Sign up for The Media Today, CJR’s daily newsletter.
In the aftermath of this week’s get-together between Tony Blair and President Bush, it was widely reported (by the AP, Forbes, and USA Today, among others) that Bush had pledged an additional $674 million to famine-stricken African nations. Only a handful of reporters pointed out that there was nothing additional about the money at all: the president was merely releasing funds that had already been approved by Congress earlier this year. But when it comes to aid issues, this type of budgetary sleight-of-hand dazzles the media all too often.
The Boston Globe, for instance, noted on Wednesday: “Bush also criticized ‘big talkers’ who speak of doing more for Africa, but who have not given as much as the United States, which has dramatically increased aid to Africa since 2000, and now gives roughly twice as much as any other donor.”
Well, that’s one way of putting it. The U.S. may be the biggest donor in dollar terms, but proportionally speaking, it’s one of the stingiest. According to the Council on Foreign Relations, American aid represents about 0.1 of GDP — that’s one-tenth of one percent — making the U.S. the least-generous developed country around. Outside the U.S., this is a frequently-reported fact; but here, a 2001 University of Maryland poll found, most Americans believe that their government lavishes 24 percent of the federal budget on poor nations.
The way to bridge this perception gap is by questioning the numbers; those who did (like the Minneapolis Star Tribune) quickly found out who the “big talkers” really are. But most of the press left the talk unexamined.
–Rachel Morris
Has America ever needed a media defender more than now? Help us by joining CJR today.
