American media assaults Arab and Islamic media out of guilt
November 10th, 2007There has been a rise in the number of attacks against the Arab and Islamic media over the past few years. The focus of much of the attacks is al-Jazeera, for no other reason except that al-Jazeera is the best known of the Arab media in the United States, and the most often slandered, libeled and demonized.
Most recently, Kristen Gillespie wrote a column in The Nation, the magazine that normally leans “liberal” except when the issues have to do with the Middle East, Palestine-Israel and Islam. Her column in this week’s issue online, The New Face of Al Jazeera, slams the satellite network in what I consider a very unprofessional and unfair manner.
I say that in this context. Al-Jazeera is doing in Iraq, what the mainstream American media did in Vietnam in the late 1960s and early 1970s.
Gillespie slams al-Jazeera as being unprofessional in a very subtle but vicious manner. She notes accurately that Al-Jazeera broadcasts now in both English and Arabic, and says that the English version is fine. But then she goes on to say that al-Jazeera’s reporters in the field are biased and unprofessional for reporting the harsh realities of the Iraq war. What she is really saying in this is that al-Jazeera has violated the most sacred principle of journalism and is deceitful: they say one thing in English and something else in Arabic.
Why is the mainstream American media so harsh in their constant, unfair attacks against the Arab and Islamic World media? Certainly the Arab and Islamic World media have problems. But then, so does the media in the United States. The American media is biased against Arabs and Muslims. They routinely deny Arab and Muslims equal voice in Op-Ed pages, for example. They constantly publish racist stereotypes about Arabs and Muslims, stereotypes when written about Blacks, Hispanics and other “acceptable” minorities and religious groups, would be intolerable.
So why the attacks?
I think it is becuase the mainstream American media has a guilty conscience. Al-Jazeera is doing what they are supposed to be doing, but are not. They should be covering the Iraq war the way the mainstream American media gallantly and courageoulsy covered the vietnam War, publishing the ugly truth despite its rough and oftentimes horrendous edges. Instead, the American media allowed itself to be “compromised,” by accepting a self-imposed status as “embedded.” Being an “embedded” journalist in Iraq is not a mark of distinction. There were embedded journalists reporting during the Vietnam War but they were denounced as hacks and shills for the American government and for the Military. The greatest reporting came from independent journalists like Dan Rather who rejected government and military control and reported the harsh, ugly truth, a truth that ended up changing how Americans viewed the Vietnam War. It was American journalists, not soldiers, who exposed the war crimes that took place during Vietnam like My Lai. The Iraqi My Lai might be the rape and murder of the Iraqi girl, by American Marines who then murdered her family to keep the rape and murder a secret. It was a soldier who helped expose that crime, not the media. Rumors of Marine war crimes in Iraq are abundant but only seem to surface when a soldier with conscience — and they are the true heroes of Iraq — stand up and declare that immoral conduct is wrong and must be exposed.
No, the American media is failing to properly cover the war in Iraq, covering it from an idealogical standpoint. I understand why. The American media is under public pressure. The conservative fascists in the American media (Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, the very racist FrontPage Magazine and its demagogue David Horowitz, and Anne Coulter) are leaning on them, pulling the heartstrings of an uneducated American public that has been confused by the causes of Sept. 11, 2001, to blame all Arabs and all Muslims, when in fact it was the result of a handful of fanatics, Osama Bin Laden and al-Qaeda, who claim to represent Islam, but do not.
The re-definition of patriotism caused by the terrorism and President Bush’s simplistic, fascist declaration “You are either with us or against us” policies also have cast journalists who question the war as being unAmerican, not just by the rightwing critics, but by their own colleagues.
Their conduct in covering the Iraq War is pathetic and shameful. And the only response they have is to redirect attention elsewhere, and say that al-Jazeera is biased because its images reflect the harsh realities of the Iraq War and convey views that Americans reject.
I think a part also stems from the lingering Crusades. The war between Christianity and Islam has never ended in the minds of many Americans.
You can read my column on the topic at www.ArabWritersGroup.com or at the new Society of Professional Journalists SPJ-Arab Journalists al-Sahafiyeen blog where Arab American professional journalists are slowly shattering the iron-fisted ceiling that oppresses Arab and Muslim writers in America under the guise of a phony claim of “freedom of the press.”
