Al Jazeera – friend or a foe?

Rageh Omaar, acclaimed journalist on the recently launched Al Jazeera English channel, talks about what makes it so different.
Al Jazeera, with its headquarters in Doha, Qatar, often covers topics most other 24/7 news operations, such as CNN, Sky News or even the BBC, do not. But the contents are a well-tested mix of hard-hitting news, documentaries, interviews and lighter material. Al Jazeera Arabic was launched in 1996 as a news and current affairs satellite TV channel. It rose from the ashes of the BBC World Service’s Arab TV service, closed down after the co-owner, the government of Saudi Arabia, demanded it to be censored.

The Emir of Qatar, who regards Al Jazeera as his country’s greatest export, provided an initial US$150m grant to help launch the channel, and has continued financial support since. Today Al Jazeera provides a whole network of TV channels, including a sports and a children’s channel.

From the Middle East in English
Launched in November 2006, Al Jazeera English is broadcast via satellite and internet to bring news from a Middle Eastern perspective to a global audience. The launch can be seen as taking on “the big boys” of global rolling news at their own game. Many of Al Jazeera’s employees have come from other big news agencies. Sir David Frost is perhaps the biggest name among the many BBC recruits. The 66-year-old has interviews with seven US presidents (including the first post-Watergate interviews with Nixon) and six British prime ministers under his belt.

Rageh Omaar is also one of the channel’s top recruits. An Oxford-educated journalist, who moved to Britain at the age of six from Somalia, he previously worked for the BBC as its Iraq and Africa correspondent. “Our newsroom is by far the most diverse newsroom I have ever worked in. Other broadcasters have very global audiences as well. But if you broadcast to 30 different cultures and 80% of your newsroom is British, how can you speak to those people?” he asks.

The objectives of Al Jazeera English are to emphasize news from the developing world, reverse the North to South flow of information, and set the news agenda. It is the first ever channel to be broadcast from the Middle East in English, with a bold mission “to introduce nations, cultures, and civilizations to each other”. It is aiming to become the “last great 24-hour news network”.

“The BBC and CNN would say we are their main competitors. They enjoyed a nice situation, like Coca Cola and Pepsi Cola. But now the audiences have somewhere else to go, and they have to improve, which is good for everyone,” says Rageh Omaar.

”We are covering the Nigerian presidential elections live. This is the country where one in four people of Africa live, 15% of America’s oil comes from there, yet nobody is bothering to cover the elections.”

Political target
For many people in the West - especially in the United States - the name Al Jazeera first sprang into consciousness after the September 11th attacks that felled the twin towers in New York. Al Jazeera Arabic was sent tapes by Osama bin Laden, some of which it broadcast, demeaning the US and praising the attacks that killed around 3000 people.

Considering that most Americans do not pay much attention to foreign news, the fact that they heard about Al Jazeera for the first time in this context hardly did the channel any favours. Donald Rumsfeld, the US Secretary of Defence at the time, accused Al Jazeera of telling “vicious lies” and becoming the “distribution method of choice” for Osama bin Laden, and al-Qaeda.

Al Jazeera has gained a reputation as an unusually independent voice in the Middle East. In 1999, Jordan ordered the closure of the Al Jazeera bureau in its capital Amman, accusing it of “intentionally attacking the Jordanian people and regime”. Algeria, Morocco, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Egypt also have complained about the channel’s coverage.

Rageh Omaar admits that the channel has an image problem to overcome in the US. He emphasises that, contrary to rumours, Al Jazeera has never shown kidnappings or beheadings. He defends showing the Bin Laden tapes. “You have all seen them on Finnish television. Al Jazeera makes them available but every news outlet in the world ran the same things.”

Al Jazeera English is not yet broadcast nationwide in the US, as no cable network provider has included the channel in its programming. It has been available via You Tube since April 16. Fox News is the most watched cable news channel in the US. It regularly has the Stars and Stripes flag decorating its news studio.

Omaar, however, is optimistic about Al Jazeera’s prospects in the US. “We in Europe think America is so much behind but they have the most powerful anti-war movement. Bloggers, protesters, alternative media ... even actors in Hollywood. They are far ahead of Britain.”

Controversial circumstances
Over the years, Al Jazeera’s operations have encountered some serious attacks. In November 2001, a US missile destroyed Al-Jazeera’s office in Afghanistan. In 2003, journalist Tareq Ayyoub was killed when the network’s Baghdad bureau was struck during a US bombing campaign. The US claims both attacks were mistakes.

Last year it was revealed that Tony Blair talked George Bush out of bombing the firm’s Doha headquarters during a meeting between the two leaders in April 2004.

Al Jazeera cameraman Sami al-Hajj has been held by the US as an ‘enemy combatant’ in Guantanamo Bay since 2002, even though his treatment has been widely condemned by international human rights and press freedom groups. He is believed to be the only journalist from a major international news organization held there.

Al Hajj, who has reportedly started a hunger strike recently, responded to the allegations: “With all due respect, a mistake has been made because I have never been a member of any terrorist group.” This married man is likely to mark his fifth anniversary in Guantanamo this June, with his wife and son in Qatar. The US military has said he faces at least one more year at the detainment camp. Reporters Without Borders cited his case when it dropped the US to 53rd place in its 2006 Worldwide Press Freedom Index.

Taysir Allouni, the only journalist to have interviewed Osama bin Laden post 9/11, was arrested in Spain in September 2003. Allouni was sentenced in September 2005 to seven years in prison for being a financial courier for al-Qaeda, despite his own and Al Jazeera’s protestations of his innocence. He was set free in October 2006 and placed under home detention due to ill health.

Diverse audience
Al Jazeera English is watched by an exceptionally diverse audience. It is worth remembering that most Muslims do not speak Arabic. For example, Pakistan has a population of nearly 170 million, whereas Indonesia is the most populous Muslim country in the world. A BBC study of viewing patterns among Asians has found a “deep lack of trust” of the broadcasters’ coverage of Islam and relations between the Middle East and the West.

Witness, the show Rageh Omaar presents, “always tries to do fresh stories that haven’t been told, by filmmakers from societies in Africa, Asia and Middle East – not forgetting Europe.” For example, the story of a girl from the Masai tribe in Kenya who, after various ups and downs, gains a scholarship to a university in Chicago. And no, Uncle Sam is not always bad, nor is Masai culture always the best.
Al-Jazeera was awarded the prestigious Index on Censorship prize for upholding freedom of expression in 2003. The judges said: “Al Jazeera’s apparent independence in a region where much of the media is state run has transformed it into the most popular station in the Middle East. Its willingness to give opposition groups a high-profile platform has left it with a reputation for credible news among Arab viewers. But that same quality has enraged Arab governments and the US – which have sought to have the station more closely controlled.”

When news is not enough
When talk turns to Iraq, Rageh Omaar’s voice grows stronger and optimism fades. The country from where he reported live during the second Gulf War, and where he made many friends, “has been completely destroyed”.

“Four million [mostly well educated] people have left Iraq. It is the largest movement of people in the Middle East since the creation of the state of Israel. American soldiers, 160,000 of them, cannot protect themselves. So how can they protect 24 million Iraqis?”

What he finds interesting is that the politicians are now starting to blame the Iraqis, saying things like maybe the Iraqis are not ready or do not want democracy. “I don’t think we have accepted our responsibility in the West. This will come back to haunt us. Iraq has strengthened al-Qaeda.”

To decide for yourself, go to youtube.com or see Al Jazeera English as a part of Welho’s Forte package, if you have cable. Otherwise you can receive it for free from the satellite dish Hotbird.

FIVE MONTHS OF AL-JAZEERA IN ENGLISH

Is Al-Jazeera International more anti-American than its sister station? The company's English-language operation is one of the most talked-about broadcasters in the world right now. In an interview with SPIEGEL ONLINE, US media expert Mohammed el-Nawawy discusses its strengths and weaknesses.

Nawawy: Yes, absolutely. Many people asked why we need another global English network if we already have CNN? But I think there are major differences. Al-Jazeera International is the first non-Western network to challenge the Western networks' control over the global news flow. It offers a fresh perspective in reporting on world affairs, it has reversed the flow. Instead of the information coming from the West to the rest of the world, it has established a platform from which they can appeal to people in other parts in the world. That's also what they are claiming: We are giving a voice to the voiceless.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Nigel Parsons, managing director of Al-Jazeera International, promised a "decidedly different tone than on established Western channels." Has that promise been kept?

Nawawy: Yes. They are, for example, covering parts of the world that have traditionally been neglected by the Western media -- not necessarily in the Arab or Muslim world, but also Latin America and Africa. Nor do they relay as much on headline journalism. They have reduced the number of news stories and increased in-depth coverage at a time when Western channels are more focused on soundbite culture.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: How does Al-Jazeera International deal with the most sensitive issues? What wording do they use, for example, to describe suicide bombers?

Nawawy: What they do supports my concept of "contextual objectivity," which means that different networks have to appeal to their target audiences. And that's what Al-Jazeera International is doing. It is not using a term like "martyrs" in the context of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. They are using "suicide bombers." Al-Jazeera International understands that they have to appeal to a non-Arab target audience as well.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: So there are differences between Al-Jazeera International and the Arab original?

