In 1948, as the Cold War was taking shape, the United States passed the Smith–Mundt Act, officially known as the U.S. Information and Educational Exchange Act. Its purpose was simple but profound: empower the U.S. government to produce and distribute information and cultural programming abroad to promote American values, while explicitly forbidding the use of those same propaganda tools on the American public. This legal firewall reflected a deep suspicion of government-run information campaigns at home, rooted in lessons from World War II.During the war, the U.S. and its allies had learned firsthand how powerful propaganda could be. Britain’s BBC World Service provided trusted broadcasts into occupied Europe. Japan’s “Tokyo Rose” and Germany’s “Lord Haw-Haw” used radio to weaken enemy morale. The U.S. Office of War Information produced posters, films, and broadcasts for both domestic and foreign audiences. By 1948, lawmakers wanted America to compete in the global battle for hearts and minds—but without turning those tools inward.Under Smith–Mundt, outlets like Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Europe could beam uncensored news into the Eastern Bloc, Africa, and Asia. U.S. embassies could distribute pamphlets promoting democracy abroad. But none of this material could legally be disseminated to Americans at home. The separation was strict: VOA could broadcast to Cuba or the USSR—but not to Kansas. This was about trust. Citizens needed to believe their news media was independent of government influence.For decades, the system held. Propaganda was for “export only.” Domestic audiences got their information from private media, foreign audiences from U.S. state-sponsored broadcasters. But the digital revolution eroded these boundaries. By the early 2000s, a radio segment for Afghan listeners could be uploaded to YouTube and viewed in Cleveland the same day. Social media made it impossible to stop foreign-directed content from “boomeranging” back home.In 2013, the Smith–Mundt Modernization Act took effect, removing the ban on domestic access to foreign-targeted U.S. content. The State Department and U.S. Agency for Global Media (USAGM) could now make VOA, Radio Free Asia, and other materials available in the United States. Supporters argued the change was about transparency—acknowledging the internet had already made the old firewall meaningless. Critics saw a dangerous precedent: legalizing domestic exposure to state-crafted narratives.The stakes are high because propaganda is not just a relic of the past—it’s a core pillar of modern statecraft. Political scientist Joseph Nye’s concept of “soft power” captures the idea: nations shape outcomes through attraction and persuasion, not just coercion. During the Cold War, the U.S. invested heavily in cultural diplomacy, educational exchanges like Fulbright, and media operations like Radio Liberty. Other nations played the same game: Britain’s BBC World Service, Russia’s Radio Moscow and later RT, China’s CGTN, and even North Korea’s border loudspeakers aimed at the South.Today, the boundaries have vanished. U.S. government content streams online alongside private news and foreign state media. Russian social media campaigns, Chinese video platforms, and American-funded broadcasters all compete for attention in the same feeds. In 2025, North Korea dismantled its last propaganda loudspeaker—but the global information war has only grown louder in digital form.The Smith–Mundt firewall was designed for a world of clear borders and controlled media channels. That world is gone. The 2013 rollback aligned the law with technological reality, but it also erased the formal assurance that Americans would be free from their own government’s influence campaigns. In the 21st century, the battle for hearts and minds has no borders—every message is now for everyone, everywhere, all at once.

Ver todos los episodios