Foreign Relations of the United States, 1917–1972, Volume VII, Public Diplomacy, 1964–1968

50. Memorandum From the Acting Director of the Broadcasting Service, United States Information Agency (Adamson) to the Director (Rowan)¹

Washington, July 1, 1965

SUBJECT

• Comparison of East-West High Frequency Broadcasting Efforts

A radio frequency shortage, which has grown progressively more serious during the past few years, has now reached the point where the Agency’s broadcasting effort is hampered. The seriousness is such that I would like to recommend that the U.S. Government as a whole examine the assignment of responsibility for International Broadcasting to be certain that the limited frequencies are made available to the broadcasting interests deemed to have the most pressing need for them.

International Broadcasting is a highly competitive field. As you are aware, in the last eight years the world’s effort in this field has more than doubled. At the same time, the number of frequencies available for high frequency broadcasting has remained constant. Simply stated, the problem is one of supply and demand. Despite major technical efforts, it is no longer possible to find the large numbers of frequencies required to support the various independent high frequency broadcasting efforts which, in one way or another, come under the cloak of the United States.

While in Washington on June 21, Mrs. Norman Chandler of the Advisory Commission asked me specifically why both the Voice of America and Radio Free Europe were necessary. I explained to her the basic difference—that the Voice of America speaks for the United States and the government while Radio Free Europe offers a platform for political opposition in exile for Eastern European countries. While I may have been able to justify to Mrs. Chandler the continued existence of both VOA and RFE on the basis of their different missions, I could not answer the questions she asked regarding the relative importance of each. She indicated that the foundation she represents cannot vote to make a contribution to RFE until this question is answered.²

To the best of my knowledge, no attempt has ever been made to answer this question from the point of view of overall U.S. interests. Though I have mentioned VOA and Radio Free Europe, I feel we ought to seek the same answer for Radio Liberty, which broadcasts to the Soviet Union, but that we specifically exclude Armed Forces Radio which broadcasts only to our armed forces stationed overseas even though they do have an “eavesdropping audience”.

While RFE and Radio Liberty may appear to be compatible with VOA, because of their different missions, I am alarmed at the competition they are giving the VOA for radio frequencies. The competition is now so keen that in some cases VOA, RFE and Radio Liberty are interfering with each other and with the broadcasts of friendly countries. The interference being caused to the broadcasts of friendly foreign countries is of special concern to us since it blemishes, to a degree, the harmonious relationships that exist between the VOA and the broadcasting organizations of many of these countries. In addition, Radio Liberty and some of the broadcasts of RFE continue to be jammed by target countries. This often makes it impossible for the VOA to use adjacent frequencies without also being inadvertently jammed.

In a recent technical meeting, held to coordinate the seasonal broadcasting schedules of the various U.S. broadcasting organizations, it was noted that RFE and Radio Liberty in their broadcasts to Iron Curtain³ countries are using daily more than three times the frequency hours of either VOA or BBC. If for no other reason than the competition that now exists for frequencies, I feel we should push for an examination of the role of each, the relative effectiveness of each, and the share of the limited frequencies each should have to carry out its task.

Normally, we compare U.S. and Free World broadcasting efforts to Communist efforts in terms of radio program hours per week, but inasmuch as available frequencies are a major limiting factor, I am attaching for your examination a comparison of frequency hours used daily.⁴ In summary, the USSR, Communist China and the UAR use 1,727 frequency hours daily for international broadcasting, whereas United States broadcasters and the BBC use a total of 2,308. (U.S. broadcasters include the VOA, RFE, RLN, AFRTS and the private U.S. international broadcasting organizations WRUL, KGEI and WINB.)

It is significant that VOA broadcasting to the entire world in thirty-eight languages uses 815 frequency hours daily, while Radio Free Europe broadcasting only to Eastern Europe uses 461 and Radio Liberty broadcasting only to the Soviet Union uses 235.

National policy concerning International Broadcasting has not been reviewed, so far as I can determine, for a great number of years. I suggest that the time has come to review the relative importance of the efforts of VOA, RFE and Radio Liberty and to determine the relative priority for their use of the limited number of frequencies.

Keith E. Adamson⁵

1. Source: National Archives, RG 306, DIRCTR Subj Files, 1963–69, Bx 6–29 63–69: Acc: #72A5121, Entry UD WW 257, Box 24, Broadcasting Service—General, 1965. Confidential. An unknown hand wrote “CTR” and “For Mr. Marks” in the top right-hand corner of the memorandum. Both were crossed through presumably indicating that Rowan and Marks saw it.
2. Presumably a reference to the U.S. Advisory Commission on Information.
3. This term was used to describe the Soviet Union and Communist countries of Eastern Europe.
4. Attached but not printed is an undated, 1-page table entitled “Overall U.S. High Frequency Broadcasting Effort.”
5. Adamson signed his initials “K.E.A.” above this typed signature.