Ray Hanania
Loading ...
Loading...
You’re wrong, our media is heavily biased against our efforts, and against good news.
I think the main issue with Al Jazeera is that they care more about how they market themselves to the target audience. They admit this in the documentary “Control Room.” They basically say what they know we want to hear, because they want to maintain their regional credibility and viewership. They are doing a good job with that, with over 50 million loyal viewers now in the Arab world alone. Al Jazeera English is incomparable, because it’s just too different. Again it’s because of who they are marketing the material to – the West doesn’t want to hear what Al Jazeera Arabic is saying or doing, it’s like they have a whole different set of media ethics there. They realize what they are guilty of but defend it, because they care more about what we WANT to hear rather than reporting what’s actually going on.
There are many young men and women who died reporting for Al Jazeera from dangerous locations in the region, including women as young as 22. So I have nothing but respect for the reporters who are putting their lives on the line just to give us the news.
Tor, I don’t get it. Are you Norwegian or American?
I’m Norwegian, but what’s the difference? Our newspapers subscribe to the same news feeds as the American ones, and the editorializing is comparable. We watch the same interviews they do, only subtitled. Our media, like theirs, lean left.
I am an interventionist classical liberal, and geopolitically I identify with “the west” in general, meaning NATO + Australia. Politically I identify with the liberal right. I consume more international news in English than I do in Norwegian.
Norway has troops in Afghanistan as well, and a dude in Iraq for political posturing. (our troops are more useful in mountains, and the Kurds can hold their own) I think of all NATO forces as “our guys”.
There is quite a difference in news reporting between the US and the UK, watching American news channels is like watching a movie, full of drama and music. But you still couldn’t really see the UK media as ‘leaning left’, let alone the American, unless ofcourse you are extremely right wing and conservative.
Every news source has their own agenda to follow, none can be truly objective as many of them claim. We as individuals can never completley be objective either.
And Tor, get your head out of the clouds and stop lapping up Bush’s ideals of us vs. them. The only us vs. them is the powerful vs. the people. We need to take our power back, we need to stop allowing ourselves to be blinded by the propaganda that tells us things in Iraq are getting better, they are not. Blackwater has free range in Iraq, to attack and kill whoever they like. It wouldnt surprise me if people where paying to come into iraq through blackwater, just so they can have the thrill of killing an ‘Arab Islamist Terrorist’.
“Osama Bin Laden and al-Qaeda, who claim to represent Islam, but do not.” I have a question about that, if it can be asked without starting a fight. I don’t remember chapter and verse but I’m certain I saw passages where the Prophet said to beware of people who would manipulate or make use of Islam for their own benefit. Is Bin Laden guilty of “crimes against Islam”?
I agree completely that the American media is a disgrace (I never watch TV news) but not at all with this part: “…a part also stems from the lingering Crusades. The war between Christianity and Islam has never ended in the minds of many Americans.” How did you reach that conclusion?
Tamara:
There have been studies done on the voting patterns of journalists, they overwhelmingly vote for leftist candidates. Journalists being a low income group may have something to do with it. In the US and UK this is compounded by the media operating out of staunchly left leaning metropolises. Just look at the questions politicians are asked when interviewed by the press, even socialist candidates are almost exclusively challenged from the left.
Tamara:
Ahh, I can see why you think the press is relatively unbiased. The us vs them is the age old conflict between freedom and populist regulation, whether inspired by self interest as in machine politics, religious dogma or sensibilities like the prohibition and censorship, or misguided idealism based on ignorance of the machinations of markets like socialism.
Tamara:
Actually they are, you just don’t know it, because the oh so unbiased media, exemplified by the two ladies I linked before, didn’t find the information worth relaying. I covered this in my reply to your blog a while ago, but my comment is still awaiting moderation.
Tors reply on Tamaras blog:
We should probably continue this on your blog, so as not to hijack this thread on media bias. I would like to know what you would have us (US/NATO) do with regard to Iraq and the wider “war on terror”.
You should talk to Randall, between the two of you you might be able to come up with a conspiracy theory that can at least be considered specious. You could try to embellish this one.
Islam is a cult of death. Convert, enslave, or murder ALL infidels or you are not a true follower of moohamed. This is islam. No one attacks the word of islam. The truth is enough. We will rule and kill everyone and receive our booty. Media say the truth.
