booktv, 48 hours of book programming beginning saturday morning at 8 eastern through monday morning at 8 eastern. nonfiction books all weekend, every weekend right here on c-span2. >> here's a look at some of what's ahead today on c-span2. next, "the communicators" with voice of america director david ensor on the future plans for his organization. then a panel of federal and state appeals court judges give some insight into the decision making process. after that, a senate hearing on the economic challenges facing native americans, and later the senate's back at 2 p.m. eastern for an hour of general speeches followed by debate on fiscal year 2012 spending for energy and water development, financial services and foreign operations. >> this week on "the communicators," a discussion about the future of voice of america with voa's new director,

david ensor. >> host: david ensor, how would you describe the mission of voa and how it's evolved over the last 50, 60 years? >> guest: you know, the mission has actually stayed pretty much the same since 1942 when we went on the air, on february 1, 1942, and that is to try to provide a truthful and accurate news broadcast to all the different countries that we broadcast to, and also to explain to them what's going on in the united states and what, what this country's all about. that mission has remained the same, but the way that we do it has changed dramatically, and right now it's changing because the ways humans are communicating with each other are changing so rapidly at the moment. so where the history, most people think of voa as a broadcaster on short wave with the huddled masses in eastern europe listening on a radio and listening at the door if secret police might come, that's kind

of an out-of-date image. we're on facebook, we're on twitter, we're on satellite tv, we're on fm radio. we have a lot of affiliates around the world. stations that use us as kind of a washington news bureau for them. so we're finding new ways to communicate with people, but the mission has pretty much stayed the same which is to give a truthful picture of what's going on in the world n many cases in countries where that is not being done by anyone else. >> host: using these new platforms the way voa is, do you lose control over whether or not your message gets out if. >> guest: well, you know, the extent to whether or not it gets out is obviously of great importance to us, and it is difficult to do that in countries like north korea or iran. we don't have good audience data to know how many north koreans might have heard a broadcast, we have to interview people who have escaped. but we do have ways of know anything a lot of places, even

iran, that the broadcasts are really very popular, and they fill a need. so we're very pleased by that. now n freer countries like, for example, our most successful country right now is indonesia, 38 million people are hearing or seeing something from voice of america every week in indonesia. and we've got pretty accurate data because most of that is television, and what we're doing is providing reports that go on end news yang newscasts. and they've got good audience figures. so that's we know we have a lot of viewers this. >> host: how is voa structured, and who are some of your sister stations? >> guest: well, voice of america is one of several u.s.-funded international broadcasters, and we all come under something called the broadcasting board of governors. their structure is that there are, there are four democrats and four republicans, and then

there's the tie breaker which is the secretary of state. so a fifth democrat. and under them are voice of america, radio free europe, radio free asia, the middle east broadcasting network and the office of cuban broadcasting which is tv and radio. so we have sister networks. and the plan of this board is to try to consol tate them more. -- consolidate them more. their vision is to have, eventually, one company, many brands. this will save money, and it will rationalize and consolidate and streamline u.s. international broadcasting overseas because like the rest of the federal government or those who are funded by the federal government, these are tight times for us in terms of budgets, and we have to do more with less. >> host: what's the current voa budget, and how many employees? >> guest: we have a budget of $208 million, and the number of employees is, i think it's 1200

at the moment. then there are contractors and stringers beyond that. >> host: joining us in the conversation with david ensor who is the director of the voice of america, the new director of the voice of america, is keach hagey of "politico." >> host: hi, david, thanks so much for doing this. >> guest: thank you. >> host: you allude today the transformation that's going on, but what's that transformation going to mean to voice of america specifically, and, um, we've heard a little bit about them phasing out some of the chinese services, croatian services, why are those changes being made? >> guest: well, you know, there's -- we live in a constantly changing world. we no longer broadcast to france or germany or western europe because there isn't a need to, and when you have just so much money, you want the reach the key audiences. so one of the reasons that we sometimes drop a language service is because it really

isn't -- i mean, croatia, for example, is about to join the e.u.. it's already a member of nato. things are going relatively well, and there's a lot of free media there. china's another story. my feeling is that there's a very, very great need for our voice to be heard in china. and we're going to be looking at creative ways to try to reach more of the chinese people with voice of america. i'm expecting that that will include not so much short-wave radio which our data shows is really not reaching very many people anymore in china though it still reaches some, but more in terms of satellite television. we'll be doing a lot of work on the internet, and we will use internet circumvention techniques to try to make sure that people are able to see what we put on the internet even when there are attempts made by the government to prevent them from