Nawawy: Absolutely. It's the same company, but they have a totally different editorial board.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Would you say that Al-Jazeera International provides quality journalism? Or are there severe shortcomings?

Nawawy: There are always shortcomings, there is no perfect channel. But the nice thing about Al-Jazeera is its spirit of self-reflection. They criticize themselves even before anybody else does. But there are areas that have been neglected -- and perhaps they have run more documentaries than they needed to. Still, they have only been broadcasting for five months now. We need to wait a bit longer.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Does Al-Jazeera International have religious programs like its Arabic sister channel?

Nawawy: Recently they had a documentary on women in Hezbollah. But the Arabic channel really only has one religious program, "Sharia and Life." But again you can see here that the two channels are targeting different audiences.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Some people have said they found Al-Jazeera International to be more anti-American than the original. Is that true?

Nawawy: I don't think so. The problem starts with the framing of Al-Jazeera by the US Administration after 9/11 in very negative terms. People need to understand that because a channel is non-American it doesn't mean it has to be anti-American. Why would Al-Jazeera by anti-American? In the Middle East there are very anti-American channels like al-Manar, but are they as successful as Al-Jazeera? No. Besides, Al-Jazeera International isn't really anti-American.

Nawawy: I think their coverage is more comprehensive. They don't focus on this issue as much as Al-Jazeera Arabic does.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: How are the prominent Western-trained journalists fairing who have been hired by Al-Jazeera International, like former BBC correspondent Rageh Omar and former CNN anchor Riz Khan?

Nawawy: And also David Marash (the network's chief Washington anchor). I think Al-Jazeera made a wise move. I used to question this, but I think this way they achieved more of a balance. They need to address the Western mentality as well. And the fact that they hired big shots from the Western journalism world makes sense because people listen to them. It gives Al-Jazeera credibility.

SPIEGEL ONLINE: Al-Jazeera International is said to have a strong viewership in Europe, Australia, parts of Asia and even Israel. Still, no major satellite or cable provider in the United States carries it. Why?

Nawawy: Many providers do not want to alienate their viewers. They don't want to be framed as the carrier that offers a "terrorist network." That is narrow-minded. People have a right to be exposed to different perspectives. When I taught a class in Middle Eastern media last semester, I let them watch Al-Jazeera and many subscribed to it because they found it interesting.

SPIEGEL: Can the success of Al-Jazeera International be quantified?

Nawawy: It is currently hard to quantify its success among viewers, especially given that the Arab world does not have specialized rating companies like America's AC Nielsen and Arbitron.

Interview conducted by Yassin Musharbash.

New Jordan - AlJazeera crisis

Media outlets have been reporting about a new crisis between AlJazeera TV and Jordan. The new scandal started after Jordanian authorities confiscated the videotape of an interview in which the former crown prince slammed the United States and Saudi Arabia for pursuing "destructive" Middle East policies.
The row has escalated as the Doha-based television aired a discussion on alleged Jordanian king's remarks suggesting the problem of Palestinian refugees could be resolved through paying "compensations" to refugees by rich Arab states. These comments were first published by an Israeli newspaper and drew sharp reaction from Palestinian groups. Jordanian officials, however, denied the monarch made such remarks.
This is not the first time, that AlJazeera is involved in such a deep crisis with an Arab regime. In Saudi Arabia, alJazeera is banned. The Saudi regime disliked the Qatar-based channel for often giving a voice to the monarchy’s opponents.
AlJazeera was banned in early February 2004 from covering the annual pilgrimage to Mecca. Most recently, the popular pan-Arab news channel was not even permitted to cover the Arab League summit, held last month in Riyadh. Additionally, Saudi Arabia has been preventing Saudi companies from advertising on the Doah-based station. Instead, the Saudis back al-Arabiya, AlJazeera's main competitor.
In the current affair, AlJazeera claims Jordanian security agents confiscated a tape of an interview with Prince Hassan Bin Talal saying it included comments that would harm Jordanian relations with Saudi Arabia.
AlJazeera called the seizure "an offence and insult" to the TV station and to press freedom. Gassan Ben Jeddou, Al Jazeera staff member, and one of the prominent figures in Arab media, said the interview at the Royal Court was not aired live because of the Prince's commitments. In the interview, Prince Hassan said there are reports allegedly claiming that Saudi Security Adviser Prince Bander Bin Sultan supports "jihadist" groups against the Lebanese Shiite movement Hizbullah, the Al Jazeera journalist conveyed.
Additionally, Prince Hassan added some Arab parties are cooperating with the US to attack Iran and Hizbullah besides trying to instigate a regional Sunni-Shiite strife, Ben Jeddou added.
Now it remains to be seen how the current crisis will develop. About five years ago, Jordan shut down the local office of the Qatari TV station. The move came after the airing of a show considered an affront by the kingdom's royal family.

Al-Jazeera named an agent of democracy, not terrorism

By Dahr Jamail

DOHA, Qatar (IPS/GIN) - The Al-Jazeera television network is gaining international respect for defending its journalistic mission and press freedoms, despite harassment from U.S. officials who call it a “terrorist network.”

“I support Al-Jazeera because Al-Jazeera has done more to propagate democracy in the Middle East region than anybody else, certainly more than the American government has done,” media specialist Hugh Miles said. “It’s strange to me that people refer to Al-Jazeera as a ‘terrorist network’ because that couldn’t be further from the truth.”

Mr. Miles spoke to IPS at the third annual Al-Jazeera forum, which took place Mar. 31 to Apr. 2 in Doha. The forum highlighted the successful recent expansion of the network while also addressing difficulties that reporters face in the Middle East hot spots.

Mr. Miles, author of “Al- Jazeera: How Arab TV News Challenged the World” and an award-winning freelance journalist, said former U.S. defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld had got it wrong on Al-Jazeera.

“Al-Jazeera has been called a ‘terrorist network’ or ‘the voice of (Osama) bin Laden,’ but this just demonstrates deep ignorance of its history and the channel,” he said.

The 10-year-old Al-Jazeera network weathered a U.S. military attack on its Baghdad office during the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in April 2003. It faced accusations from Mr. Rumsfeld that it promoted terrorism by airing beheadings and other attacks.

Al-Jazeera editors say the channel has never aired a beheading, nor does it support terrorism.

Other leading voices at the forum spoke in support of the channel, which has been under frequent attack of all kinds. The forum, titled “Media and the Middle East: Going Beyond the Headlines” brought journalists, international media leaders and scholars from around the world to discuss critical issues facing the media, with a focus on in-depth journalism.

Abdul Bari Atwan, editor-in-chief of the London-based Arabic newspaper al-Quds al- Arabi said, “journalists should unite and raise our voices to say ‘no’ to this kind of brutal treatment by the leader of the free world, by people who are representing freedom. We should stand united against the new wave of embedded journalism because this is censorship.”

Many other journalists are detained without fair trial. Al-Jazeera cameraman Sami al-Hajj, a Sudanese national, was detained by the U.S. military in Afghanistan in December 2001. He has yet to be charged, and continues to be held as “enemy combatant” at Guantanamo Bay.

On Aug. 7, 2004, the U.S.-backed Iraqi interim government led by former CIA asset Iyad Allawi, shut down the Iraq office of al-Jazeera, claiming that it was presenting a negative image of Iraq, and charging the network with “fueling anti-coalition hostilities.”

That makes it similar to the Inter Press Service (IPS/GIN) news agency, said IPS director-general Mario Lubetkin. Al-Jazeera has much in common with IPS because the Arab network “goes for the news behind the news,” and “because they cover the south,” he said.

The forum addressed several issues such as parachute journalism, journalism of depth and the new media. But the dominant theme remained attacks on journalists in an increasingly difficult global environment.

Variations in Reporting Al Jazeera Trial

Reports about a U.K. trial under the Official Secrets Act have varied in the amount of background explanation and in reference to previous stories suggesting that a leaked memo may record discussion about Al Jazeera. The report by David Stringer for Associated Press is headlined "Al-Jazeera Memo Trial Starts in London," (Dispatch Online). David Keogh, aged 50, and Leo O'Connor, 44, are accused of violating secrecy laws by disclosing a document relating to talks between U.S. President George W. Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair in Washington on April 16, 2004. Stringer cites the earlier report by The Daily Mirror newspaper that Blair had argued during this meeting against Bush's suggestion of bombing Al-Jazeera's headquarters in Doha, Qatar.

Reports by the BBC and The Times make no mention of Al Jazeera. Their reports do repeat the prosecution case as made in court. There has been evidence so far from Matthew Rycroft, who wrote the original memo. He has explained that it was distributed to David Hill, Blair's director of communications, and to Tom Kelly, his spokesman, not to use the information in their work briefing the press, but so that they had a more complete knowledge of the policies the Prime Minister was putting forward to Bush. It was reported that the meeting lasted about two hours and was also attended, on the British side, by Sir Nigel Sheinwald, the Prime Minister's foreign policy adviser, and Jonathan Powell, his chief of staff. Bush was accompanied by Colin Powell, then U.S. Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, then his National Security Adviser, and Dan Freed, special assistant to the president.
There was concern at the time about the original Daily Mirror report, especially when the Attorney General used the Official Secrets Act to prevent further publication. For example Boris Johnson, now a Conservative shadow minister, announced he would be prepared to publish the memo. He wrote in his blog that "the Attorney General's ban is ridiculous, untenable, and redolent of guilt... we now have allegations of such severity, against the U.S. President and his motives, that we need to clear them up. If someone passes me the document within the next few days I will be very happy to publish it in The Spectator, and risk a jail sentence."

