Which specific provisions did the 2013 Smith–Mundt Modernization Act amend or repeal?
Executive summary
The Smith–Mundt Modernization provisions were folded into the National Defense Authorization Act for FY2013 and primarily changed the domestic dissemination limits of the 1948 U.S. Information and Educational Exchange Act: they allowed the State Department and the Broadcasting Board of Governors (now USAGM) to make program materials prepared for foreign audiences available in the United States upon request and to respond to U.S. requests for that content [1] [2]. The change amended section 501 and related text to permit domestic access while preserving that the agencies must still focus on foreign audiences and remain subject to other statutory limits [1] [3].
1. What exactly was altered — the core legal tweak
The single, practical amendment inserted in the 2013 NDAA amended the Smith–Mundt framework to permit the Secretary of State and the Broadcasting Board of Governors to make available in the United States “motion pictures, films, video, audio, and other materials” that had been prepared for dissemination abroad and to disseminate such material domestically when consistent with applicable laws and standards [4] [1]. USAGM’s summary says Section 501 was amended in 2013 to permit program materials to be made available domestically, upon request, subject to statutory authorities and prohibitions [1].
2. What the change did not do — statutory boundaries retained
Advocates and agency statements emphasize that the amendment did not change the agencies’ enabling statute authorizing broadcasts for foreign audiences, nor did it authorize the agencies to shift their missions to target U.S. audiences proactively; the agency must continue to focus on overseas audiences and remains constrained by other statutory prohibitions [2] [1]. USAGM and academic commentary stress that the modernization was aimed at transparency and allowing legally-requested access rather than initiating domestic targeting [3] [2].
3. Which prior prohibition was most visibly affected
The most visible effect was the lifting of a longstanding prohibition on domestic dissemination of material produced for foreign audiences — the Smith–Mundt ban that, in practice, had limited how Voice of America and other U.S.-funded international broadcasters shared content inside the United States [5] [6]. Multiple commentaries and analyses note that the 2013 change allowed materials prepared under the U.S. Information and Educational Exchange Act of 1948 (and related statutes) to be released domestically [7] [8].
4. How Congress framed safeguards and limits in the amendment
Congress inserted qualifiers: dissemination within the U.S. was to occur “when appropriate” and “consistent with all statutory authorities, prohibitions, principles, and standards,” and the amendment specifically limited its application to the Department of State and the Broadcasting Board of Governors [1] [4]. The congressional bill text also clarified that the Foreign Relations Authorization Act prohibition on using funds “to influence public opinion” in the U.S. would continue to apply to programs carried out pursuant to specified international broadcasting statutes [4].
5. Points of dispute in public debate
Critics characterized the change as effectively repealing a 64‑year ban on domestic dissemination and raised concerns about “domestic propaganda” [7] [9]. Supporters argued the amendment modernized an outdated restriction that, in the internet era, simply prevented transparency and lawful access to government-funded international programming [3] [8]. The law’s sponsors and USAGM framed it as enabling responses to U.S. requests and improving transparency rather than authorizing domestic-targeted propaganda [2] [4].
6. What scholars and watchdogs note about real-world effect
Analyses after enactment said the modernization mostly allowed U.S. entities — broadcasters, universities, researchers, and the press — to request and receive U.S.-funded international programming and for Freedom of Information Act access in some cases; it did not create a free-for-all domestic broadcasting mandate [3] [1]. Scholarly reviews describe the amendment as “sparse” in language but consequential in lifting the prior distribution ban [6].
7. Limitations of available reporting and unanswered specifics
Available sources describe the primary textual outcome — allowing domestic availability and amending Section 501 — but do not provide the verbatim revised statutory text or a clause-by-clause comparison in these excerpts; for full legal drafting details one should consult the published NDAA language and the codified text of the Information and Educational Exchange Act [1] [4]. Available sources do not mention implementation guidance or examples of specific materials subsequently disseminated domestically beyond general agency statements [2] [3].
Bottom line: the 2013 Smith–Mundt Modernization change amended the Smith–Mundt prohibitions to permit the Department of State and the Broadcasting Board of Governors to make materials produced for foreign audiences available inside the United States upon request, while preserving mission constraints and other statutory safeguards — a narrow but legally significant shift that prompted heated debate over transparency versus the risk of domestic influence [1] [2] [7].