graphite is receiving unfair subsidizes. The agency laid out a plan to impose tariffs of up to 721 percent on some natural and artificial graphite active anode material from China that's used in batteries. Tesla has fought against the tariffs, with one of the company's attorneys pointing out that U.S. manufacturers don't yet produce anode material that meets carmakers' standards. The fallout could also put a bulls-eye on Musk's financial ties to Beijing, something Democrats have repeatedly railed against. The Trump administration and lawmakers from both parties are pushing to ease China's grip on supply chains, from the production of critical minerals to processing and manufacturing of EV batteries. Yet Tesla has many ties to China, including reliance on graphite imports, a gigafactory located in Shanghai, and ongoing work with Contemporary Amperex Technology. CATL, the world's largest battery-maker, is on a U.S. government list of companies that work with the Chinese military. In short, nothing on Thursday boded well for America's leading electric automaker. 'It's another Twilight Zone moment in this Musk/Trump relationship which now is quickly moving downhill,' wrote Dan Ives, an analyst at investment shop Wedbush Securities who tracks Tesla. But Ives nonetheless remained hopeful. The subject line of his email: 'Friends Again Soon?' Hannah Northey contributed to this report. This story also appears in Climatewire.

New York's climate goals are teetering. Trump could knock them over.
New York's climate goals are teetering. Trump could knock them over.

E&E News

time11 minutes ago

  • E&E News

New York's climate goals are teetering. Trump could knock them over.

