That article is 44 years old.

RFA isn't part of the CIA. It's part of U.S. Agency for Global Media. From Wikipedia:

an independent agency of the United States government which operates various state-run media outlets.[2] It describes its mission, "vital to US national interests", to "inform, engage, and connect people around the world in support of freedom and democracy"[3] and in accordance with the "broad foreign policy objectives of the United States".[4] USAGM supervises Voice of America (VOA), Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Radio y Televisión Martí, Radio Free Asia, and Alhurra TV and Radio Sawa.

That’s literally the definition of propaganda.

Why is it so difficult for Americans to believe that the US engages in a war of propaganda against countries it labels as “adversaries”? [1]

[1] https://foreignpolicy.com/2013/07/14/u-s-repeals-propaganda-...

I think the disconnect here is that at least for a large part of RFA/RFE's history, simply broadcasting fair and accurate news was effective "propaganda".

Whether that's still true today or not is not something that anyone here is going to agree on.

They never "simply" did this. They often did this, when the truth was good news for them, but so does RT.

The "Truth" (or facts presented in a very specific way) is a incredibly effective form of propaganda. You think foreign governments like Chin haven't been using the storming of the United States Capitol as a means to demonstrate the US's weakness or incompetence?

No one said that the U.S. doesn't engage in propaganda. But RFA News isn't it.

Why is it so difficult for Americans to believe

Suggesting that "Americans" suffer from a lack of introspection reveals your own biases. 350 million people. 350 million different worldviews.

So in your view as one of 350 million, RFA is only(or mainly) set up for providing news to brainwashed Chinese people but not promoting democracy and universal human rights value?

I said no such thing. You should not make assumptions about other people.

Of course it would not be officially part of the CIA... that would be idiotic.

That article, which is from 1977, is about an earlier incarnation of Radio Free Asia that was originally run by the CIA, but ceased operation in 1955 (the article even mentions this). The current RFA started broadcasting in 1996 and is under direction of the US Agency for Global Media.

RFA is still run by the US Government, which is worth considering when talking about the possible biases of RFA... but the NYT article you linked has nothing to do with the current RFA.

You're citing a news article from 1977 as your counterpoint?

RFA is still doing the same thing today. Technology has changed but their mission has not.

It's not the same organization.

The RFA from the 1977 article and the RFA today were separated by 44 years.

Perhaps you're confused because they have the same name.

This simply isn't true. These are two different organizations.