Christopher Hitchens, often a supporter of Bush policy on Iraq, was also concerned about threats to journalism and became involved in the story. Writing in Slate in January 2006 he considered reasons to think the memo may be authentic. These included the strong reaction of the U.K. Attorney General and a quote in the original story from an unnamed spokesman for Blair saying that Bush's remark was "humorous, not serious." Hitchens concluded that "This is as much as to concede that some such conversation did in fact take place." Hitchens also questioned Powell's claim not to remember what was said at the meeting.
”I am not the world's greatest fan of Powell or of his secretaryship, but the chief steward of American foreign policy might be expected to remember a proposal to bomb the territory of a friendly neutral that is the site of U.S. Central Command, as well as a sharp dispute about it between his president and his country's chief political and military ally. If he doesn't feel confident enough to say: 'That is too absurdly untrue to deserve even a comment from me,' then he is not doing much better than stalling.”
So far there has been no U.K. reporting linking the trial and the public concern at the time of the Daily Mirror publication. The fact that it is now clearly stated that Colin Powell was present at the meeting may have an implication for the Freedom of Information Act in the U.S. Steve Wood has reported on the U.K. Freedom of Information blog about repeated efforts to find out more about the memo in the U.K. In July 2006 he quoted a response from a request to the U.S. State Department, "no records responsive to your request were located." Wood found this surprising as he believed then that Colin Powell had been at the meeting based on statements by Peter Kilfoyle MP, who has seen a copy of the leaked memo.
"The other problem is that if a record is held at the White House, 'the President's immediate personal staff or any part of the Executive Office of the President whose sole function is to advise and assist the President' are not subject to the U.S. FOIA (the reason I directed my request to the State Dept). Requests for records originating from the White House are also subject to special treatment."
So there may be no State Department records of meetings held at the White House.

It has been reported that Peter Kilfoyle may face similar charges, but there has been no update on this. As reported in the Sunday Times, papers were passed to the Crown Prosecution Service last year and senior lawyers were in the final stages of consulting on whether to press charges against Kilfoyle and former MP Tony Clarke . “A decision on Kilfoyle and Clarke is expected soon,” a spokesman said. This was in February. A case against Peter Kilfoyle would get more media attention than the current trial. He is already known as a critic of the Iraq war and the Telegraph has reported a recent comment on Gordon Brown's meeting with George Bush. "This is Bush's administration saying it can do business with Gordon, as it could with Tony Blair, and this worries me."

So far there has been no comment on the trial in the U.S. that can be found through Google News. At the time of the Daily Mirror story, there was some questioning in the White House as reported by Dan Froomkin. He was interested in the nature of the denials.

First there was an email from Scott McLellan: "We are not interested in dignifying something so outlandish and inconceivable with a response." Froomkin suggested that "nothing arouses White House reporters more these days than a non-denial denial," but then added, "I apparently overestimated the mainstream press corps' baloney detectors. By contrast, the corps was downright dogged yesterday when it came to rooting out the details of Bush's summons to jury duty in Crawford. Now there's a big story."

There may be more comment later. The trial is expected to last for two or three weeks.

Al Jazeera have reported the connection with the Daily Mirror report, but have also included statements from the prosecutor, David Perry.

"We live in a democratic society, not the Wild West," Perry told the court. "It is not for people to decide they are going to be the sheriff in town."

Jordanian authorities confiscate Al-Jazeera TV tape interview with Jordan's Prince Hassan

AMMAN, Jordan: Jordanian authorities on Saturday confiscated the videotape of an interview with the country's former crown prince by the Al-Jazeera Television, the Qatar-based satellite broadcaster and a Jordanian official said.

The tape was confiscated as an Al-Jazeera reporter, Ghassan Ben Jeddou, was about to leave the kingdom. No further details about the circumstances of the seizure were immediately known.

Nasser Judeh, the chief Jordanian government spokesman, confirmed the videotape's confiscation but said it had nothing to do with the content of the interview with Prince Hassan, the uncle to Jordan's King Abdullah II and one time heir to the Jordanian throne.

Meanwhile, Al-Jazeera aired a statement by Ben Jeddou, the network's bureau chief in Beirut, Lebanon, who interviewed Prince Hassan in Amman and who said the tape contained remarks by the Jordanian royal citing U.S. reports, such as the Brookings Institution, that allegedly claim a national security adviser in Saudi Arabia was financing Sunni militants to fight the Iran-backed Hezbollah group.

The network identified the Saudi official as Prince Bandar bin Sultan, a former Saudi ambassador to Washington.

Today in Africa & Middle East

After suicide bombings, Morocco looks within

Chaos and attempted bombing sully election in Nigeria

After Iraqi troops do dirty work, 3 detainees talk
In the interview, Prince Hassan also sharply criticized U.S. policies in the region as "destructive," Ben Jeddou said.

Ben Jeddou said that the Jordanian authorities informed the channel's office in Amman that the seizure was "an official measure by Jordanian authorities" and that they have "no problem with al-Jazeera."

Ben Jeddou said the confiscation was a "mistake" by the Jordanians. The reporter also cited the Jordanians as telling him that there were "higher interests for the country than dealing with what you reporters call freedom of journalism."

Hassan was the brother of King Hussein but was dismissed as crown prince in a 1999 royal shake-up by Hussein shortly before his death that year. He is a moderate who does not hold any official role in Jordanian politics but is has considerable influence among decision makers.

A spokesman for Prince Hassan declined to comment the incident.

City-owned cable system offers Al Jazeera, Arab-run news network

Published: Saturday, April 21, 2007
By Sam Hemingway
Free Press Staff Writer

The face of Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, flickers across the television screen as a reporter fills in viewers on the latest in the Attorney General Alberto Gonzales story.

Meanwhile, a news ticker streams headlines across the bottom of the screen: "U.S. says 24 Taliban killed in Afghan clash .... Nigeria election to go ahead .... U.N.: Sudan flying weapons into Darfur."

Squint your eyes, and you'd think you were watching CNN, or maybe BBC. Open them, and you'd see an Arabic-looking logo alongside the words "Al Jazeera" at the bottom of the screen. And it's all available to you in the comfort of your Burlington-area home.

Burlington, it turns out, is one of the very few places in the United States where the English language version of Al Jazeera, the Arab-backed television network criticized as pro-terrorist by the Bush administration, is available to local cable viewers.

Al Jazeera's Arab channel first came under worldwide scrutiny after it broadcast video statements from Osama Bin Laden in the aftermath of the 2001 terrorists attacks in the United States.

"We were certainly squeamish about it at first, given its reputation in the United States," said Tim Nulty, director of Burlington Telecom, the city-owned cable system, speaking of Al Jazeera. "But if you look at it, it looks like BBC. I think it's more mainstream and more objective than CNN."

Portions of Al Jazeera's English broadcast are occasionally featured on Channel 16, Comcast's education channel in the Chittenden County region, according to Scott Campitelli, Channel 16's executive director.

"It's got an Arab perspective, because it's from the Middle East," Campitelli said. "I don't see it as propaganda ... It's very credible journalism, very well done."

Even so, Burlington is one of the very few places in the country where Al Jazeera is available to cable subscribers. It also can be seen in Houston, Washington D.C. and parts of Ohio.

Worldwide, the English version of Al Jazeera network reaches 100 million households, about half the viewership of CNN. Despite its anti-Israeli reputation, Al Jazeera's English and Arabic channels are available to viewers in Israel.

"It's extraordinary that while the rest of the world is happy to watch us ... the U.S. stands in splendid isolation," Nigel Parsons, the Al Jazeera English network's managing director told The Associated Press recently.

Most of the network's programs are beamed by satellite from Al Jazeera's space-age looking studios in Doha, Qatar, a small, pro-American monarchy on the shores of the Persian Gulf.

The newscasts touch on American stories but have a heavier diet of news from Asia, Africa and even South America than American-based newscasts. Weather and sports reports are more worldly as well; a sports cast Thursday afternoon began with a report on a cricket tournament.

"The subject matter is stuff you can't get anywhere else," said Nulty, a globe-trotting economist before settling down in Burlington and taking the helm of Burlington Telecom.

Burlington Telecom began offering Al Jazeera in its cable packages to customers six months ago. The two-year-old cable system does not pay anything for Al Jazeera and has a contract to provide it until 2011.

Nulty said he has received little if any criticism about the decision to air Al Jazeera. Burlington Telecom has 1,200 customers in the city.

"One person called to complain vociferously," Nulty said. "Then we had two others call us who were obviously put up to it by the first guy. That's it."

Campitelli, at Channel 16, said he had received no complaints about Al Jazeera; Comcast reaches 34,000 households in Chittenden County.