Tor wrote, “You’re wrong, our media is heavily biased against our efforts, and against good news.”
The way you can tell which way the majority of the media is biased towards, is to look at the actions and words of the politicians. The majority of the politicians are pro war which is a reflection how the media represents the situation in Iraq. The majority of the politicians claim it is just a civil war and don’t acknowledge the role of the United States in destroying the country and fueling the violence in Iraq; this is a refelection of how the media represents it.
Tor wrote, “You should talk to Randall, between the two of you you might be able to come up with a conspiracy theory that can at least be considered specious. You could try to embellish this one.”
Tor, do you think it was some rich Saudis that paid some Isrealis to go to New Jersey and cheer and dance while filming themslevs with the WOrld Trade center in the background on 9/11? Do you think it was some rich Saudis that paisd Israelis to drive a van filled with explosives towards the George Washington bridge on 9/11?
See http://www.mideastyouth.com/2007/10/28/wanna-be-famous-bash-islam/#comment-81834
Wouldn’t it make more sense to look at the actions and words of the media?
MyTwoCents,
Go ahead, but any studies done about the media will be biased as well. The researcher will be selective on the parts of media he/she wishes to expose.
Tor thinks that the media is biased against the right. Here is an organization that believes the media is biased against the left. http://www.fair.org
MyTwoCents, “I agree completely that the American media is a disgrace (I never watch TV news) but not at all with this part: “…a part also stems from the lingering Crusades. The war between Christianity and Islam has never ended in the minds of many Americans.” How did you reach that conclusion?”
I agree with you here. With the exception of some Christian and Jewish fundamentalists, the resentment for the Muslims winning during the Crusades are not on most Westerners’ mind.
If it really was about Christianity vs Islam, why isn’t there sympathetic coverage for the Christian Congolese, where millions have been killed?
Where is the sympathetic coverage or acknowledgement for the 3 to 5 million Buddhists the United States killed when it bombed Vietnam and Cambodia?
No, Tamara. They are. The Black Water incident was screwed up. There’s no doubt about it but you’re blowing things out of proportion. Read Iraqi blogs instead of watching the media and make up your mind. You could probably also read Michael J Totten.
And I agree with Tor, the media is generally left leaning (at least the major outlets) with the exception of Fox News and a bunch of others.
No one here knows the situation except for the Iraqis themselves, most of whom by the way aren’t on the internet, have no access to the media whatsoever and are practically unheard. There are millions of voices that need to be heard, but are silent due to lack of resources and global outreach. Here’s an example of a prominent voice that made it:
Link to must-watch video.
You can’t say things are getting better there just because you hear it in the news or because some blogger abroad says so. Hear it from the families who are currently there, they are the ones we should be seeking out. Saying things are getting better just so it helps us go to sleep isn’t going to do anything. I’m sure Iraqis don’t approve of people speaking on their behalf especially if such people are not within the country and have no access to average families who know what it’s really like to live like this.
No one but the Iraqis know their situation and their solutions better than themselves. People abroad sitting in the comfort of their safety blogging about what should happen to Iraq and Iraqis or declaring that things are better without having actual proof that goes beyond just a TV show is wrong and arrogant to say the least.
Speaking of blogs, here’s one from a mother in Iraq. Doesn’t seem like the situation is getting any better in her point of view. However this is her proposed solution:
Rare to see these views being represented in the American mainstream.
A huge percentage of U.S media is owned by 6 big and controlling conglomerates who for the most part represent the right-wing. It threatens the reliability of mainstream news, independent journalism and freedom of information in general. News Corp alone is getting its hand on as many news sources as possible including most recently the Wall Street Journal which is a prominent source of information in the USA and much of Europe. And we all know how conservative Murdoch is. FoxNews gets away with advocating violence and justifying hatred. How would you guys explain this video?
At the end of the day it’s not what’s available out there. Alternatives are available. Left-wing networks are available. The issue is finding out what the majority is watching.
Regardless of what you want to hear about Iraq, you will find someone saying it, and that goes for Iraqis as well. The way to tell reality from fiction is to look at the aggregate numbers of military and civilian deaths.
