The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) has funneled nearly half a billion dollars through a secretive, U.S. government-financed non-governmental organization to manipulate media narratives and censor social media users, according to newly released documents from WikiLeaks.
The documents, released on Feb. 7, reveal that Internews Network (IN) received $472.6 million in U.S. government funding and has worked with 4,921 media outlets, producing 4,799 hours of broadcasts that reached up to 778 million people. In 2023 alone, the organization trained more than 9,000 journalists.
Internews claims to promote “free speech” in former Soviet states, but the documents indicate that its mission was far from neutral. Instead, the network focused on shaping narratives that aligned with U.S. geopolitical interests, particularly in support of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), a military alliance between North America and certain European countries.
WikiLeaks also revealed that since 2008, when electronic records first became available, the U.S. government has supplied more than 95% of Internews’ budget. Further documents show that the network’s budget has doubled over the past decade, raising questions about its true independence.
In addition to USAID funding, Internews has received $985,126 from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation since 2005. The foundation, known for its influence in global health and media initiatives, has been linked to efforts to combat what it calls “misinformation,” particularly in areas such as vaccines, public health policies, and political discourse.
Jeanne Bourgault, president and CEO of Internews, has been a vocal advocate for reshaping the global media landscape. Speaking at the World Economic Forum’s 2024 Annual Meeting, Bourgault called on the global advertising industry to redirect funding toward “good news and information” while combatting “disinformation.”
“Disinformation makes money,” Bourgault said. “We need to follow that money. … You can work really hard on inclusion lists or exclusion lists to sort of really try to focus ad dollars and challenge the global advertising industry all around the world to focus our ad dollars towards the good news and information.”
Bourgault, who earns an annual salary of $451,000 from Internews, previously worked for the U.S. Embassy in Moscow and directed USAID’s Office of Democratic Initiatives, according to her LinkedIn profile. Her deep ties to the U.S. government, coupled with Internews’ financial dependence on USAID, suggest that the organization operates less as an independent media advocate and more as an instrument of U.S. foreign policy.
Beyond shaping narratives in Eastern Europe and former Soviet states, Internews has been linked to efforts to influence social media policies. According to the documents, the organization has supported initiatives aimed at flagging and suppressing what it deems “disinformation” on platforms such as X (formerly Twitter), Facebook, and YouTube. These censorship efforts have often aligned with U.S. government interests, such as the war in Ukraine, the COVID-19 pandemic, and U.S. politics.
Critics argue that Internews’ operations reflect a broader strategy by the U.S. government to use NGOs as intermediaries to control public discourse while maintaining the appearance of independent journalism. By channeling funds through organizations like Internews, USAID can influence global media without direct state intervention, giving the illusion of organic, grassroots information networks.
The revelations add to growing concerns over the role of government-funded organizations in shaping online and traditional media narratives. Recent disclosures about USAID’s involvement in media development programs—often in politically sensitive regions—have drawn criticism from independent journalists and free speech advocates, who argue that such funding undermines genuine press freedom.
Moreover, Internews’ media influence extends beyond former Soviet states. The organization has funded training programs in Africa, the Middle East, and Latin America, where it has supported local news outlets that align with U.S. policy goals. In some cases, journalists trained by Internews have gone on to work for major international media outlets, further embedding U.S.-aligned narratives into global reporting.
The involvement of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation also raises questions about the intersection of public health advocacy and media control. Gates-funded projects have been at the center of vaccine promotion campaigns, and critics argue that funding media organizations creates conflicts of interest that discourage critical reporting on public health policies, pharmaceutical companies, and government mandates.
Internews’ expanding reach and deep entanglement with U.S. government funding paint a concerning picture of the modern media landscape. What appears to be a network of independent journalism organizations may instead be a sophisticated mechanism for influencing public perception under the guise of press freedom.
The extent of USAID’s financial support for media-related initiatives suggests that this is not an isolated case. Other organizations that receive U.S. government funding, such as the National Endowment for Democracy and Georgoe Soros’ Open Society Foundations, have also been accused of promoting specific ideological and geopolitical narratives under the banner of democracy and human rights.
As scrutiny over media manipulation grows, these latest revelations underscore the need for greater transparency in government-funded media initiatives. The role of NGOs like Internews in shaping global narratives warrants further investigation, particularly as governments and corporations continue to assert greater control over digital platforms and news dissemination.
With billions of dollars at stake and the power to shape public opinion on a global scale, the line between independent journalism and state-backed propaganda is becoming increasingly blurred. Data revealed by USAD suggests that much of the news we consume isn’t truly independent, it’s a result of a carefully orchestrated influence campaign.