doing so. >> host: many americans looked at the arab spring and saw that the real media force there were for private things like facebook and twitter. that was accomplishing many of the sensible goals of things like voice of america. given that, why should the taxpayer keep paying these, the same size budget for something like voice of america and other broadcasting board of governors' projects? >> you know what? we give great value for the dollar. we're one of the most cost effective national security institutions that the united states has. we're, we cost less than the wig on a fighter jet -- wing on a fighter jet, and we reach key audiences that can't be reached any other way. take iran, for example. the united states has no diplomatic relations with that country, there's no trade, there's no exchanges, there's no diplomacy virtually. what there is is voice of america broadcasts which reach -- for example, our satirical show reaches, to our

knowledge, more than 19 million iranians. it's the most popular show in iran on television even though the iranian government tries to jam the satellite broadcasts and makes other efforts to make itless easy to see. it's wildly lahr. our other news broadcasts to iran are also providing a very useful service, and it's one way americans have of reaching the iranian people. so it's, frankly, very cost effective and very much needed. >> host: david ensor, you mentioned the iranian show. we want to show just a little bit from their appearance on the daily show. >> i had to have the freedom that i wanted to have inside my home. and when i want to go out, i had to lie all the time, you know? ingso this kind of lifestyle thi had and lots of people of my

generation they have right now inside iran cause all this anger, revenge and everything. but with we're trying to transform all of this into humor and say whatever we want to say with this dark, angry humor, but in a civil way, you know? >> ahmadinejad came to columbia, one of the most well respected schools of all time, and he stood in front of the whole world and said, there are no gays in iran. that's all you need to ask. from then on, you have the show. [laughter] >> host: david ensor, where is that show produced, where do they broadcast from, and what platforms do you use to get them broadcast in iran? >> guest: the show is produced in our studios just a few blocks from here in washington, d.c., and there's a big creative team at pnn, person news service that

we founded and that is part of voice of america. very creative young people in many cases, and it's just a lively look at the news, irreverent, satirical. they make fun of ayatollahs, but they make fun of anybody, basically. it's a kind of a different attempt to reach a different demographic, if you will, and it's been wildly successful. but we also have very serious newscasts that try to give the iranian people some perspective on what's happening in the world and how their government is viewed by others. >> host: just to kind of peg off what keach was asking about when it comes to china or iran, if you're using the internet or facebook or some of these other platforms, respect those easier to -- aren't those easier to shut down than short-wave radio? >> guest: not really, no, actually, they're not. because there's always a way of circumventing it. there's always another web site, there's another way of working around it.

so while you can stop a particular route and you can censor a particular way of downloading the internet, people are enormously creative. the chinese people, the russian people and others, and they are good at finding our message. and we have some creative people looking to make sure that they will be able to. so it's a cat and mouse game, if you will. but the mouse has plenty of ways of getting around. >> host: keach hagey. >> host: so here in the u.s. we, of course, by law can't consume voice of america. you've spent a lot of your career overseas, most recently at the u.s. embassy in kabul. how did people perceive voice of america in the countries where you have worked as a journalist and as a diplomat? >> guest: well, i was very impressed by the way voice of america and radio free europe, our sister network, were able to be effective in afghanistan. our audience, our audience

estimate in afghanistan is we have approximately eight million people who see a voa product each week. most of those are probably watching our television show which is on prime time weeknights at 6:30 p.m. on the state television network. and it's half an hour in dari and half an hour in pashtun, the two main languages of the country. it's produced near washington, but it has a lot of guests from afghanistan. it's a serious, well written broadcast. and it's very, very effective. so i used to, i used to work in trying to develop public diplomacy tools in afghanistan, and i always felt that i was not going to be able to beat what voa was doing there. enormously popular broadcast and very useful. you mentioned that people can't see voa here in the united states, and that's true. there's a law against our prosthelytizing, if you will, to our fellow americans.

and that's fine, although because of the internet everything's porous now. if somebody wants to see what we're doing, they can. um, and, actually, the current board is planning to ask congress for some amendments to something called the smith-mundt act under which we're not supposed to broadcast to the u.s. we've got commercial station in minnesota saying to us, look, we have a substantial somali refugee, we have a lot of somali immigrants in our state, and be right now they miss voa which they used to see in somalia. right now they can't see it. so as we, as our world become more and more global, we think it may behoove congress, and we may ask them to do so, to make some changes to modernize that law so that we can reach audiences that speak other languages but are in the united states.