Excerpt from Iraq progress, by the numbers:
That excerpt was drawn from the first of the five articles I linked in my reply to Tamara, a reply dealing exclusively with the notion that no progress is being achieved in Iraq. Read the whole thing, and check out the other articles I linked as well. They’re long, but good reads.
These are numbers. I don’t care much for numbers, because I can’t see how such stats can actually be conducted as accurately as possible in a country that has been undergoing chaos for years. What if there are deaths that no one is reporting? Who is reporting the deaths anyways?
I see the article is written by Robert J. Caldwell, who is that and how do I measure his reliability?
From Just Foreign Policy:
As you can see, there appears to be a billion ways that you can uncover stats. I personally do not find them reliable during wartime. This is not a 5th grade class to show a toll of how many kids prefer cupcakes over brownies. It’s not that easy. We’re talking about millions of people here being influenced by various corrupt institutions.
Can you list the major left-learning outlets? Can you trace these back to their respective corporate owners?
Esra’a
These are, as far as I can tell, the official numbers. One counts the number of bodies showing up at morgues, the numbers killed in car bombs etc. The number of enemy operations is easily counted by the coalition.
My point is that these data are collected in the same fashion as they have been since the invasion, when they are down by two thirds that means something. When enemy activity in Anbar is down 90% that means something. When the number of mass casualty attacks in Baghdad, easily counted, is down by three quarters, that means something. The progress measured far outweighs any insecurity in the data.
And if this was just propaganda, why wait years before springing it? Does that make sense to you?
I disagree with your assessment that the numbers are more susceptible to bias and nitpicking than first person accounts. In fact, my approach seems to be the polar opposite to yours. While I consider first person accounts good for adding context, I rely on numbers alone to cut trough the spin, and to capture the greater picture.
If you want first person accounts though, I’ll join Drima in recommending Michael Totten. I especially recommend his two latest articles from Ramadi, one about how bad the place used to be, and one about the completeness of the turnaround.
Sorry. I just don’t buy it.
Here’s also one of the reasons why I don’t find these “official” numbers reliable:
More here.
Here’s more:
Esra’a how much of that must-watch video of yours do you agree with? It seems to be a summary of anti-american talkingpoints with regards to Iraq, some valid, many baseless, and one I’ve never heard of before. (Quwaities and Saudies make money off bottled water, is this a new conspiracy-theory?)
The most baseless ones:
Depleted Uranium:
There is scientific consensus that the exposure measured is nowhere near the amount needed to be harmful.
White phosphorous:
White phosphorous is bright burning substance which is dropped, in clusters, to illuminate an area, and facilitate the identification of friendlies, civilians and hostiles. More unnecessary deaths would be incurred if our forces were to fight in darkness. White phosphorous is not a weapon.
Napalm:
Napalm was used on strictly military (uniformed) targets during the initial invasion. It has, to my knowledge, not been used since.
Do agree with her suggestion for a complete immediate withdrawal? What would you have us do? (us being NATO)
Correction:
It appears white phosphorous can also be used as a weapon, and is used in generating smokescreens. I appear to have been mistaken.
Yep, I was wrong, white phosphorous was used by the coalition during the assault on Fallujah not only for illumination and smokescreening, but also to flush enemy combatants out of fortified possitions.
Remember though that Fallujah had been evacuated at the time, and that the operation resembled conventional war more than anything.
That’s the thing. Anyone with a different opinion, even on this website, is intimidated to shut up because many claim such views are “racist and anti-American.” Or better yet, that valid criticisms are “conspiracies.” It is not uncommon to find Iraqis who want the US troops immediately out of Iraq. It is not uncommon to find Iraqis who absolutely despise the US government and what it has done for years to their country. I am not sure why people find this surprising.
When it comes to believing someone abroad with little to no connections whatsoever to Iraq, versus someone with family in Iraq and has actually spent a considerable amount of time there, it’s only logical that I choose the latter. Sorry to disappoint. I hope more voices like Dr. Wasfi’s are heard, and hope to see less people trying to silence or discredit them.
There are several forms of media bias in the American mainstream media.
The first is in reporting, and it’s not bad. A problem there is that the media has so few Arabs and Muslims. Reporters are charged with conveying a balanced story “as best as is possible.” That means that if they don’t have access to good sources in, say, the Arab/Muslim community they might not get the story right. And, reporters do write from what they know. Which means if you happen to be a Jewish American reporter, you know all about Israel (usually) and that plays into the detail you put into the story. That’s why not having Arab and Muslims reporters in the media is so critical.
