Throwing out the Daily NK baby with the USAID/NED bathwater?
Daily NK’s reporting is difficult to dismiss even if it follows a script - researchers and analysts can read between the lines.
ATTENTION! IN SEVERAL INSTANCES THIS PIECE MISTAKENLY USED “NK NEWS” INSTEAD OF “DAILY NK”. THE TWO ARE VERY DIFFERENT. NK NEWS DOES NOT RECEIVE NED FUNDING AND IS A HIGHLY REPUTABLE AND RESPECTED SOURCE OF INFORMATION AND ANALYSIS ON KOREAN AFFAIRS. THIS PIECE WAS CORRECTED ON 25 FEBRUARY.
No doubt, you’ve heard Mike Benz on any number of podcasts or talk shows over the last few months. If you haven’t, listen to him here on Joe Rogan’s Podcast. Benz is very well known for seeking to expose what he sees as a troubling reality about U.S. foreign policy. According to Benz, USAID, often presented as a force for humanitarian aid and development, functions as a strategic instrument for shaping foreign governments, influencing media, and engineering political outcomes.
USAID is not just about providing food assistance or infrastructure projects but about funding opposition groups, controlling narratives, and ensuring compliance with U.S. interests - and recently it has even been used to push social and political change on the U.S. home front.
Critics point to the routine. First, USAID and other U.S.-government-backed organizations funnel resources into NGOs and media outlets within a target country. These civil society groups, under the guise of democracy promotion, often serve to erode trust in governments that resist U.S. influence, even to the point of funding investigative journalism and pushing prosecutors to chase after opponents to U.S. interests. Sooner or later, the media landscape shifts, with the U.S.-funded journalists amplifying selective narratives about corruption, human rights abuses, or political instability. As pressure builds, opposition movements gain traction, culminating in mass protests. If the government refuses to yield, sanctions follow. When all other measures fail, direct intervention—covert or military—becomes the final step.
This playbook has been visible across multiple regions. Mike Benz offers an example from Cuba. An ostensibly indigenous Twitter-like app that was created through a number of shelf-companies. The app came across as a harmless social media platform - a tool for everyday life, giving updates on hurricane warnings, sports, and music. The aim was to build a large, engaged user base without drawing attention from state authorities.
Once the user base had grown sufficiently, the app’s sophisticated algorithms would gradually shift the focus of discussions towards more divisive topics: racial and social divisions, government failures, and inequality. The plan was to subtly amplify conversations pushing political discontent, social division, and anti-government sentiment, transforming a benign social network into a catalyst for political mobilization. Now think Iran, Venezuela, the Arab Spring, Velvet Revolutions in Ukraine, and even social media on the U.S. home front. Even if half of what Mike Benz says is true, it is frightening.
It’s downright foolish—almost stupid—not to question U.S. (or any major power) foreign policy. The Gulf of Tonkin incident, which escalated the Vietnam War; the ouster of democratically elected Salvador Allende in Chile; or the weapons of mass destruction claims and the missing billions from 2003 Iraq War, are just a few glaring examples of American manipulation and imperial ambition. These events, among many others, leave no room for naive acceptance, demanding that we critically scrutinize and hold U.S. actions accountable.
Even the its closest allies are not free of U.S. influence. The 1975 Dismissal stands as a brutal reminder that Australia’s democracy is not immune to covert U.S. meddling, while the CIA’s past creation and manipulation of The Quarterly magazine, and the relentless pro-U.S. bias in our think tanks and university centers expose an ongoing agenda to shape our political narrative. If you want funding as a security studies academic in Australia, shut up and support AUKUS and the Empire (and don’t write cynical blog posts).
However, it’s important to note that this cynical narrative is not entirely straightforward - particularly in the case of Korean studies and North Korea. The case of Daily NK, a South Korean-based media organization reporting on North Korea, should serve as a warning - sometimes the baby will get washed out with the bathwater.
The Daily NK purportedly gathers firsthand accounts from inside North Korea, exposing food shortages, internal purges, and human rights violations that remain otherwise hidden from global view. I say purportedly, not necessarily because of disbelief, but because sources and stories on North Korea are by nature near impossible to confirm. Daily NK is one of very few sources that gives insight into life in North Korea. Because of its reach and effectiveness, it is, for many, the only source.
However, Daily NK is funded by the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), a U.S. funded organization that comes under particularly sharp criticism from Mike Benz.
NED’s involvement in media and civil society initiatives worldwide has led to concerns about its role as a vehicle for U.S. geopolitical strategy. It has funded opposition movements in Venezuela, Belarus, and Hong Kong, frequently aligning with broader U.S. foreign policy goals. This raises legitimate concerns: Can Daily NK maintain true independence given its funding source? If China or Russia funded a similar initiative focused on North Korea, how would its legitimacy be perceived?
Daily NK’s reporting remains difficult to dismiss. Daily NK’s materials do follow an overtly propagandistic script. With a focus on the granular details of daily life in North Korea, from black-market food prices to shifting political dynamics within the regime, it maintains a very clear angle - the regime is illegitimate, self-interested, and well, pretty evil. Yet, even amidst these angled spiels, it contains information that does not appear elsewhere. It’s incredibly valuable information for researchers and analysts who can read between the lines.
This presents a dilemma. The historical record overwhelmingly supports skepticism toward U.S. foreign policy institutions and those they sponsor, particularly when they claim to promote democracy. Yet, dismissing all initiatives linked to U.S. funding ignores cases where valuable information emerges. The existence of Daily NK proves that not every U.S.-supported media outlet functions only as a tool of manipulation. There’s value in the outcomes regardless of the aims. The key is learning to read between the lines.
U.S. foreign policy has long operated under outdated frameworks that prioritize entrenched interests over genuine national benefit. Disruption is sorely needed. President Trump’s unapologetic approach is shaking up the status quo by challenging traditional alliances, withdrawing from ineffective commitments, and recalibrating America’s global posture. These actions are forcing a critical reassessment of policies and are making a radical break from the norm - but the risk remains that the baby will be thrown out with the bathwater.
Recognizing patterns of manipulation is crucial, but so is acknowledging the instances where valuable information emerges, even from sources with ostensibly compromised funding. Blind rejection of all U.S. affiliated reporting risks missing essential truths, just as blind acceptance of any reporting risks missing essential truths.
ATTENTION! IN SEVERAL INSTANCES THIS PIECE MISTAKENLY USED “NK NEWS” INSTEAD OF “DAILY NK”. THE TWO ARE VERY DIFFERENT. NK NEWS DOES NOT RECEIVE NED FUNDING AND IS A HIGHLY REPUTABLE AND RESPECTED SOURCE OF INFORMATION AND ANALYSIS ON KOREAN AFFAIRS. THIS PIECE WAS CORRECTED ON 25 FEBRUARY.