Barbara Walters Takes ‘Some Time to Enjoy The View’ from the Middle East

By Rima Abdelkader



The status of Middle Eastern women and their roles have often been undervalued and misrepresented in both the United States’ and Middle East’s mainstream television news media. In the former, their identity has been limited to the clothing they wear, misrepresented through on-air discourse and visually on screen and juxtaposed with the need for ‘liberation.’ In the latter, their identity has been limited to their domestic duties where few if not many female voices appear in domestic radio and television outlets.



These are just some of many perceptions of Middle Eastern women that were discussed and debated by female television reporters and journalists from the Middle East, including Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Iraq, Lebanon, and Iran, in a New York panel discussion moderated by a female U.S. TV news journalist at The Museum of Television and Radio on Thursday, April 19th.



In a political, stereotypical context, the moderator could be seen as ‘one liberator’ and the panelists as ‘oppressed women,’ but this was largely not the case. The panelists and moderator spoke candidly on the need for advancement in looking beyond the hijab or veil and discovering shared needs in each of their host countries.



Let’s get real. This topic, predominantly, has not been on the agenda of TV mainstream news media in both regions although it has been frequently debated and discussed in both public and in private spheres albeit through Western orientalist discourse. This panel discussion, though a public sphere and did on occasion fall into this type of “us” versus “them” discourse, was nonetheless distinctive in its framing of these issues since it included representatives from the mainstream TV news media world from both regions.



It was moderated by ABC’s Barbara Walters and included an impressive panel of women, including MBC anchorwoman Muna AbuSulayman, Pakistani media specialist Tasneem Ahmar, McClatchy’s Baghdad Bureau reporter Huda Ahmed, LBC journalist May Chidiac, Al Jazeera English anchorwoman Ghida Fakhry, and Iranian human rights advocate Mehrangiz Kar.



Far from a kumbaya-type of social, these panelists, notably AbuSulayman, Ahmed and Fakhry, fiercely debated Walters on several of her initiated discussions on the perceptions of Middle Eastern women.



“Americans think of woman in Saudi Arabia as not having the right to drive and covered,” Walters said and questioned AbuSulayman on the perceptions of Middle Eastern women in Saudi Arabia.



Although not having this right to drive is challenging at times AbuSulayman explained, “it is not an inconvenience” as not having equal pay for women. She blamed the later on a male/female schism rather than a religious schism. On the subject of the veil in Saudi Arabia, AbuSulayman responded, “It is not about how much is covered, it is about modesty.”



AbuSulayman is an anchorwoman and woman’s rights activist in Saudi Arabia. She hosts an Arabic version of Walter’s The View in Saudi Arabia, labeled Kalam Noua’em (Arabic for “Speaking Softly”) that airs from Lebanon to Saudi Arabia.



Learning of this new TV program in the Middle East, Walters joked, “Perhaps, you have a similar exchange like Rosie [Rosie O’Donnell], then?” The audience laughed. (For those who may not understand this inside joke, Rosie is the new co-host of The View on ABC in the United States and has received quite a lot of controversy for her political views (For an example, click here).)



Divorced and living independently with one child, AbuSulayman does not fit the old/modern political stereotype of an Arab woman. Although she only lives fifteen minutes away from her family, she explained it is still a challenge for her given the harsh restrictions imposed on women in her host country. In her discussion, she referred to Prophet Mohammed’s (phuh) first wife, Khadijah, who she considers best exemplified an independent, Arab woman. At the age of 40 years old, Khadijah was both a widow and a businesswoman who ran her own caravan trading business. It was at that age when she married Prophet Mohammed (pbuh) who was 25 years old at the time and working in that business under her supervision.



Barbara then asked Ahmar, “In Pakistan, women are not ‘liberated,’ forgive me if I’m not using the right word. Is that true?” This question falls into the Western orientalist discourse I had mentioned earlier.



Ahmar disagreed with Walters on her description of Pakistani women and explained that it is more so about them being confined to domestic duties than liberation. “The men still believe that the women should not be allowed outside the home,” she said.



Ahmar is Pakistan’s Resource and Publication Centre on Women and Media director and said that in her country of Pakistan, “Women are being killed for honor if seen with another man.” She said progress is being made, however, and explained that four male witnesses are no longer required under Pakistani law to absolve women of alleged crimes against them.



In her work, she said, she tries “to sensitize the media on gender issues” to affect men’s thinking of women in Pakistan in hopes for change. She said she is a teacher and her hope is that her students will have different mindsets than those who currently hold misogynistic views.



McClatchy’s Baghdad Bureau Reporter Huda Ahmad, who asked that her picture not be taken for fear of retribution and imprisonment by Iraqi authorities, discussed her role on the frontlines in covering war and carnage in her host country. “Anywhere you want to write a story, you have to gain their [Iraqis] trust,” she said. Her main fear, she told the audience, is that her “name will be published by the militia and Al Qaeda.”



“One story can kill you,” and added that she and her colleagues “try to avoid the cameras” and wait for the cameramen to give them clues on when the camera is turned off, so they can pass through with ease.



When asked if she will return to Iraq, she answered, “My friend once told me that if I do, I would not live long enough to write the story.” The Iraqi citizens who are aware of this, she said, now get their news from the Internet and blogs.



AbuSulayman, adding to the discussion, said she does not watch television anymore, but instead watches YouTube. In Saudi Arabia, she said there are Internet cafes, which she believed is revolutionizing the way in which Saudi Arabians retrieve their daily news. Blogging, she said, is a form of citizen journalism and is growing in Saudi Arabia.



Iranian human rights activist Mehrangiz Kar, a visiting scholar of the Harvard Law School Human Rights Program, discussed her role and plight living in Iran. She explained that she is banned from returning to her country ever since she spoke out for Iranian women’s rights. Her and her husband can not see one another due to Iran's resulting censorship, she explained. More troubling, she said, is that her husband is under house arrest for speaking on his and her behalf on camera.



“Promoting women’s human rights is impossible,” Kar said and added that “Women rights activists are working very hard through the Internet and email.”



LBC journalist May Chidiac, who lost her arm and leg in Sept. 25, 2005 in an assassination attempt in Lebanon, is determined to stay in her native country of Lebanon. “Even though we live in danger,” she said, “doesn’t mean we listen to our enemies.” There was shock and awe from the audience when she made them aware of her 26 operations.



On the subject of Middle Eastern women on Arabic television, Chidiac told AbuSulayman that she was shocked to learn from her Arabic version of The View that 99% of Saudi Arabian men are against having Arab women in the media.



Walters asked AbuSulayman why there are so many restrictions in Saudi Arabia. AbuSulayman countered that “there are mainly restrictions at the ministerial levels and at top positions in factories,” not in all employment levels. She explained that it is relative. She grew up looking up to her mother and her mother’s friends as role models as they were in top positions in the labor force themselves.



Fakhry responded to the generalization of Walters’ question of restrictions in Middle Eastern countries and said, “I think there is a tendency to generalize” [on the part of the United States].



On the subject of media, Fakhry thought it was “unfathomable” that Al Jazeera English is not shown in the United States. (However, worth noting, some of Al Jazeera English’s programming can be found on YouTube.)



Walters asked Fakhry, “Why is Al Jazeera International biased towards America?”



Fakhry responded, “The mantra of Al Jazeera International is to show two sides” and added that the network shows the “reality of what you see out there.”



Ahmad, agreeing with Fakhry, went further into the topic of generalization and told Walters, the United States government and soldiers only knew about the civilization of Babylon when they invaded her host country of Iraq. When the Iraqis learned the United States entered their country, she said, “At first, they thought they [United States] had information they [Iraqis] were not aware of.”



Walters responded, “We were ignorant not only in your country, but in other countries. We’re learning slowly but surely.”



Fakhry contested and asked Walters what is being done. Walters answered, “The big question is, what do we do about this?” Fakhry persisted, “That is not raised in the United States.” Walters then replied, “I can’t represent the whole media let alone ABC.” This is where the panel discussion became “a hot topic” as the cast of Walter’s The View would say.



These women, in the end, pointed out that what one fails to realize is that Middle Eastern women share the same need as any other woman: the need to affect positive change in their lives. Yes, there are differences in which they live their lives (from social, economic, political, educational, religious, etc.) and what ‘positive change’ may consist of, but that with which they share is relatively the same.



Following the forum, I asked Walters if she would consider having such a panel on her show, The View, in the United States. She answered that such a forum took much and energy on the part of MTR. I persisted then to ask her, then, why not have at least one woman from this panel share their views on the status and perceptions of Middle Eastern women in both media outlets? Considering that idea, Walters told me she may consider having AbuSulayman on her show given that she has an Arabic version of The View in her country.



Rima Abdelkader is a NY-based journalist and a graduate of Pace University in NY.

How I learned to love Al-Jazeera

The Arab TV network is controversial for showing Osama bin Laden's videos, but it provides a real opportunity to help people understand each other

Ofir Gendelman
Citizen Special


Saturday, April 21, 2007



CREDIT: Caren Firouz, Reuters
The entrance to the Al-Jazeera studios is seen through a cactus garden in Doha, Qatar. The channel has become an unexpected means to build respect between Israelis and Arabs.