>> host: and at the same time, um, there's so many other foreign government-owned media that have set up shop here in the u.s. in the last few years -- france 24, al-jazeera, russia today, just recently china's cc tv is starting here in d.c. >> guest: sure. >> host: how does voa compete in this scrum, and do you see it doing the same kinds of things as these other foreign-owned media? >> guest: well, clearly, other governments have decided that having a voice, having their own television or radio network is worth it. and it's something that is important. they've copied us in a way. and in many cases they have a lot more money with which to do this kind of thing. so we find ourselves in a very competitive environment. we are concerned about that. but, you know, i like our message. i think our reputation for trying to tell the truth, though we don't always succeed, is very high. we have a 70-year tradition at

voice of america of trying to get the story right. and believing in fairness and objectivity. and although you never achieve it, that's a good goal. and we have, you know, a proud history of broadcasting to the communist world and perhaps playing a role in the end of that terrible system. now there are, you know, more discussions, more debates among humankind. we're in a with battle of perces and ideas that will never end. now we have to worry ri about a kind of a sick distortion of islam that certain terrorist groups have come up with, and we need to respond to that with facts. we also need to explain our own country. if we don't, others will do it for us. >> host: now, if david ensor's voice or face looks familiar to you, that's because he spent 32 years in television and radio news, five years with national

public radio, nearly 20 years with abc news, foreign correspondent in many different locations including many communist countries, and then about eight years with cnn as their national security correspondent. he became director of voa on august 1, 2011. david ensor, you mentioned the islam issue. in pakistan voa is starting a new service. how are you developing that service, and how is it different from what you've done in the past? >> guest: pakistan's a very difficult country because the relationship between the united states and pakistan is a difficult one. we are allies, but it's contentious. it, in no other place is it more important for voice of america and for our sister stations to try and reach an audience in pakistan. we're doing it by finding

affiliates, by finding pakistani radio and television stations that would like to, that are willing to have a broadcast with us or put something on the air that we've produced. um, there's a program called "the platform" which we co-produce with a pakistani program that's kind of a bridge program, if you will, where there'll be somebody in the studio in washington, and someone in he here, and they have a debate about the issues. i think that kind of programming is just absolutely crucial. and it's something i hope we can increase while i'm director. >> host: a couple years ago the government accountability office issued a pretty critical report about the broadcasting board of governors in general of which voa's a part and complained that by having spent $10 billion since september 11th, negative views of the u.s. still persist in foreign polling. why do you think that is, and have you seen any signs to

suggest in the last couple years that that's turning a corner in any way? >> guest: well, obviously, we would like to have positive views of the united states. we're americans, and we're proud of it. um, and we are the voice of america. but we're not going to be able to, by ourselves, turn around negative polls if people feel strongly enough and if there are enough other sources of information coming at them, more propaganda coming at them. this is just one tool in the arsenal of the united states to reach those audiences. it's a very important one, but i can't take responsibility for the u.s. image as a whole. have we wasted money? frankly, i think we're very cost effective. i do think, though, that this is an institution that is in need of a larger image right now. mainly because the way human

beings communicate with each other is -- the ways are changing so rapidly. we really are in a communications revolution right now. think of the cell phone. i know in afghanistan, you know, six, seven years ago there were 10,000 cell phones. now there are depending on who's counting, 10 to 15 million of them. the goat herd has a cell phone, you know? and that is a platform with which one can reach people with news. it's not just a telephone, it's -- so we are now, we have a very successful internet program in the many different languages, and now we're building more and more web sites that are designed to be seen on a mobile device. and we're trying to improve and make more user-friendly those web sites. and we think that is a very important way to reach people in the future. and the present. >> part of the criticism from that report was that there were not good definitions of success

for bbg and for voa. how would you define success for voa at the moment? >> guest: you know, you have to take it almost country by country and program by program. is, are we reaching an audience? is the programming compelling? is it accurate? is it well produced? on a, frankly, by commercial standards where i used to come from on a shoe string budget, we do some pretty good stuff. but it is, it could be better. it could be a lot better, as a matter of fact. and we are having to move now more and more away from the old traditional short-wave radio into kind to have modern media which could be satellite television. it could also be finishing m radio. fm radio. you know, and fm radio has to be

broadcast locally. you can't do that from far away. so then you need affiliates. and you need friends in a country, you need a partner. so the way we work is changing. but the basic mission, as i said in the beginning, has stayed the same. >> host: well, david ensor, just to return to that point. we've seen examples this past year where egypt in their uprising, essentially, shut down the entire internet. the same happened in libya. china has done this on a regular basis. censored a lot of what happens over the internet. and you talked about the cat and mouse, but representative dana rohrabacher, a republican from california, has inserted language into a bill saying that voa must continue its short-wave broadcast into china because a of the censorship issues. how do you respond to that? >> guest: i should probably just speak for missouri on this issue. for myself on this issue. i certainly think china is one of our most important countries that we need to reach.

i don't think we're doing it at all well enough. i know that that feeling is shared by many at the bbg and throughout international broadcasting. we need to find better ways to reach china. we're working on it. um, i think satellite television has promise. there is a lot of work already being done in terms of internet reach and mobile device reach. and i think it's promising. short-wave radio, however, still reaches some people in china, and personally i think we should persist until we have a better way. but, you know, there are different view on that, frankly. you know, is it a waste of money, is it not a waste of money. there are people who think that broadcasting to china on short wave is a waste of money because the audience is so tiny. then there are others who say, well, each if you reach, you know, 200 dissidents in that vast country, it's still worth all those millions. well, you know, reasonable people can disagree.