Donald Trump is stress testing New York's climate goals. The Empire State was already struggling to meet its ambitious climate targets before Trump returned to the White House in January. Renewable deployments lagged. Transportation emissions barely budged. And concerns over rising energy bills pushed emission reductions down state leaders' priority list. Trump has only added to those difficulties. The president quickly took aim at a state plan to limit the number of vehicles entering Manhattan after reassuming office. He followed up by temporarily halting construction of an offshore wind project that would connect to the electric grid in Brooklyn. His price for lifting the halt: building a pair of pipelines that the state had previously rejected. Advertisement The result is a showdown over one of the country's most ambitious climate plans. Trump and business interests contend new gas pipelines are needed to lower energy costs, bolster economic growth and help household budgets. One pipeline developer, Williams Cos., recently refiled a permit with federal regulators for an expansion of an existing line and has signaled it may resubmit plans for a second new line. 'The President is unleashing the might of American energy and lowering costs for the American people,' White House spokesperson Harrison Fields said in a statement. 'Increasing the flow of U.S. natural gas is vitally important for Americans living in the Northeast, and the President's leadership has successfully driven this critical pipeline to life.' Environmentalist say such moves are folly. Gas already generates roughly half the state's electricity and is the leading heating source for buildings. They maintain that burning more of it will not only blow a hole in the state's climate goals, but in consumers' wallets as well. Trump, a Manhattan real estate magnate, is simply seeking to make an example of his former home state, climate advocates say. 'New York has been a leader on climate and this administration is coming after progressive climate policy,' said Raya Salter, a climate advocate who serves on the state's Climate Action Council. 'That's why we need for our state to fight and push harder than ever and be the model that this country and the world needs.' The seeds of the current conflict were sown during Trump's first term, when New York blocked a pair of pipeline proposals and passed one of the country's most ambitious climate laws. The Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act, which passed in 2019, requires the state to cut emissions 40 percent compared to 1990 levels by 2030 and 85 percent by 2050. As part of its climate efforts, New York committed to generating 70 percent of its electricity from renewables by 2030. New York City enacted a ban on new gas hookups in new large buildings in 2024, a requirement that will extend to all new buildings by 2027. The state passed a new building code with a similar requirement, halting new gas hookups for most large new buildings in 2026 and nearly all new buildings by 2029. But hitting the state's targets would already be difficult, even without Trump's meddling. New York's greenhouse gas emissions were 9 percent below 1990 levels in 2022, according to the state's most recent figures, meaning the state will have to make huge strides to reach a 40 percent reduction by the end of the decade. Only a quarter of the power online today is considered renewable, and the vast majority of that is hydropower. Gas interests have challenged the ban on new hookups in court — and while New York City won a court challenge earlier this year, appeals are expected. Emissions from transportation, New York's largest single source of climate pollution, have hardly moved. In 1990, New York's transportation emissions amounted to 70 million tons of carbon dioxide. In 2022, they were 71 million tons, or about 40 percent of New York's total greenhouse emissions, according to the state's figures. Rising costs New York's difficulty cutting carbon has been compounded by rising energy costs. While most of the U.S. saw natural gas prices fall in 2024, New York and New England were exceptions. Gas prices in New York increased by 14 percent compared to 2023, according to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's annual state of the markets report. Electricity prices also increased 17 percent in the New York City area, though they remained below their five-year average. Rising costs have become a pressing political issue in Albany. In a sign of the growing political pressure, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul, a Democrat, blasted the utility Consolidated Edison in February for proposing an 11 percent increase in electricity rates and a 13 percent increase in gas rates. The difficulty cutting emissions and Hochul's increasing focus on affordability has caused concern among environmentalists, many of whom were already skeptical of the governor's commitment to climate. 'New York has really good climate goals on paper, but the Hochul administration has a long way to go to implement the greenhouse gas commitments the state has already made,' said Judith Enck, who served as EPA Region 2 Administrator in the Obama administration. Those frustrations come with new ones from the Trump administration. The first signs of trouble between the president and his native state came over New York's congestion pricing plan to limit traffic below 60th Street in Manhattan and raise revenue for its ailing public transportation system. Trump rescinded support for the federal program in February, drawing an immediate legal challenge from the state. Last week, a federal judge issued a temporary restraining order barring Trump from ending the program while the case is heard. Congestion pricing is not a climate policy, per se. But its backers say it has the added benefit of reducing emissions. A March paper by researchers at Stanford University estimated it had reduced the emissions rates of vehicles traveling in the city's central business district by 2 to 3 percent. As New York works to reduce traffic, it is also attempting to connect a major offshore wind project to Brooklyn homes. Empire Wind 1, which began offshore construction on its 54 turbines in March, is slated to provide enough electricity to 500,000 homes. Offshore wind is a centerpiece of New York's climate and energy plans. The state has a goal of bringing 9,000 megawatts of offshore wind capacity online by 2035. But its plans have been frustrated by rising interest rates and construction costs, which have forced the state to cancel a series of contracts to buy power from offshore wind developments. Empire Wind 1 is one of two offshore wind projects that would add about 1,700 MW of offshore wind capacity to the state's power grid. But in April, Interior Secretary Doug Burgum halted the project, claiming its permit approval had been rushed by the Biden administration. Hochul lobbied Trump hard to lift the stop work order, saying the project was essential for creating jobs and powering the economy. The president ultimately agreed, saying he did so in exchange for permitting new pipeline capacity into the state. Hochul disputes that, even as she signaled she is open to new pipelines that can demonstrate a need for the gas and meet the state's permitting requirements. Many greens doubt Hochul. 'I think this was a deal with the devil that was unnecessary,' Enck said. She predicted the state would have won if it had challenged the stop-work order in court. 'It is deeply disappointing. Of course we want offshore wind, but not at the price of more fracked gas.' Paul DeMichele, a Hochul spokesperson, said the governor 'is embracing an energy policy of abundance to make electricity more affordable and meet the growing demand of businesses looking to expand here — which includes her recent successful effort to save Empire Wind from the federal government's attempt to shut it down.' But if environmentalists saw a sellout, business interests saw a potentially groundbreaking compromise that could end more than a decade of pipeline fights in the Northeast. An attractive gas market A recent S&P Global Study commissioned by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce concluded an additional 0.5 billion cubic feet per day of gas capacity into New York would decrease wholesale gas prices by 17 percent. Williams' Northeast Supply Enhancement project — or NESE — would add 0.4 bcf per day of additional capacity. 'It seems natural to me that we could be arriving at a bargain like this,' said Dan Byers, vice president for policy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's Global Energy Institute. 'It's hard to think of a clearer example of a self-inflicted economic pain than blocking pipelines to limit supply of gas to your own citizens.' When Williams' initially proposed NESE in 2017, it struck an agreement to supply a pair of National Grid subsidiaries in the New York City area for heating consumption. Today's push comes at a time when New York is trying to wean itself off gas consumption in buildings. A National Grid spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment. Tulsa, Oklahoma-based Williams contends the additional capacity would not only lower gas prices for consumers, but bolster the reliability of the state's electric grid, which can be strained during the winter months when New York's limited gas pipeline network labors to keep up with heating and power demand. Many gas plants in the state are equipped with oil tanks and switch over to the fuel during periods of cold. Williams has also signaled it plans to revive the Constitution Pipeline project, which would run 127 miles from Pennsylvania toward Albany. 'The NESE and Constitution projects are essential to address persistent natural gas supply constraints in the Northeast, constraints that have led to higher energy costs for consumers and increased reliance on higher-emission fuels like fuel oil,' the company said in a statement. Gas drillers in Pennsylvania view New York and New England as attractive markets because the region boasts some of the highest gas prices in the country, said Ira Joseph, a longtime gas analyst and senior research associate at Columbia University's Center on Global Energy Policy. New York's relative proximity is also attractive for Pennsylvania producers who now ship much of their gas to the Gulf Coast, where it is liquefied and exported abroad as LNG, he said. New York's electrification mandates could limit gas demand growth in the future. The question is whether they will cause gas demand in buildings to fall, he said, adding,'the goal of moving pipelines into New York state is not to have gas demand fall.' Consumers would likely benefit in the form of lower prices, but it would likely come at the expense of the state's climate goals, Joseph said. 'It's going to be hard to reach the goals if you keep building infrastructure to expand consumption,' he said.

Trump's high-speed rail attacks are boosting Democratic support
Trump's high-speed rail attacks are boosting Democratic support

E&E News

time11 minutes ago

  • E&E News

Trump's high-speed rail attacks are boosting Democratic support

President Donald Trump is about to snatch $4 billion away from California's high-speed rail project — and all that's doing is reinforcing Democrats' iron-willed support for the beleaguered venture. The Trump administration said Wednesday — in the form of a 300-page report — that it's on the verge of nixing Biden-era grants for the planned rail line from Los Angeles to the Bay Area, a conclusion state officials have feared since the president put the project in his crosshairs in February. Rather than being a death knell for a project that's years behind schedule and has a price tag that's ballooned from $33 billion to as much as $128 billion, Trump's attacks are fortifying state Democrats who hold the purse strings to its largest funding source — the state's emissions trading program for greenhouse gases. Advertisement 'We've seen this coming and we're going to do everything we can to prevent it,' said state Senate Budget Chair Scott Wiener. 'Regardless of what happens here, we're committed to making this project a reality.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store