It is common to denounce Al-Jazeera, the wildly popular Qatari TV station, as a venue for anti-Israel and anti-American propaganda, and as the favourite channel of Osama bin Laden. As an Israeli, however, I prefer to think of Al-Jazeera (along with other emerging Arabic language TV channels) as a potential friend.

Until Al-Jazeera appeared in 1996, TV stations throughout the Arab world served mainly as the mouthpieces of their respective regimes. The newscasts dutifully reported on the daily activities of the ruling king or dictator -- whom he met, where he visited, how many people came from far and wide to greet him. It was deadly dull.

Then along came Al-Jazeera, which for the first time ever allowed criticism of these same Arab regimes (except, of course, the Qatari ruling family, one of whose members is the founder of the channel). Arab viewers were immediately captivated and ratings soared. So did profits, prompting other Arabic media to copy the new genre. The Arab media scene was changed forever.

Al-Jazeera was the first Arab channel to host Israelis, officials and pundits alike, a daring novelty that would normally be viewed as treason to the Arab Cause against the Jewish state. Again, ratings went through the roof, and the lesson was clear: Book an Israeli guest and Arab audiences will tune in. Other Arabic stations did just that, and suddenly the masses were being introduced to flesh-and-blood Israelis in their own living rooms.

The Israeli government seized the opportunity. Since 2001, the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs has used a special team to serve as Israel's face on the Arab TV screens. These individuals, all of them experts in Arabic culture and language, Islamic history and Middle Eastern politics, were prepped by the top TV trainers in Israel and the United States, in order to help them better pitch the Israeli message to their designated audience.

Think about it: For generations, Arabs have been told by their leaders what to think about Jews and Israelis, but now Israeli spokespeople are able to speak directly to the Arab street, in its own language and over the heads of its illiberal governments. Arabs for the first time could see that Israelis don't have horns and tails, that we are willing to talk about peace and co-existence, that we respect and understand Arab history and culture. Even those channels that were reluctant at first to host Israelis, for fear of "fraternizing with the enemy," could see that interviewing Israelis in Arabic brought ratings, attention and influence.

As the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs' first spokesperson to the Arab media outlets, I witnessed how the attitude toward Israel changed over time. At first, every time I was interviewed on the evening news of Al-Jazeera and its competitors, the anchors treated me rudely.

Although Arab culture is famous for its hospitality and manners, no one said "Good evening" or a simple "Hello, thanks for being with us." At the end of these interviews the anchors would cut me off and finish with a statement such as: "Surely, the Palestinian struggle will go on."

Slowly but surely, they got used to me and the discourse became warm. A friend of mine was killed in a terrorist bombing at the Hebrew University campus in Jerusalem, and 15 minutes after hearing the news I received a call from an Arab producer. I went on the show to give the official Israeli response to the attack but, grief-stricken, I also told the anchor that my best friend had died in the attack. Through my earpiece I heard my interviewer say, "May Allah's mercy be upon him. I'm sorry for your loss."

To me, that was a breakthrough. We were talking to each other as people to people.

To supplement this direct engagement with ordinary Arab citizens, the Israeli foreign ministry created an Arabic website, altawasul.net (altawasul means "making a connection"), featuring information not just about Israel's government and policies, but also a window into the "Israel behind the news."

When Arabs think of Israelis, they often think of soldiers, but we are a nation of poets, peaceniks, scientists, philosophers, even beach bums. The website is so popular now that writers from Arab countries which do not have diplomatic relations with Israel use it as a platform to publish their articles and to speak directly to the Israeli and Arab publics alike, calling for peace.

This idea of talking to the Arab world in its own language, using its own terminology, should be adopted by other democratic countries, especially those who feel the war on terror is at least in part a war over ideas.

It's astonishing to me the U.S. State Department has just one Arabic speaking diplomat, representing the entire Bush administration on highly important matters such as the war in Iraq and the situation in the Middle East.

The application to bring Al-Jazeera to Canadian television was controversial, but Canada, Britain and other G-8 members could learn a lot from the Israeli experience. After all, they enjoy a huge advantage of having diplomatic relations with all the Arab countries, something Israel sadly does not have.

Everyone likes to talk about winning the "hearts and minds" of Arabs, but that's impossible to do if you don't know their culture and background, and if you don't start talking to them in their own language.

Ofir Gendelman is a diplomat at the Embassy of Israel in Ottawa. He returns to Israel this summer to take up duties as deputy director of the Israeli foreign ministry's Arab media division.

Al-Jazeera channel offered locally, struggling nationwide

Toledo Free Press Staff Writer
news@toledofreepress.com

Nearly six months after its debut, Al-Jazeera's English language television has gained strong viewership across Europe and in parts of Asia, Australia — and even Israel, according to station executives and local companies that carry it.

But no major cable or satellite provider in the United States is carrying the channel, a decision the network blames on political pressure. U.S. carriers, however, say there is simply no market.

Nearly 100 million households worldwide receive Al-Jazeera's English service, almost half as many as CNN, station executives say. Since January, it has been broadcasting news to 550,000 Israeli homes on Yes TV, the country's largest cable provider.

“It's extraordinary that while the rest of the world is happy to watch us ... the U.S. stands in splendid isolation,'' said Al-Jazeera English Managing Director Nigel Parsons at the station's headquarters in the Persian Gulf state of Qatar.

Station executives said they expected a dogged battle for American airwaves because Al-Jazeera's Arabic channel has been excoriated by the Bush administration as a mouthpiece for terrorists including al-Qaida's Osama bin Laden.

Al-Jazeera in Toledo
Buckeye CableSystem spokes-man Tom Dawson said the company offers Al-Jazeera English on channel 220 to area subscribers of its digital basic package. The network began airing through Buckeye on March 19.

Dawson said the cable service provider decided to carry the channel in part because of the large Middle Eastern population in the area.

“We think it helps add to the diversity of the channel,” he said.

Buckeye, which is owned by Block Communications, received some requests for the station prior to offering it, but not overwhelming demand.

Dawson said Al-Jazeera English differs significantly from the Al-Jazeera Arabic. He said it's a mainstream news channel such as CNN or the BBC.

Buckeye received several complaints when it first announced their intention to carry the station, but those have mostly subsided since it began airing, Dawson said.

“We've received as many compliments as complaints since it's been on,” he said.

Dawson said most of those who have complained haven't actually watched the channel.

Retired Oregon resident Yehia Shousher, the former president of the Toledo-based Lebanese-American Association, said he watches Al-Jazeera English. He said his impression is that most people in the area of Middle Eastern descent watch the channel, particularly those who are first or second generation Americans.

“They like to watch it and listen to the Middle Eastern news,” Shousher said.

Shousher said many local residents of Middle Eastern descent also watch the Arabic Al-Jazeera, which they receive via satellite.

Still, No. 1 U.S. cable provider Comcast Corp. was ready to carry Al-Jazeera English's November debut in the Detroit area, Al-Jazeera executives said.

But Comcast suddenly pulled out just before launch, Parsons said. He and Wadah Khanfar, managing director of Al-Jazeera Arabic, believed the decision was spurred by U.S. political opposition.

“We suspect there was outside pressure, including of a political nature,'' Parsons said. But he said he had no evidence of such pressure, and did not know whether pressure came from the U.S. government, elected officials or lobby groups.

A spokeswoman for Philadelphia-based Comcast, D'Arcy Rudnay, said scarce bandwidth and not political pressure was to blame.

“We looked at the local lineup and determined that the channel capacity would be better used to add other channels and services that our customers have been asking for, e.g. more (high definition) and HD On Demand programming,'' Rudnay said in an e-mail.

Al-Jazeera in Detroit
Detroit, home to a large Arab community, was considered an ideal market for Arab-focused news. Parsons said Comcast's Detroit affiliate was “pushing for an agreement'' to carry Al-Jazeera, which broadcasts in high definition.

Comcast's Detroit spokesman, Jerome Espy, said he wasn't familiar with the details of the Al-Jazeera negotiations. Espy said Comcast Detroit has bandwidth to spare for channels “that fit a certain niche.'' But he said there was already programming catering to local Arabs.

For now, Al-Jazeera's only U.S. carriers are Fision, a small provider in Houston; Globecast, a French satellite provider; and local providers in Ohio, Vermont and Washington D.C.

The station is currently negotiating with others, Parsons said.

Al-Jazeera faces questions about its marketability in America, however.

At one major cable carrier, an executive said Al-Jazeera's English programming was too similar to BBC World and there weren't enough likely American viewers to add another foreign-centric news channel.

The executive spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss corporate strategy.

Al-Jazeera in Israel
Al-Jazeera English has found an audience in Israel for its mix of extensive African, Asian and Middle Eastern coverage. Viewers in Israel also have access to Al-Jazeera's original Arabic news channel.

“This is thought of as one of the best news channels in the world,'' said Yes TV spokeswoman Libi Zipser, speaking of Al-Jazeera English. “There are those who think that certain channels are less supportive of Israel, but we just let our customers see what they want to see.''

Jeanette Elmekis, 58, whose husband was killed in the 1973 Middle East war, said she thought it was “very important'' to understand what people perceived as Israel's enemies think — even if it appears unfair.

“But if I hate him (my enemy), that won't heal my wounds,'' Elmekis said.

