The past few days have shown two examples of government’s trying to take for itself a journalistic role.

First is from Foreign Policy:

For decades, a so-called anti-propaganda law prevented the U.S. government’s mammoth broadcasting arm from delivering programming to American audiences. But on July 2, that came silently to an end with the implementation of a new reform passed in January. The result: an unleashing of thousands of hours per week of government-funded radio and TV programs for domestic U.S. consumption in a reform initially criticized as a green light for U.S. domestic propaganda efforts. So what just happened?

Until this month, a vast ocean of U.S. programming produced by the Broadcasting Board of Governors such as Voice of America, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, and the Middle East Broadcasting Networks could only be viewed or listened to at broadcast quality in foreign countries. The programming varies in tone and quality, but its breadth is vast: It’s viewed in more than 100 countries in 61 languages. The topics covered include human rights abuses in Iran, self-immolation in Tibet, human trafficking across Asia, and on-the-ground reporting in Egypt and Iraq.

The restriction of these broadcasts was due to the Smith-Mundt Act, a long-standing piece of legislation that has been amended numerous times over the years, perhaps most consequentially by Arkansas Senator J. William Fulbright. In the 1970s, Fulbright was no friend of VOA and Radio Free Europe, and moved to restrict them from domestic distribution, saying they “should be given the opportunity to take their rightful place in the graveyard of Cold War relics.” Fulbright’s amendment to Smith-Mundt was bolstered in 1985 by Nebraska Senator Edward Zorinsky, who argued that such “propaganda” should be kept out of America as to distinguish the U.S. “from the Soviet Union where domestic propaganda is a principal government activity.” …

BBG spokeswoman Lynne Weil insists BBG is not a propaganda outlet, and its flagship services such as VOA “present fair and accurate news.”

“They don’t shy away from stories that don’t shed the best light on the United States,” she told The Cable. She pointed to the charters of VOA and RFE: “Our journalists provide what many people cannot get locally: uncensored news, responsible discussion, and open debate.”

A former U.S. government source with knowledge of the BBG says the organization is no Pravda, but it does advance U.S. interests in more subtle ways. In Somalia, for instance, VOA serves as counterprogramming to outlets peddling anti-American or jihadist sentiment. “Somalis have three options for news,” the source said, “word of mouth, al-Shabab, or VOA Somalia.”

This partially explains the push to allow BBG broadcasts on local radio stations in the United States. The agency wants to reach diaspora communities, such as St. Paul, Minnesota’s significant Somali expat community. “Those people can get al-Shabab, they can get Russia Today, but they couldn’t get access to their taxpayer-funded news sources like VOA Somalia,” the source said. “It was silly.”

Lynne added that the reform has a transparency benefit as well. “Now Americans will be able to know more about what they are paying for with their tax dollars — greater transparency is a win-win for all involved,” she said. And so with that we have the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012, which passed as part of the 2013 National Defense Authorization Act, and went into effect this month.

So far, there is some validity to this. Larger metro areas do have significant populations of those who came to America to escape, for instance, Somalia, who don’t know English very well yet. I bet at least half of Americans don’t even know what Voice of America is, since they can’t hear it here. There is truth to Weil’s statement about “what many people cannot get locally: uncensored news, responsible discussion, and open debate,” though that is not for the Obama administration to define.

The problem is …

Last year, two USA Today journalists were ensnared in a propaganda campaign after reporting about millions of dollars in back taxes owed by the Pentagon’s top propaganda contractor in Afghanistan. Eventually, one of the co-owners of the firm confessed to creating phony websites and Twitter accounts to smear the journalists anonymously. Additionally, just this month, the Washington Post exposed a counter-propaganda program by the Pentagon that recommended posting comments on a U.S. website run by a Somali expat with readers opposing al-Shabab. “Today, the military is more focused on manipulating news and commentary on the Internet, especially social media, by posting material and images without necessarily claiming ownership,” reported the Post.

… that if you give the government an inch, as with too many areas to count, it will take 10 miles. One commenter presents a scenario:

Soon we’ll see the “suggestions” to run this “content” getting stronger. Between license renewals, environmental impact statements for new studios or antenna installations, access to lawmakers and the President, press junket invites, and all the rest, if the government wants stations to run it, they will. Keep in mind the increasing media consolidation too – most “local” TV stations, and even more so, local radio stations, are not truly local. There are only a few big companies that have to be influenced in order to get the latest from VOA into the news. Regarding that consolidation, the anti-trust division of the Justice Department gets its yea-or-nay.

As it is, there are too many journalists who take anything said by or at any level of government without any questions at all.

Which brings us to something I’m not leery about at all, reported by Wisconsin Reporter:

The federal government is handing out $1.77 million to 16 community health centers throughout the Badger State to help promote Obamacare.

The Health Resources and Services Administration, an arm of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, said the health centers “expect to hire 40 additional workers, who will assist 26,474 people” in enrolling in Obamacare or other government health coverage like BadgerCare.

HHS announced the grants on Wednesday. The federal government plans to spend more than $150 million in grants to 1,100 heath centers and clinics across the county.

Yes, I’m not leery about this all. “Leery” means you have doubts. I don’t. I know this is a horrible idea. It’s domestic propaganda meant to make ObamaCare popular with the public that sees “Free!” and nothing else. And at $44,250 per job, that’s pretty good pay in a state where the average income is about $20,000 less. Perhaps that’s the Obama administration’s definition of job creation, but with our tax dollars, of course.

When I correctly observe that government is too large, I’m occasionally asked, and often in a snarky manner, what I’d favor cutting. The snarks usually don’t expect an answer, but I have several. In addition to everyone with the title “executive assistant” (political appointees of their boss) who works in state government, the state should eliminate most, if not all, positions with titles similar to “public information officer.” Media relations — that is, self-promotion of your little corner of the bureaucracy — is not a core function of government. Making the media’s job easier by spoon-feeding information to reporters is not a core function of government either.

Maybe if the media had to work harder to get information from the government, the media might take its proper role as skeptics of what government does more seriously.