Jake Matthews: An Online Profile

 

    Like most Gen Z'ers, I have a large and well connected online presence. For me, each platform provides a unique look at my life in the moment. Facebook is how I connect with my family as they spread from North Carolina to Wisconsin to Texas to Nevada. Instagram, for me, is like Facebook but for my friends who I went to high school with and who I consider colleagues now at High Point University. Twitter is my political channel where I follow the news and my favorite politicians. LinkedIn is my professional portfolio where I connect with people in my intended career field and current colleagues at High Point University. Snapchat is so I can see the beautiful faces of my friends while we catch up and TikTok is my escape from reality where I can just chill and focus on watching other people. For me, social media and the internet is more than just about connections, it is about memorializing my life in the moment so no matter what happens, it will be documented somewhere.

    Facebook is for my family and occasionally political activity. While I maintain my Facebook activity for my grandparents, great grandparents, and family members spread across the United States, I also use it to flex my political opinions in my hometown. As someone who will go into politics, as long as I do not participate in particularly divisive rhetoric, this will not negatively impact my life. My home county is home to only 19,000 people spread across thousands of square miles. For us, Facebook is the main form of communication about our county's problems and solutions. Sure some post upset people, but more times than not, Facebook posts have led to seemingly positive change in my community. Facebook is also the main way political campaigns in my county operate since we are so spread out with so few people.

    Instagram is my Facebook for friends. Of my 1,111 followers, a majority are college friends and old high school classmates. Sure my family is active on Instagram, but for me, it is a platform to express my college life more freely. My posts are pictures of me and my friends without the inappropriate content that plagues so many people my age. Every once in a while I will post a set of pictures from an outing or hanging around with my friends. Not a political platform for me, Instagram is where I can freely express myself about things outside the realm of political issues. 

    Twitter, the black sheep of social media. For me, Twitter is a political avenue where I can keep up with breaking news, political drama, the occasional meme and sometimes I will give my 2 cents. Twitter has cause trouble for most people in the political world. Thus, I am more careful about my Twitter content than I am on other platforms. My followers include friends, politicians, political campaigns, and some spam accounts. I keep my Twitter clean and it should honestly be a model for my other social media accounts. 

    LinkedIn is my personal baby, my pride and joy. I have spent countless hours polishing my LinkedIn, growing my connections, and expanding my personal brand. Solely used for professional and academic updates, my LinkedIn has prepared me for a job in the world of politics and branding. My network spans from High Point University to the White House and everywhere in between. I am most proud of my LinkedIn and I take pride in the way that it looks and the message it portrays about me.

    For most, social media can be a toxic relationship. For me, it is the opposite. When you do not compare yourself to others and simply be yourself and post content that you are confident in, it can be a great stress reliever. While for me social media is seen as a positive, I can understand and am aware of the impact that social media has on society. In 2019, Brett Kavanaugh underwent the most disgusting Supreme Court confirmation process in American history over allegations with no proof and over yearbook writings. Today, every individual aged 25 and young has an internet and social media presence that can be exploited for profit or political grain.

Smith-Mundt Act: Government Sanctioned Propaganda

 

    First introduced in 1945- ironically after defeating the Nazi propaganda machine in WWII- the Smith-Mundt Act was introduced in the United States House of Representatives by Republican congressman Karl Mundt of South Dakota. It was not until 1948 that the act was signed into law by Democrat president Harry S. Truman. The Smith-Mundt Act would later be modernized in 2012 by Republican congressman Mac Thornberry of Texas. 

    The original intent of the legislation was to allow for the United States government to sanction pro-America propaganda abroad. Initially a weapon used to combat the spread of Communism and the Soviet Union during the Cold War, the impact of the Smith-Mundt Act is still being felt throughout the world. The act commissioned the 'Voice of America' radio broadcast abroad. Commonly referred to as the 'VOA,' this broadcast is still commissioned abroad in foreign territories. 

    The original Smith-Mundt Act called for 'the creation of an information service to disseminate abroad information about the United States, its people, and policies." This legislation essentially introduced American propaganda to people in countries that were unaware of American values and ways of life. It has escaped the controversy that most legislation experiences and has not faced backlash from opponents; it is not mainstream enough a problem to cause trouble.

    

    In 2012, the Smith-Mundt Act, like most legislation, underwent a modernization. Republican congressman Mac Thornberry of Texas introduced the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act. Formally known as 'United States Information and Educational Exchange Act' this modernization called for an amendment to the original legislation to allow for the dissemination of pro-America propaganda within the borders of the United States.

    Signed in 2012 by Democrat president Barack Obama, the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act passed through the House of Representatives with little opposition. Proponents of the modernization act claim that allowing for domestic broadcast allows for a more efficient way to disseminate propaganda abroad. Opponent to the legislation claim that the Voice of America will be used as a fourth arm of the United States government to push pro-America propaganda against its own people.

 

    The Smith-Mundt Act, and its subsequent modernization act, are not well known to the majority of American citizens. The Voice of America is not a mainstream news source known by people. Despite being a political science major, this is the first I have ever heard of this legislation and the Voice of America.

    Many feared, during the Trump years, that President Donald Trump would use the Voice of America broadcast (both foreign and domestic) as a pro-Trump broadcast rather than pro-America. Though not used by the president himself, the Voice of America has been used by presidents of the past to push policy agenda's abroad. 

    This legislation does not have any noticeable impacts on the average American. Not known to most, the Smith-Mundt Act has not led to controversial media coverage or criticism by regular people. The VOA is a radio broadcast meant to spew pro-American information in foreign countries mainly targeting pro-Communist regimes. Most people are not even aware this is a thing as the passage of the amendment did not make top news headlines- this being said, most people are unaware of these changes so it is nearly impossible to measure positive, or negative, impacts on Americans.

Critics Fret About Smith-Mundt Modernization Act | CSC Center for Strategic Communication

Smith-Mundt reform: In with a whimper?

Smith-Mundt Act – USAGM

HR5736 - 112th Congress (2011-2012): Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012 | Congress.gov | Library of Congress