Join In On The Action "Register Here" To View The Forums

Already a Member Login Here

Board index Forum Index
User avatar
Dignitary
 
Posts: 8486
Joined: 01 Mar 2002, 9:37 am

Post 12 Feb 2011, 7:59 am

I got into the habit of visiting Al Jazeera (English) a few days ago since I could easily view streaming live shots of Tahrir Square. While it's a little odd to watch British newscasters on an Arab network delivering a combination of straight news and hand-offs to heavily slanted reportage and commentary from both Al Jazeera employees and miscellaneous "experts", it was what I expected. I was a bit more surprised this morning when I got to reading a couple of written pieces that had links on the front page. I've reproduced that page below. It's what I see right now at the URL http://english.aljazeera.net/

ajfp.jpg


I draw your attention to that "Opinion" box and the first and last (visible) items: "The resurrection of pan-Arabism" and "Egypt's lessons for Palestine". In both cases these are written by freelance journalists and Al Jazeera includes this disclaimer beneath each article: "The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial policy." I don't know how frequently they contribute to Al Jazeera. But please note that the links to the articles are quite prominent on the very front page of the English website. The English one.

I am going to extract, without context, some bits and pieces. Please read the entire articles. From the first:
"This does not mean that Arabs do not care about the occupied people of Iraq... || The Arab failure to defend Iraq or liberate Palestine has come to symbolise an Arab impotence that...|| In Ramallah, the protesters repeated a slogan calling for the end of internal Palestinian divisions (which, in Arabic, rhymes with the Egyptian call for the end to the regime), as well as demanding an end to negotiations with Israel - sending a clear message that there will be no room left for the Palestinian Authority if it continues to rely on such negotiations."

I can understand calling Iraq "occupied" in the past, but the elections there have been the freest and fairest ever held in an Arab state - is it still "occupied"? And if there's no room left for the PA, who does that leave? Are negotiations with Israel viewed as cynically by others as they are by this writer?

In the "Lessons for Palestine" article:
"...American strongman Hosni Mubarak... || The race-based Israeli apartheid system and the virtual Palestinian Authority (PA) police statelet work in tandem to pummel the Palestinians into submission. The binational repression apparatus spawned by the Israelis and venal Palestinians is especially difficult to overcome. That is because while the Israelis are perpetrating what Professor Juan Cole calls the "slow genocide" of the Palestinian people, PA functionaries insulate the occupation from legitimate resistance. || [Israel knows] that the PA exists to protect them from Palestinian resistance..."

This article goes on to give the Palestinians advice on how to defeat the "colonially corrupted PA".

These articles are not devoid of truths, and I've not provided the contexts of these excerpts. Please read both. But I was surprised by the tone and general thrust of each. I can't help wondering what these two articles, and others that may not even appear in the English version, sound like in Arabic. I disagree with many of the opinions expressed in these two articles but not with all - maybe even not the majority of them. But each is delivered from within a worldview and with a point of view that I find more provincial than I expected, and more prone to beliefs that approach "conspiracy theory" level. Mubarak is "American"? (Not American-backed, or -supported, or pro-, just "American".) The PA, originally led by Yassir Arafat and comprised almost entirely of offshoots of his PLO, exists to protect Israel? Iraq is still occupied and needs to be defended?

I find this a bit more than vaguely disturbing. Al Jazeera is the most sophisticated and ubiquitous, and one of the more modern and cosmopolitan, of Arab news media. I find that a bit more than vaguely disturbing as well. Am I right to feel this way? Do you see Al Jazeera as being more part of the problem or part of the solution?
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11324
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 12 Feb 2011, 3:44 pm

Al Jazeera does clearly try to deliniate opinion from objective reporting. I beleive that their journalism in reporting is considered very accurate and ethical.
Thats a big step up for most middle eastern news sources.

But opinion is opinion. And conspriacy theories and plots are regular fare for Arab media. What specifically do you find shocking?
And, just for comparison sake, have you seen Glenn Beck lately?
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 1272
Joined: 10 Sep 2002, 10:28 am

Post 12 Feb 2011, 8:30 pm

Great thread X.

AL-J had some of the best stuff coming out of Cairo...and I understand that the opinions they publish don't necessarily reflect their own views...though I'll bet the chances are pretty good that they do.

Reading some of these columns reminds me of some of the old Soviet stuff published at the height of the Cold War. Much of it had the surreal flavor these exhibit. How could they possibly hold some of those views? Didn't they see? But they didn't...they were isolated, their information limited and...in their way...they were horribly provincial.

Ah, but the upshot was that, during the Cold War, the Western powers hid stuff from their own people that was blindingly obvious to the Sovs...and we looked like the unlettered goons to them.

I think we're seeing the same thing here...two provincial narratives clashing (ours and theirs)...which I thought would be much harder in the internet age. But people can self-censor almost as effectively as any institutions.
User avatar
Emissary
 
Posts: 3405
Joined: 12 Jun 2006, 2:01 am

Post 12 Feb 2011, 11:23 pm

I saw a clip from a guy called Alex Jones the other day, who's a fairly well known conspiracy theorist and generaly allound nutjob. His take on Al Jazeera is quite interesting. He's convinced that it's nothing more than a front for British intelligence....
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 4961
Joined: 08 Jun 2000, 10:26 am

Post 13 Feb 2011, 5:01 am

PCH:
I think we're seeing the same thing here...two provincial narratives clashing (ours and theirs)...which I thought would be much harder in the internet age. But people can self-censor almost as effectively as any institutions.
Group think, confirmation bias, and blaming others for our own problems are all powerful forces.