Public Relations and Propaganda: Restrictions on Executive Agency Activities (CRS Report for Congress)
Premium Purchase PDF for $24.95 (18 pages)
add to cart or
subscribe for unlimited access
Pro Premium subscribers have free access to our full library of CRS reports.
Subscribe today, or
request a demo to learn more.
| Release Date |
Revised May 24, 2005 |
| Report Number |
RL32750 |
| Report Type |
Report |
| Authors |
Kevin R. Kosar, Government and Finance Division |
| Source Agency |
Congressional Research Service |
| Older Revisions |
-
Premium Revised March 21, 2005 (15 pages, $24.95)
add
-
Premium Revised Feb. 8, 2005 (13 pages, $24.95)
add
-
Premium Feb. 2, 2005 (13 pages, $24.95)
add
|
Summary:
Controversies recently have arisen over certain executive branch agencies' expenditures of
appropriated funds on public relations activities, some of which have been characterized as
propagandistic. Generally speaking, there are two legal restrictions on agency public relations
activities and propaganda. 5 U.S.C. 3107 prohibits the use of appropriated funds to hire publicity
experts. Appropriations law "publicity and propaganda" clauses restrict the use of funds for puffery
of an agency, purely partisan communications, and covert propaganda. No federal agency monitors
federal public relations activities, but a Member or Committee of Congress may ask the Government
Accountability Office (GAO) to examine an agency's expenditures on public relations activities with
a view to their legality. Any effort to reform current statutory restrictions on agency public relations
activities will face three challenges: tracking public relations activities by agencies, defining
"propaganda," and enforcing laws against agency use of funds for publicity experts and propaganda.
On January 26, 2005, H.R. 373 was introduced in the House of Representatives.
The bill would require a federal agency to notify the Congress no later than 30 days after entering
into a public relations contract, codify the publicity and propaganda clause and provide penalties for
violations of it, and require federal agencies to label their communications as having been paid for
with appropriated funds.
On February 2, 2005, S. 266 was introduced in the Senate. The bill would define
"publicity and propaganda," codify the types of communications that constitute publicity and
propaganda, provide financial penalties for executive agency officials who authorize the use of
appropriated funds for publicity and propaganda, empower both the Attorney General and private
citizens to bring civil actions against agency officials who authorize the use of appropriated funds
for publicity and propaganda, and provide "whistleblower protection" from agency retribution for
employees who take actions in support of this law.
S. 967 was introduced on April 28, 2005. The bill would amend Part I of Title III
of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 301 et seq.) to require audio and video news releases
to contain announcements that inform viewers that the media segment they are viewing was
"produced by the U.S. government." S. 967 was referred to the Senate Committee on
Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
This report will be updated as events warrant.
