We Can't Get the *US State Department's Propaganda* Out of Our Head

The Unseen Impact of a little known 2012 legislation

For the Full Podcast click here

In today's hyper-connected world, it often feels like we can't escape the relentless flow of information. Whether scrolling through social media, watching the news, or just trying to relax with some entertainment, the narratives that shape our understanding of the world are everywhere. And if you feel like these messages are increasingly polished, on-brand, and extra division focused—well, that's no accident. Welcome to the world post-Smith-Mundt Modernization Act (SMMA), where the U.S. State Department is now playing a more significant role in the content we consume than most of us realize.

The Quiet Revolution: What Is SMMA?

Back in 1948, the original Smith-Mundt Act was passed to help the United States fight the ideological battle of the Cold War by disseminating information abroad. The law explicitly prohibited the U.S. government from broadcasting its content domestically, a safeguard to ensure that propaganda aimed at foreign audiences wouldn’t be turned inward on American citizens.

Fast forward to 2012, when the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act quietly passed as part of the National Defense Authorization Act. This update lifted those long-standing restrictions, allowing U.S. government-produced content—previously intended for foreign eyes only—to be broadcast directly to American audiences. That means the US State Department has been funding propaganda, against Americans, since 2012.

Why did this change happen? The world had changed. The lines between foreign and domestic media were increasingly blurred by the internet and social media, and the government argued it needed the flexibility to communicate effectively with both domestic and international audiences.

The State Department in the Digital Age

What does this mean for us today? It means that the narratives crafted by the State Department are no longer confined to foreign airwaves. They're part of the media landscape we navigate every day. The polished videos, the emotionally resonant stories, the social media campaigns that seem to echo our values—many of these may be products of the State Department’s expanded toolkit.

This isn't about obvious propaganda. It's about the subtle shaping of narratives, the gentle steering of public opinion, and the seamless blending of government messaging into the everyday media diet of Americans. It's about the State Department’s new ability to ensure that its version of the American story is the one we're hearing, whether we're aware of it or not.

The Implications: A New Kind of Influence

The Smith-Mundt Modernization Act has created a media environment where the U.S. government can—and does—engage directly with American citizens in ways that were once forbidden. The implications are profound. On one hand, it allows for a more cohesive national narrative, a unified voice that can counteract disinformation and present a strong front both domestically and internationally.

On the other hand, it raises important questions about the role of government in shaping the media we consume. What happens when the line between information and persuasion becomes so thin that we can no longer tell the difference? When the content designed to influence foreign minds is also shaping our own, how do we maintain a healthy skepticism and a critical eye?

Activism in America has undergone a significant transformation over the past few decades. In the late 1990s and early 2000s, movements like the Seattle WTO protests in 1999 and Occupy Wall Street (OWS) in 2011 were characterized by a strong anti-corporate sentiment. These movements rallied against the power of multinational corporations, economic inequality, and the influence of big money in politics. However, following the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act (SMMA) of 2012, the landscape of activism began to change in subtle yet profound ways. This case study explores how government influence, particularly through digital platforms, has reshaped activism, shifting its focus from corporate power to social divisions, often driven by covert operations.

Activism Pre-SMMA: A Unified Front Against Corporate Power

• Seattle '99: The 1999 WTO protests in Seattle marked a high point in global anti-corporate activism. Protesters from various backgrounds came together to challenge the World Trade Organization's policies, which they argued favored corporate interests over workers' rights, environmental protection, and democratic processes. The movement was decentralized, grassroots, and focused on the global impact of corporate capitalism.
• Occupy Wall Street 2011: Over a decade later, OWS captured the world's attention with its critique of economic inequality and corporate greed. The movement’s slogan, "We are the 99%," encapsulated the frustration of ordinary Americans with a system that seemed rigged in favor of the wealthiest 1%. OWS was notable for its use of social media to organize and communicate, reflecting the growing importance of digital platforms in modern activism.