as i say, i pledge to congressman roar backer and to the rest of those listening, we will look for ways to be more effective in china. that's the key. we want to reach as many of the chinese people as we can. >> host: increasingly, the defense department has been getting into the media business, running its own news service in place like north africa. how appropriate do you think that is because this is the state department, and how to you plan to coordinate with this to make sure there isn't overlap or conflicting messaging in some way? >> guest: you know, i'm so new to this job, i don't know too much about that, and so i'm going to, i'm going to have to look into it. i do know that, you know, our colleagues in uniform have a very effective public diplomacy effort that they make in various countries, and i wish them well. but i can't really answer your question until i know more about it. >> host: david ensor, let's go back to the arab uprising this

past year. what was voa's activities or continued activities in libya and with the events occurring regularly in syria as well, is voa active in those two arenas? >> guest: well, here's where i have to explain. voa broadcasts in 44 languages and reaches people in 60 countries, about 133 million at last count. but we don't broadcast in arabic anymore. our sister network, the middle east broadcasting network which hassal jura is the sort of air air -- arabic-speaking voice of the united states now. we work with them, we cooperate with them. al jura correspondents have been on voa area when they were in the right place, we were delighted to have them there. we do broadcast in english, we do have bureaus in the arab world that report the news out

of the arab world to our listeners in other parts of the world. >> host: david ensor, is the new director of the voice of america. keach hagey is with "politico." we have a few minutes left. ms. hagey. >> host: how committed is the obama administration to voa and public diplomacy compared to previous administrations in your experience? >> guest: well, i'm the new guy, and i've been hired during the term of president obama. and my sense is warm support from the administration for what we're trying to do. but, again, i vice president had much -- i haven't had much time yet to really learn the nuanced, more complex answer to that question. my sense is that they favor what we do, they understand it. i'm very, very supportive of and pleased that walter isakson is the chairman of the board of the broadcasting board of governors. he's a great american and a very wise person. he was, by the way, at one point

president of cnn, and i was working for him then too. >> host: and where do you think is the most fertile place for what voa does in today' world? >> guest: you actually raise an interesting question because we debate amongst ourselves, which is more important; to have more people or to have certain key countries listening? and, obviously, we want both. but you have to find your place on that continuum. on the one hand, voa's enormously effective on the continent of africa, and if we had a bit more money, we would want to spend it to try to build that audience further. and we may be able to do that, i'm hoping we can in the coming years. there's a real hunger for what we're offering in africa, and an important audience. for example, in the horn of africa right now where there's a drought and there are people starving, we are doing some innovative broadcasting to those refugees to tell them where's

water, where's shelter, where are you going to be safe. um, so on the one hand, if we might say that a key audience is africa because we can build and reach so many more people there if we try to build our service, and we'd like to do that. on the other hand, there are key countries. we talked about china, iran, pakistan, north korea. these are countries where it is in the national security interest to be able to reach the audiences of, and i think those are absolutely critical and that we should make every possible effort to reach more people in countries like those. >> host: and finally, david ensor, if americans listen to voa regularly, would they hear critiques of the united states and u.s. policies such as they would on abc, nbc, cbs or the national news? >> guest: yeah, they would. voice of america tries to present a balanced portrait of this country and its politics to

the rest of its world. during the watergate scandal, voice of america -- i've been told by those who were involved -- that voice of america's coverage was pretty hard hitting and that that helped a lot with foreign audiences. it helped them find us credible. we were looking at our own country, warts and all, with all the problems that were becoming evident because of the watergate scandal, and that gave us a certain credibility overseas. so, yes, we do report the good, the bad and the ugly, but we are americans, we're very proud of our country, and we're not ashamed of saying so as well. >> host: david end sor, the new director of the voice of america. thanks for being on "the communicators." keach hagey is with ""the politico." ". >> coming up, a panel at -- of state and federal appellate court judges. after that, a senate hearing on how current economic conditions are affecting native american communities. and later, the senate returns at 2 p.m. eastern for an hour of

general speeches followed by debate on fiscal year 2012 spending for energy and water development, financial services and foreign operations. no roll call votes scheduled for today. >> also today maryland governor martin o'malley who chairs the democratic governors' association talks about his group's approach to creating jobs and the role he and his democratic colleagues will play in next year's elections. you can see his remarks live at 10 a.m. eastern on our companion network, c-span. >> i want to make sure that we have taken every step possible to bring peace of mind to the family members of our fallen heros. and for that reason this review commission will look at the processes and procedures there and make sure that we are implementing the highest standards in dealing with the remains of our, of our