The U.S. State Department’s Global Engagement Center (GEC) has closed its doors, leaving many folks talking about what this means for our country.
Officially, the GEC was created to fight foreign propaganda and disinformation, but it’s been criticized for overreach and possibly stepping on the toes of free speech. Now that the funding has dried up, it’s time to have a conversation about what this means for us as Americans.
The GEC’s mission, at least on paper, sounds like something we’d all get behind. Who wouldn’t want to counter fake news or keep foreign powers from meddling in our country?
The idea was to identify and push back against propaganda from places like China or Russia. But here’s the thing: when the government starts deciding what counts as “disinformation,” it’s a slippery slope. Critics have argued that this kind of program can end up targeting voices that simply disagree with those in power.
Think about it this way: if you’re having a debate at your local coffee shop and someone decides they’re the referee of what’s true or not, it changes the whole conversation.
That’s how some people felt about the GEC. They worried that, instead of just fighting foreign influence, it might be used to influence what Americans could say or hear.
Now, supporters of the GEC argue that in today’s digital world, we need some way to counter misinformation. They’ll point out examples of foreign governments spreading fake stories to sow division here in the U.S.
And let’s be honest, social media has made it easier than ever for lies to spread faster than the truth. But even if the goal is good, the method matters. If the government takes on the role of “truth police,” where does it end?
A recent poll by Pew Research found that 62% of Americans are concerned about the government’s role in policing misinformation. That’s a pretty strong indicator that folks value free speech and don’t want Big Brother deciding what’s true.
After all, the First Amendment is about protecting speech—even speech we might not like—because the alternative is letting someone else decide for us.
The GEC’s shutdown has some people worried, though. They fear that without it, foreign actors will have a field day spreading lies unchecked.
But here’s a question worth asking: do we really need a government program to tell us what’s true? Or can we rely on free speech and open debate to sort out the facts from the fiction?
Take a look at how we handle fake news in our personal lives. When we see something sketchy online, most of us check it out before we believe it. Maybe we look for multiple sources or ask a friend.
It’s not perfect, but it’s better than putting all the power in the hands of bureaucrats who may have their own agendas.
There’s also the question of cost. Programs like the GEC don’t come cheap.
With a national debt over $33 trillion, every dollar spent by the government should face serious scrutiny. Is it really worth funding a program that’s controversial at best and potentially harmful to free speech at worst? Many fiscal conservatives would say no.
Critics of the GEC’s closure argue that we’re leaving ourselves vulnerable. They point to examples of Russian bots on social media or Chinese-funded outlets spreading propaganda.
But these aren’t new problems, and Americans have faced similar challenges before without sacrificing our freedoms. During the Cold War, for example, the U.S. countered Soviet propaganda through public diplomacy and by promoting the truth—not by censoring speech.
At the end of the day, the GEC’s closure gives us a chance to reflect on what kind of country we want to be.
Do we want a government that protects free speech by staying out of the truth-telling business? Or do we want one that tries to control the narrative, even with good intentions? Most of us would probably say we want the former.
As neighbors, parents, and citizens, we have a role to play here.
We can teach our kids to think critically, question what they see online, and value honest conversations. We can support independent journalism and hold media companies accountable without handing over the reins to Washington.
Because at the end of the day, a free society is one where ideas—even bad ones—are debated, not censored.
So, while some may lament the GEC’s closure, others see it as a win for freedom. It’s a reminder that sometimes the best way to protect what we hold dear isn’t by expanding government but by trusting the people.
After all, when it comes to figuring out the truth, Americans have been doing just fine for over 200 years without anyone holding a “disinformation” badge.
This article was written with the assistance of AI. Please verify information and consult additional sources as needed.