Show me where it says that?

Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012[edit] The Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012[35] was introduced by U.S. Congressman Mac Thornberry on May 10, 2012 in the House of Representatives.[35] The bill purpose is "to authorize the domestic dissemination of information and material about the United States intended primarily for foreign audiences"[35] The act was added to the 2013 NDAA bill as section of 1078 to amend certain passages of Smith-Mundt Act of 1948 and Foreign Relations Authorization Act of 1987.[36] The Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012 passed Congress as part of the NDAA 2013 on December 28, 2012.[36] Amendments made to the Smith-Mundt Act of 1948 and Foreign Relations Authorization Act of 1987 allow for materials produced by the State Department and the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) to be released within US borders.[37][38][39] U.S. Congressmen Adam Smith stated with the respect to the bill's purpose that al-Qaeda was infiltrating the Internet in order to promote anti-American sentiments and that with passage of the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012 the US government would be able disseminate public diplomacy information by the State department to counter that in the Arabic language abroad.[40][38]

Several news outlets reported that the 2013 NDAA overturned a 64-year ban on the domestic dissemination of propaganda (described as "public diplomacy information") produced for foreign audiences, effectively eliminating the distinction between foreign and domestic audiences.[41][42][43][44] The social news media site BuzzFeed for example quoted an unnamed source saying the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012 would allow “U.S. propaganda intended to influence foreign audiences to be used on the domestic population.”[43]

The Media and Outreach Coordinator for the U.S. State Department’s Bureau of African Affairs, Gregory L. Garland, noted that the United States shoots itself in the foot by the release prohibition of materials produced by the State Department and the BBG within US borders and by preaching freedom of the press abroad while practicing censorship at home.[45] He argued against a complete repeal of the Smith-Mundt Act of 1948 stating that the law "creates a statutory firewall between resources intended for foreign audiences and those used domestically. Tear down that firewall, and it will be a matter of time before resources and personnel who focus on talking about America overseas are diverted in favor of domestic “public affairs,” the short-term political imperative of any administration." An unnamed Pentagon official who was concerned about the 2012 law version stated: "It removes the protection for Americans. It removes oversight from the people who want to put out this information. There are no checks and balances. No one knows if the information is accurate, partially accurate, or entirely false.”[43] The monthly magazine The Atlantic echoed those concerns by pointing out to two USA Today journalists who became target of a smear and propaganda campaign after they reported that the U.S. military "information operations" program spent millions of U.S. dollars in marketing campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq criticized as ineffective and poorly monitored.[38][46] As it turned out one of firm leaders who executed the marketing campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan admitted to be a part of the smear and propaganda campaign against the USA Today reporters.[47]

While there are concerns as the described above there are also advantages by repealing the release prohibition of material materials produced by the State Department and the BBG within US borders. Garland for example wrote that the provision banning domestic dissemination deprives the United States in a communication age with no frontiers the U.S. of its "most powerful tool of soft power: our ideals."