Both Seattle '99 and OWS were primarily anti-corporate, with activists targeting the concentration of economic power in the hands of a few. The movements were united by a common enemy—corporate influence in politics and the economy.

Post-SMMA: The Rise of Government-Influenced Division

The passage of the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act in 2012 marked a turning point in how the U.S. government engaged with domestic audiences. By lifting restrictions on the domestic dissemination of government-produced content, the SMMA allowed for a new kind of influence campaign—one that could be directed at American citizens through the same digital platforms that had empowered grassroots movements like OWS.

The Role of Government Bots and Digital Influence

• Elgin AFB and Reddit 2013: A revealing incident occurred in 2013 when it was discovered that Elgin Air Force Base (AFB) in Florida was the city most addicted to Reddit . This anomaly raised eyebrows because Elgin AFB is not a typical urban area with a large civilian population. The truth behind this finding was that government operatives, using Elgin AFB as a base of operations, were engaging in online influence campaigns without proper use of VPNs, inadvertently exposing their activities.
• Race Divisions and Social Discord: After the SMMA, there was a noticeable shift in the focus of activism. Instead of uniting against corporate power, movements became increasingly divided along racial and social lines. Investigations and leaked documents have since suggested that government-run bots and troll farms played a role in exacerbating these divisions. By stoking racial tensions and amplifying divisive content on social media, these operations created a fragmented activist landscape, where identity politics often overshadowed broader economic concerns.

The Impact on Modern Activism

The shift from anti-corporate activism to a focus on race and identity has had profound implications for the effectiveness and unity of social movements in America. While issues of race and identity are undeniably important, the government’s role in driving these narratives raises questions about the authenticity of these movements and their long-term goals.

• Fragmentation of Activist Efforts: The post-SMMA era has seen a fragmentation of activism, with movements often divided along racial and ideological lines. This fragmentation has made it more challenging to build broad coalitions that can effect significant change, as was seen in the anti-corporate movements of the late 1990s and early 2000s.
• The Illusion of Grassroots Movements: The involvement of government operatives in shaping online discourse has blurred the line between genuine grassroots activism and state-sponsored influence campaigns. As a result, the public’s trust in social movements has eroded, with many questioning the motivations behind popular narratives.

Conclusion: A New Era of Collective Action

The evolution of activism in America mirrors the shifting dynamics between the state, corporations, and the public. In the past, anti-corporate movements brought together diverse communities around shared economic concerns, creating powerful coalitions for change. However, the post-SMMA era has introduced new challenges, with activism becoming more fragmented and increasingly influenced by external forces.

As we move forward, the key to effective activism lies in recognizing these influences and finding ways to unite around common goals that transcend divisions. This is where Restore-a-thon comes in. Restore-a-thon is designed to bridge these gaps by fostering collaboration across sectors—bringing together corporations, government entities, and grassroots organizations to solve real social problems through collective action.

In this new landscape, Restore-a-thon offers a platform where diverse stakeholders can come together to address pressing issues, free from the fragmentation and external manipulation that often hinders modern movements. By understanding the impact of the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act and the complex interplay between government, media, and the public, Restore-a-thon creates a space where authentic, community-driven solutions can thrive.

Join us at Restore-a-thon, where we’re not just navigating the new era of activism—we’re defining it. Together, we can build a future where collective action leads to meaningful, sustainable change.

To hear more about the politics of Unity, listen to this Political Hope podcast with Indy Rishi Singh on how we can act together for unification.

YouTube

https://youtu.be/sdDsHAVb0SM

Spotify

https://open.spotify.com/episode/0EwxfMm4GEP7jvgYAAbjtP

Apple

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/110-restory-fication-with-jon-connors

Audible

https://www.audible.com/podcast/110-Restory-fication-with-Jon-Connors/B0DFKCBNCR

About the Author:

Jon Connors is a writer, entrepreneur, and founder of LessTax.US and Restore-a-thon, with a keen interest in the intersection of media, technology, and public policy. He is passionate about exploring the implications of government influence in the digital age and helping others navigate the complex landscape of modern media.