Other analysts say it is not surprising Israel has accepted

Al-Jazeera English, given how aggressive and skeptical Israeli media are. That has conditioned Israelis to such coverage.

Al-Jazeera “is very critical of Israel, and biased and highly problematic. But you don't ban it,'' said Eytan Gilboa, a communications professor at Israel's Bar-Ilan University.

YouTube deal finally makes Al Jazeera English available in the US

By Jeffrey Blyth

Friday, 20 April 2007
The new English language version of Al Jazeera has finally found an outlet in the United States. It has signed a deal with YouTube which will carry the Qatar-based news channel.

One reason that Al Jazeera had difficulty securing a cable outlet in the US – despite signing up several top-name journalists including David Frost – was accusations that it was spreading anti-American and anti-Israel propaganda.

On YouTube Al Jazeera will be known as a "branded channel" – putting it in the same category as the National Hockey League and Capitol Records, which use the website to promote their products. A spokesman for Al Jazeera, Russell Merryman, who is in charge of the company's news service and website, said the deal with YouTube offers an opportunity for "people from all around the world to broadcast and express themselves by sharing videos in a safe and lawful manner".

The YouTube channel will run segments from such Al Jazeera English language shows as "Frost All Over the World", "Inside Iraq" a debate-style show that originates in Baghdad, a show hosted by Riz Khan, a former BBC and CNN journalist and a programme about the UN called "Political Bytes" hosted by UN correspondent Mark Seddon.

Al-Jazeera Memo Trial Starts in London

By DAVID STRINGER
Associated Press Writer
LONDON (AP) -- A British government official and a former political researcher went on trial Wednesday for allegedly leaking a classified memo in which President Bush reportedly referred to bombing the Arab television station Al-Jazeera.

David Keogh, 50, a cipher expert, and Leo O'Connor, 44, a lawmaker's aide, are accused of violating secrecy laws by disclosing a document relating to 2004 talks between Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair. Both defendants deny violating the Official Secrets Act.

Prosecutors allege Keogh passed the memo to O'Connor in May 2004, who in turn placed it in a file he handed to his boss, Tony Clarke, then a legislator who had voted against Britain's decision to join the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003.

The Daily Mirror newspaper previously reported that the memo noted Blair had argued against Bush's suggestion of bombing Al-Jazeera's headquarters in Doha, Qatar. The Daily Mirror said its sources disagreed on whether Bush's suggestion was serious.

Blair said he had no information about any proposed U.S. action against Al-Jazeera, and the White House called the claims "outlandish and inconceivable."

In his opening remarks, prosecutor David Perry did not mention the memo's contents, but said jurors would see the document during parts of the trial that would be closed to the public because of the sensitivity of the contents.

The document, marked "Secret-Personal," was intended to be restricted to senior officials and was written by a Blair adviser, he said.

Keogh and O'Connor put the lives of troops in Iraq at risk because the memo contained defense data, Perry said.

Bush and Blair met in Washington on April 16, 2004, while the Coalition Provisional Authority was acting as administrator in postwar Iraq against what Perry said was "the background of the insurgency."

"We live in a democratic society, not the Wild West," the prosecutor told the court. "It is not for people to decide they are going to be the sheriff in town."

Keogh worked at a government communications bunker handling sensitive documents and intelligence, Perry said. The unit relayed information to diplomats overseas via encrypted or secure methods.

Perry said Keogh received a faxed copy of the memo to send on to an official, but duplicated it unlawfully before doing so and later passed the document to O'Connor.

Clarke, who is no longer a lawmaker, alerted authorities when he discovered the memo among the paperwork from O'Connor.

Britain's Foreign Office said Keogh is suspended pending the outcome of the case.

Prosecutors said the trial would likely last two to three weeks.

Calls for release of Gitmo cameraman

Sudan's Justice Minister says US officials are responsible for the health of an Al Jazeera news network cameraman held captive in Guantanamo prison.

Mohammad Ali Al-Marazi's warning follows a 100-day hunger strike by the Sudanese-born cameraman, Sami Al Hajj, who was protesting his unlawful detention.

Al-Marazi condemned the cameraman's detention and called it an illegal act which runs counter to human rights.

He added that American claims of supporting human rights were "false" and that the US government has imprisoned scores of detainees without trial in the now notorious Guantanamo prison.

Sami Al Hajj was captured while in transit to Afghanistan in December 2001. Since 2007, he has been held without charge as an "enemy combatant" in Guantanamo's Camp Delta.

Calls for his release have come from around the world. Reporters Sans Frontiers has repeatedly condemned his detention and expressed concern over his imprisonment by launching an online petition calling for his release.

A NEW ERA FOR GLOBAL NEWS AND COMMUNICATIONS

Mario Lubetkin

APRIL 2007 (IPS) - Al Jazeera's plan to win a section of the western market by launching an English-language channel last November set off a global battle for giant audiences by other international TV networks, writes Mario Lubetkin, director-general of the IPS news agency.

In this analysis, Lubetkin writes that although the spokespeople of BBC of London and France 24 do not attribute their entrance into the universe of television to competition with Al Jazeera's English channel, what is certain is that both have announced or begun this month a pilot phase of satellite channels in Arabic.

But without credibility, the new companies have no future, which was the case with the Arabic-language channel Al Hurra, promoted by the U.S. government. And respect for the local and regional culture is more important than the last technological advance or the deep pockets of investors.

Welcome to Al Jazeera English (You Tube)

Did Politics Push Comcast to Pull Al-Jazeera HD?

By Phillip Swann

Washington, D.C. (April 17, 2007) -- Comcast backed away from a commitment to launch Al-Jazeera in High-Definition due to political pressure.

That's according to Al-Jazeera executives who made the charge to the Associated Press. Comcast denies the allegation.

Al-Jazeera's new English-speaking channel launched in the United States six months ago but has been picked up by just a handful of small cable systems.

The Arab news network has sparked controversy worldwide for what some say is favorable coverage of terrorists including Osama Bin Laden. The network denies the charges.

Al-Jazeera English managing director Nigel Parsons tells AP that Comcast was set to launch the high-def Al-Jazeera in Detroit, which is home to many Arab-Americans. However, Parsons says the cable operator pulled out just prior to the launch.

"We suspect there was outside pressure, including of a political nature,' Parsons said.

However, Parsons said he did not have any concrete evidence that Comcast was pressured by government officials or anyone else.

Comcast spokeswoman D'Arcy Rudnay denies the allegation, saying that the cable operator decided instead to use the bandwidth for more popular services.

'We looked at the local lineup and determined that the channel capacity would be better used to add other channels and services that our customers have been asking for, more (High Definition) and HD On Demand programming," Rudnay told the wire service.

But Parsons says the Comcast office in Detroit was "pushing" for Al-Jazeera to be added.

Jerome Espy, the cable operator's spokesman in Detroit, said he didn't know the details of the negotiations.

Al-Jazeera's American Accent

There is only one U.S. Marine in my Rolodex, and he can be found under the letter "R": Captain Josh Rushing. A telephone number follows, though I don't know if it's still in service. Certainly Mr. Rushing is no longer in service, at least as far as the Marines are concerned. He is now a reporter for Al-Jazeera English, and the face of Middle America in the Middle East.

Mr. Rushing entered a lot of Rolodexes in 2004 after the release of the documentary "Control Room," in which he appeared as a spokesman for CentCom while stationed in Qatar during the early days of the Iraq war. Soft-spoken and thoughtful, if unsophisticated, he was a refreshing contrast to the androids-in-fatigues usually wheeled out by the Pentagon to hurl jargon at reporters.

Mr. Rushing was willing to state that the civilian deaths shown on Al-Jazeera horrified him, and drew a parallel between Al-Jazeera and Fox News, saying that both stations played to the patriotic expectations of their target audiences.

Wittingly or not, Mr. Rushing had entered a zone of moral relativism or uncertainty — which is attractive in the cinema and anathema to the military — and his journalistic star rose as rapidly as his military one fell. Critics, gearing up for the divinely ordained overthrow of President Bush in the 2004 presidential election, gushed over the film's unlikely hero. Requests for interviews followed, but Mr. Rushing was silenced by his superior officers. Eventually he left the Marines and the drab world of five-figure salaries to join the Al-Jazeera offshoot, Al-Jazeera English. He has now produced enough reports (available on YouTube and through his Web site, www.joshrushing.com) to give us a sense of what he's up to.

Is he an important figure? I think he is. Although Al-Jazeera's absence from American airwaves renders him nearly invisible here, the channel's popularity makes him a considerable factor in the rest of the world. His book, "Mission Al-Jazeera: Build a Bridge, Seek the Truth, Change the World," will be published by Palgrave MacMillan in June, and American fascination with Arab media continues to grow. Tonight, the Museum of Television and Radio is hosting a panel discussion, "The War of Information in the Middle East," the first in a three-part series to focus on the region. ("Women, the Media, and the Middle East," moderated by Barbara Walters, will be held on April 19, and "Covering the World: Al Jazeera," on May 3).

