scholarly journals O sonho de Julius e Ethel Rosenberg: antissemitismo, opinião pública e a U.S. Information Agency.

2018 ◽  
Vol 24 (38) ◽  
pp. 470-487
Author(s):  
Júlio Barnez Pignata Cattai

No presente artigo, analisamos a atuação, no início dos anos 1950, da agência de informação e propaganda do governo dos EUA, a United States Information Agency, em relação ao processo movido na justiça do país contra o casal de judeus Julius e Ethel Rosenberg, acusados de espionagem em favor da União Soviética. Especificamente, analisamos a atuação de tal agência em dois importantes jornais brasileiros do período, o “Correio da Manhã” e a “Tribuna da Imprensa”. Mais do que discutir a singularidade do processo do casal Rosenberg, nosso objetivo é chamar atenção o fato de que, para além dos campos já conhecidos e consideravelmente explorados pela historiografia sobre a Guerra Fria, havia outro campo importante de disputa no período: o da propaganda cultural – no que a historiografia, notadamente estadunidense, tem chamado de “Cultural Cold War”.

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Riski Muhamad Baskoro

<p><em>Since the United States Information Agency (USIA) is no longer active to operate cultural diplomacy in the post-cold war, the concept of cultural diplomacy has experienced a time of crisis in the context of International Relations studies. For a decade, cultural diplomacy was marginalized and considered obsolete until finally in the early 2000s, cultural diplomacy was revived and activated both in practice and theory. Since then, cultural diplomacy has returned to its path. The discourse of cultural diplomacy in International Relations studies has developed to gain more specific activities. This is a qualitative research, with the aim of understanding cultural diplomacy in a more holistic way. The results of this study indicate a debate and a lack of consensus on several aspects of cultural diplomacy and bringing much unclear explanation.  This study also shows a dichotomy between cultural diplomacy and other approaches.</em></p>


2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 257-272
Author(s):  
Nicholas Cull ◽  

This article contends that just as an excess of conventional arms requires a disarmament processes, so the weaponization of media should be met with an information disarmament process. The article examines elements of this work deployed to assist in the US — Soviet rapprochement of the 1980s. Cases discussed include a mutual textbook review project, citizento-citizen conferences mounted by the Chautauqua Society and a series of forums held via satellite television links called Spacebridges. The emergence of government-to-government information talks in which the United States Information Agency led by Charles Z.Wick engaged various elements of the Soviet state media apparatus is traced. The meetings from 1986 through 1989 are summarized, including the frank discussion of the challenge of disinformation and of mutual stereotyping. It is asserted that this process was more effective than is generally remembered, but success required a rough symmetry within the US/Soviet relationship. The internal crisis within the USSR repositioned the country as a junior partner and led the US to misperceive the end of the Cold War in terms of victory and defeat, with counterproductive results.


This chapter introduces the main themes, objectives, scope, and sources underpinning this study of the Radio in the American Sector (RIAS). It also contextualizes this book within the larger body of scholarship relating to the American Cold War information programs managed largely under the auspices of agencies such as the United States Information Agency and its overseas incarnation, the United States Information Service. RIAS was created within months of the end of World War II to serve as the official broadcaster for the American sector of occupation in Berlin, and was later retooled as a propaganda operation designed to counter the Communist media organs operating in the Soviet Occupation Zone. Throughout the late 1940s and 1950s RIAS produced news and entertainment programs directed at listeners living behind the Iron Curtain in East Germany.


Author(s):  
Patrick Iber

During the Cold War, the United States and the Soviet Union each sought to portray their way of organizing society—liberal democracy or Communism, respectively—as materially and morally superior. In their bids for global leadership, each sponsored “front” groups that defended their priorities and values to audiences around the world. These campaigns frequently enrolled artists and intellectuals, whose lives, works, and prestige could be built up, torn down, exploited, or enhanced through their participation in these groups. Alongside overt diplomatic efforts, the United States funded a number of organizations secretly through the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). These efforts are often described as belonging to the “Cultural Cold War,” although the programs in fact supported overlapping networks that did anti-Communist work among labor unions, students, and others in addition to artists and intellectuals. The major CIA-sponsored group of intellectuals was the Congress for Cultural Freedom, established in 1950, and the “freedom” in its name was the major concept deployed by United States–aligned propagandists, to emphasize their differences from totalitarianism. The Cultural Cold War, as a program of psychological warfare conducted by the US government, grew out of the intersecting experiences of the left in the 1930s and the security apparatus of the United States at the dawn of the Cold War. The covert nature of the programs allowed them to evade scrutiny from the US Congress, and therefore to engage in activities that might otherwise have been stopped: working with people with radical political biographies or who still identified as “socialists,” or sponsoring avant-garde art, such as abstract expressionist painting. The programs spanned the globe, and grew in scope and ambition until their exposure in 1967. Subsequently, the United States has developed other mechanisms, such as the National Endowment for Democracy, to promote organizations within civil society that support its interests.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document