On Al-Jazeera English, Mr. Rushing's role is to play an ordinary, earnest, patriotic Texan who has seen the light about his government's foreign policy — what Gore Vidal mockingly calls "perpetual war for perpetual peace" — and mended his ways accordingly. On air, he makes a point of referring to his past as a Marine, to his complicity in insisting on the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, and he presents himself as a humble man still in the process of deprogramming himself so that he can report the news rather than spin it. But there is no doubt that, spin or no spin, the subjects he selects tend to present America in an unflattering light.

Mr. Rushing's ventures in longform reportage (a specialty of the channel) include "Hollywood: Casting the Enemy," about the image of Arabs in American movies, with a particular focus on their roles as villains. "Spin: The Art of Selling War," is a slick piece of counter-spin that paints every American military venture since Vietnam (with the possible exception of Kosovo) as based on lies, lies, and more damned lies. "The Other Washington" is a painfully aimless essay about an unemployed young African-American in Anacostia, a dangerous Washington D.C. neighborhood; finally, there's "Vanished," about Aban Elias, an Iraqi-American civil engineer who returned to Baghdad to help rebuild the country after its liberation, only to be kidnapped in mysterious circumstances. He remains missing (there was no ransom demand, nor any tape of his death), and Mr. Rushing suggests that the American government doesn't care about him because he is a Muslim and Arab-American as opposed to, say, Daniel Pearl.

None of these 15- to 20-minute documentaries is particularly well shaped or argued (although "Spin: The Art of Selling War" is cleverly asserted), and it seems unlikely they'd make the cut on CNN, regardless of their viewpoint. Yet Mr. Rushing's good press has only increased since he became a reporter. In a recent New York Observer profile, he was dubbed a "matinee idol," a "hunk of war," and — absurdly — compared to Peter Jennings, who was by far the most articulate network anchor in America until his death from lung cancer in 2005.

The segment about the role of Arabs in Hollywood movies includes interviews with actors Tony Shalhoub, Omar Sharif, Chris Maher, and Alexander Sadiq, among others. Overall, it's quite evenhanded, in part because several actors point out that, particularly since the attack on the World Trade Center, Hollywood has increasingly offered Arabs sympathetic parts and tried to make them more three-dimensional, even when they're cast as villains. But Mr. Rushing seems to believe that merely depicting a terrorist in a film is de facto to engage in "negative stereotyping." If this is truly a problem, then the only solution would be to eliminate all terrorists from films, and perhaps villains also.

When it was first announced that Mr. Rushing had signed up with Al-Jazeera, Fox's Sean Hannity reportedly posted a picture of him on screen with the word "Traitor" printed above it. In fact, Mr. Rushing seems willing to toy with the notion, at least for marketing purposes. On the cover of his forthcoming autobiography, he is photographed, unshaven, wearing a keffiyeh — a titillating suggestion that this former Marine has gone over to the other side.

But the lesson of Al-Jazeera English — for now, anyway — is that there are no sides, only an endless array of viewpoints. Some happen to be more fashionable than others, of course, and are more likely to sell books.

mediatenor: Jazeera deals with domestic affairs of wider number of countries

Competing views

Foreign-based bureaus give Al-Jazeera a run for the money

By ALI JAAFAR

With the Middle East rarely out of news headlines, the battle for the hearts and minds of Arab auds has taken on ever more importance.
The two top-rated pan-Arab newscasters, Al-Jazeera and Al-Arabiya, have long dominated news coverage in the region, but a clutch of Western news orgs are trying to change the equation by entering the potentially lucrative Arab news market.

France 24, the country's first international newscaster, launched its first Arabic-language service April 2. The new channel will initially offer four hours of broadcasting a day before ramping up to 24 hours a day by the end of the year.

"Al-Jazeera has done a great job, but essentially it's offering the Arabic perspective. We need something more," says France 24 CEO Alain De Pouzilhac. "The role of France could be a special one thanks to its strong relationship with the Arab world in the last few decades, and because we weren't involved in the Iraq war."

Also joining the increasingly crowded marketplace is German pubcaster Deutsche Welle, which already offers Arabic TV programming for a few hours a day. Russia Today is launching its own Arabic-language channel later this year, to be dubbed Rusiya Al-Yaum. The Russian net will be headed by Akram Khuzam, formerly Al-Jazeera's Moscow bureau chief.

Beeb's bid

The most anticipated of all the new offerings, however, is likely to be the BBC's Arabic TV, set for launch in the autumn.

The Beeb's Arabic-language satcaster is being funded to the tune of £19 million ($35 million) by the Foreign Office.

"I don't underestimate the challenge or the competition in a crowded media marketplace, but BBC Arabic will be the only major international news provider in the Middle East offering a service in Arabic across TV, radio and online," says Salah Negm, who left his position as head of newsgathering at Al-Arabiya to head the BBC's new channel.

For all the desire by these Western news orgs to stake a voice in the debate, the less-than-stellar performance of Al-Hurra, the U.S. government-funded Arab-language newscaster set up in 2004 to address viewers in the region, has fueled skeptics.

"If Al-Hurra is anything to go by, then there's no chance for these new channels to steal audiences from the existing ones," says Jihad Ballout, who has served as spokesperson for both Al-Jazeera and Al-Arabiya. "The BBC is different. It has a name and a culture, which is an asset. If anyone has a chance, it's them."

While execs at both Al-Jazeera and Al-Arabiya are keen to stress they're not afraid of the extra competition, it is reputed that Al-Jazeera has been offering its staff better pay packages and extra benefits to fight off potential defections.

Not that the flow of information is all West-to-East. Al-Jazeera finally launched its English-language operation in November, and rumors persist of MBC launching an English-language sister channel to Al-Arabiya.

"An English-language news channel is an idea on the table, but the business plan has to make sense. We're not going to issue a blank check just to be in the global news arena," says Mazen Hayek, MBC Group's director of marketing and PR.

Al-Jazeera English scores gains — except in US

The Associated PressPublished: April 16, 2007

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates: Nearly six months after its debut, Al-Jazeera's English language television has gained strong viewership across Europe and in parts of Asia, Australia — and even Israel, according to station executives and local companies that carry it.

But no major cable or satellite provider in the United States is carrying the channel, a decision the network blames on political pressure. U.S. carriers, however, say there is simply no market.

Nearly 100 million households worldwide receive Al-Jazeera's English service, almost half as many as CNN, station executives say. Since January, it has been broadcasting news to 550,000 Israeli homes on Yes TV, the country's largest cable provider.

"It's extraordinary that while the rest of the world is happy to watch us ... the U.S. stands in splendid isolation," said Al-Jazeera English managing director Nigel Parsons at the station's headquarters in the Persian Gulf state of Qatar.

Station executives said they expected a dogged battle for American airwaves because Al-Jazeera's Arabic channel has been excoriated by the Bush administration as a mouthpiece for terrorists including al Qaida's Osama bin Laden.

Still, No. 1 U.S. cable provider Comcast Corp. ,was ready to carry Al-Jazeera English's November debut in the Detroit area, Al-Jazeera executives said.

But Comcast suddenly pulled out just before launch, Parsons said. He and Wadah Khanfar, managing director of Al-Jazeera Arabic, believed the decision was spurred by U.S. political opposition.

"We suspect there was outside pressure, including of a political nature," Parsons said. But he said he had no evidence of such pressure, and did not know whether pressure came from the U.S. government, elected officials or lobby groups.

A spokeswoman for Philadelphia-based Comcast, D'Arcy Rudnay, said scarce bandwidth and not political pressure was to blame.

"We looked at the local lineup and determined that the channel capacity would be better used to add other channels and services that our customers have been asking for, e.g. more (high definition) and HD On Demand programming," Rudnay said in an e-mail.

Detroit, home to a large Arab community, was considered an ideal market for Arab-focused news. Parsons said Comcast's Detroit affiliate was "pushing for an agreement" to carry Al Jazeera, which broadcasts in high-definition.

Comcast's Detroit spokesman, Jerome Espy, said he wasn't familiar with the details of the Al-Jazeera negotiations. Espy said Comcast Detroit has bandwidth to spare for channels "that fit a certain niche." But he said there was already programming catering to local Arabs.

For now, Al-Jazeera's only U.S. carriers are Fision, a small provider in Houston; Globecast, a French satellite provider; and local providers in Ohio, Vermont and Washington D.C.

The station is currently negotiating with others, Parsons said.

Al-Jazeera faces questions about its marketability in America, however. At one major cable carrier, an executive said Al-Jazeera's English programming was too similar to BBC World and there weren't enough likely American viewers to add another foreign-centric news channel.

The executive spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss corporate strategy.

Interestingly, however, Al-Jazeera English has found an audience in Israel for its mix of extensive African, Asian and Middle Eastern coverage. Viewers in Israel also have access to Al-Jazeera's original Arabic news channel.

"This is thought of as one of the best news channels in the world," said Yes TV spokeswoman Libi Zipser, speaking of Al-Jazeera English. "There are those who think that certain channels are less supportive of Israel, but we just let our customers see what they want to see."

Jeanette Elmekis, 58, whose husband was killed in the 1973 Middle East war, said she thought it was "very important" to understand what people perceived as Israel's enemies think — even if it appears unfair.

"But if I hate him (my enemy), that won't heal my wounds," she said.

Other analysts say it is not surprising Israel has accepted Al-Jazeera English, given how aggressive and skeptical Israeli media are. That has conditioned Israelis to such coverage.

Al Jazeera "is very critical of Israel, and biased and highly problematic. But you don't ban it," said Eytan Gilboa, a communications professor at Israel's Bar-Ilan University.

Now on YouTube: The Latest News From Al Jazeera, in English

By SARA IVRY
Published: April 16, 2007

YouTube may be best known for showing video clips from its users of hamsters’ pratfalls or attempts to don as many T-shirts as possible. Starting today, it will also become an easy way to view content from Al Jazeera English, the English-language version of the Qatar-based television news station.

Al Jazeera introduced its English language version in November but has been unable to secure a deal with a cable television company to broadcast nationwide. Critics accuse Al Jazeera, which is available in the United States through satellite television or the Internet, of spreading anti-American and anti-Israel propaganda.

But to YouTube, Al Jazeera English is just another “branded channel” that provides video content, much the way the National Hockey League, Capitol Records and the BBC do.

“Having a branded channel does not represent an endorsement of that channel’s content,” said Julie Supan, YouTube’s head of communications. She said in an e-mail message that YouTube strives “to provide a community where people from around the world can broadcast and express themselves by sharing videos in a safe and lawful manner.”

For Al Jazeera English, the real estate on YouTube offers “an opportunity for us to put our content in front of a whole swath of viewers watching around the world,” said Russell Merryman, the company’s editor in chief for Web and new media.

“We are aware of the reputation that we have, or the name,” Mr. Merryman said, “and we’re happy to counter that” by making programming more available for viewers to judge for themselves.

The YouTube channel will run segments from such Al Jazeera English shows as “Frost Over the World” with David Frost; “Inside Iraq,” billed as a weekly debate program offering opinions from guests on Iraq; and “Riz Khan,” a former BBC and CNN journalist who now works for Al Jazeera, along with new material produced exclusively for the venture, like “Political Bytes” featuring the network’s United Nations correspondent, Mark Seddon. It plans to add 10 to 15 new clips each week.

It remains to be seen how YouTube users will respond to Al Jazeera English, but some people close to the media industry said they welcomed an additional voice in political debate.

“The idea that people can click and watch English language programming on Al Jazeera is important because it’s an alternative point of view,” said John Stauber, executive director of the Center for Media and Democracy, a watchdog organization. He said he saw the arrangement as an encouraging sign about the diversity of news coverage that could increasingly find a home online. SARA IVRY

Offering Al Jazeera English provides opportunity to fulfill the civic duties of media owners in a democratic society

BY: Courtney C. Radsch

April 14, 2007 05:53 PM

What do Vermont and Ohio have in common? And why does this particular commonality illustrate the more enlightened and democratic nature of certain citizens in these two states? Well, cable operators in both states have decided to offer access to Al

Jazeera English rather than being deterred by the narrow-mindedness of other satellite and cable operators who have focused on the potentially negative (or simple lack of) commercial consequences, either believing that only Arabs would watch it and that all other people would protest and cancel their subscription. They have not taken their role in a democratic society seriously, and instead of promoting public discourse, educated opinion formation, and transparency by showing the valid news programming of a station that focuses on a region of such vital importance, they have undermined the very nature and purpose of democracy, where rational discourse is supposed to form public opinion.

Voice of America news reports that Buckeye CableSystem in Toledo, Ohio has decided to carry Al Jazeera English because its chairman, Allan Block, saw a large potential audience in the large Arab American population there, the opportunity to educate people on the Middle East, and said that objections to the station were due to “Bias against anything that starts with 'al' and is clearly Arabic." The fact that he got a deal on the lease means he is offering it without additional charge in his cable packages, which is more than DishNetwork does for the Arabic version which costs a whopping $34.95 per month where I live. Block also highlighted his choice as a public service and part of what he can give back to the community in terms of encouraging investment in the Midwest:

"The Midwest that is in recession and has been going through economic decline could certainly use a different kind of relationship with the rich Persian Gulf… with the Persian Gulf that has capital to invest," he adds meaningfully.

Of course, according to the article, most people didn’t even know AJE was available on cable, though that didn’t mean they didn’t have an opinion.

Many echo the thoughts of Toledo an Ed Raymer, a truck driver who says he was passing through New York City on September 11th, when the terrorist attacks occurred.

At a downtown bar, he insists Americans don't need to hear the views of Arabs who are at war with the U.S. "I can see it being okay for the Arab community," he says, "but everybody else, with what's going on over there, shouldn't be subjected to it."

His friend Phil Lazuski predicts, "It's gonna cause a big chaos. If it comes here, it's gonna cause a big chaos."

The VOA news report actually does a really good job reporting why there is a need to for American’s to have access and explains, in a departure from most government perspectives, that:

“Americans generally see only excerpts of al Jazeera broadcasts, on U.S. news programs. They're usually scenes of Arab crowds mourning or protesting, or portions of videotaped statements, delivered to the Qatar-based station by al-Qaida or another terrorist organization.

That's led some Americans to associate al Jazeera with terrorism. Al Jazeera officials say they do not air terrorist videos unless they have legitimate news value. They say they want to change the network's negative image in America. So they decided to say it in English.

Too bad the officials, policymakers, think-tank analysts, and academics in Washington can’t hear what’s being said. If you want to see AJE on DishNetwork, which currently offers all the cable news channels as well as an Arabic package that includes Al Jazeera (Arabic) email them and suggest it. And while you're at it, you can email Buckeye to let them know we appreciate them fulfilling their civic duty (even if the media "watchdog" group Accuracy in Media mistakenly disagrees)

The War of Ideas

By Elizabeth DiNovella, April 13, 2007

As part of its four-part special series, “News War,” PBS’s Frontline tackles the role of the Arab media. “The War of Ideas,” the last episode of the series, looks at “the media revolution sweeping the Arab world since the advent of Al Jazeera.” The episode is eye opening for what it reveals and perhaps, more importantly, for what it leaves out.

Reporter Greg Barker begins the story at the U.S. State Department’s new Rapid Response Unit. This group, started by the Undersecretary of State for Public Diplomacy and close Bush ally, Karen Hughes, monitors what the international media is saying about America. It writes briefing reports in real time and develops a reply, which is then sent out to State Department offices worldwide. Barker says the Rapid Response Unit is like a campaign war room. These efforts aim to counteract the negative image of the U.S., or so the thinking goes.

Barker then goes to the Arab world and examines the myriad satellite channels that have flourished since Al Jazeera started broadcasting in the mid-1990s. What was so revolutionary about Al Jazeera was that, for the first time, Arab journalists were shaping public opinion outside of the narrow parameters of the state. For too long the media landscape in the Middle East was dominated by government. All of that has changed.

“The War of Ideas” delivers interviews with news directors from several different Arabic-language stations, but much time is spent looking at Al Jazeera .

The U.S. government is not alone in its criticisms of this channel. In Iraq, Al Jazeera was able to film inside the insurgency, including footage of attacks against U.S. troops. Former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said that the channel was anti-American and in cahoots with the insurgents. Though the U.S. army twice bombed Al Jazeera offices, once in Afghanistan and once in Iraq, it denied it was in retaliation for unfavorable coverage.

In 2004, the Iraqi government kicked Al Jazeera out of Iraq. But the documentary interviews one reporter who noted that Al Jazeera was not responsible for the increase in attacks. Just look at what happened after it left, the reporter says.

Al Jazeera’s coverage of the Israeli-Lebanese war of summer 2006 was criticized for being pro-Hezbollah. In response, an Al Jazeera correspondent said it was against the war itself. This point of view shaped coverage.<

What’s missing here is the obvious correlation in the U.S. press. The American press has finally admitted that its coverage in the run up to the Iraq War was not skeptical enough. Some stations were unabashedly pro-war.

A U.S. military spokesman based in the region says Al Jazeera is “like Fox News. It caters to its audience.” Al Jazeera’s Washington, D.C., bureau chief notes that the channel needs to reflect its audience, and that audience is getting more conservative.

Al Jazeera recently launched an English language channel. It broadcasts all over the world but is not available in the United States (though the State Department’s Rapid Response Unit does monitor it). So why can’t we see Al Jazeera English? Because a conservative group, Accuracy in Media, fought to keep Al Jazeera English out of our country. All satellite systems are refusing to carry the channel.

The U.S. military spokesmen in Dubai think it is “ludicrous” that Al Jazeera isn’t available in United States. Americans are becoming more isolated, they say. They add that Al Jazeera needs to stand and fall on its on merits. Americans, these military men say, should not be afraid of ideas.

Too often the Bush Administration portrays the Iraq War as a war of ideas. That view leaves out the fact that it is a war of cluster bombs and white phosphate. It is a war of human casualties and maimed civilians. Just look at the ACLU’s new database of civilian casualties, culled from U.S. government documents obtained through Freedom of Information Act requests with the Defense Department, to get an idea of the human costs of the war.

The State Department can fight a war of perceptions, but until the government stops bombing people, perceptions may never change.

“America is doing a charm offensive,” says the Al Arabiya bureau chief in Dubai. It’s an impossible job because, he says, “they are trying to sell an unsellable product.”