Second, and the most obvious place were bias occurs is on the Op-Ed pages which directly influence the thinking of the American public. These are the important pages in a newspaper, not just for activists and those int he inner circles of the story (activists, Arabs, Israelis, etc) … but they are very important to mainstream Americans who do not live to read about the Middle East the way we do on a daily basis. But, when they need info or help understanding something, they do turn to those pages to get that editorial thought help. The majority of columns published in newspapers (and there are 4,500 of them in the US) on the Middle East are usually written by pro-Israel writers or Arab and Muslim bashers. You rarely and only occasionally hear a voice from an Arab or a Muslim.
Not being on those Op-Ed pages, for example, explains why so many Americans ask the dumb question, “Why don’t Muslims and Arabs denounce Islamic and Arab extremism?” We do, but no one reports on it or allows us to publish our views.
As for the Crusades, you have to be kidding. The Crusades comes up so often from mainstream Americans in public discussions in the form of Christianity versus Islam.
And Tor. Don’t believe all the concersative propaganda about weapons of mass destruction:
Napalm was used in Lebanon. It is used in Iraq. The problem is the media doesn’t consider it important unless the naplam is used against us.
What you don’t understand is that Weapons of Mass Destruction only exist when they are in the supposed hands of people we don’t like. We’ll even make it up as Americans. But when they are in our hands, we tolerate it and even justify it, the same way we are now justifying torture against Iraqi insurgents.
As for people being silenced here, that is ridiculous. Everyone has an opportunity at MidEastYouth.com to ask questions, but if someone brings over the hate and viciousness that often characterizes some of the criticism, then that’s not a voice worth hearing ever.
Ray Hanania
http://www.hanania.com
I guess that explains the huge civilian deaths. From Dahr Jamail:
It’s easy to sit thousands of miles away and claim that no one’s hurt and nothing bad is happening except for the evil enemies being killed off by courageous U.S soldiers. It’s much harder to actually sit down and try to find and decipher the truth of what’s actually happening to thousands of innocent families.
Identifying sectarian violence vs other violence is tricky, counting the total number of violent deaths is not as tricky.
My main point though is not the numbers but the trend lines. If those numbers signify anything, drops of the magnitude registered constitute significant progress. And the methodology has remained unchanged for the period.
Here’s an independent source tallying the number of verified civilian deaths covered in the media. Does it catch all causalities? NO. But it does provide a basis for recognizing trends. Notice the sharp drop in casualties toward the end of this year? Why, if this site is a propaganda outlet, did they hold off on that for years?
Military casualties are down as well, and we can account for those to a person.
It appears that I have been misunderstood. I do not think the media is unbiased, I beleive it to be excessively biased, everywhere, each following their affiliates agendas. As for the reporters, I dont think we can take their personal opinions as a reflection of the news source they work for, they are very restricted in their reporting and from completely expressing themselves.
I am aware there have been various studies on the media’s bias, and there are varrying results, also depending on their own stance. As I said, it is inevitable that people can never be completely objective. But I would suggest to you Tor, that you try to read both sides before you reach your conclusion.
As for the situation in Iraq, I do not know, as I have not been there, but I have been in contact with a number of Reuters’ journalists that are based there, and I can only relay what they have said to me. I have also discussed the situation in Iraq with fellow students that have fled Iraq just in the last few months, to escape the horror. This is where I get my information from, not the twisted mainstream media.
My mention of Blackwater is because I think that is a symptom of the chaos that exists there. They are not answerable to anyone, and they are some of the most likely sources of illegal weapon distribution. This is not a conspiracy, this is real, but few are really prepared to ask the questions that will produce the very distressing answers. (And Tor, you only left your msg on my blog yesterday, but I will deal with it shortly)
And I did not say there is no improvement anywhere in Iraq, I am sure there are places, and situations that are improving where not 10 but maybe 5 attacks are occuring a day, and some places could be improving even more. And as for your numbers Tor, that means little, figures are constantly changing, and 15 years down the line we will see the figures were even higher than we were being told, just look at Vietnam.
My recognition of the complete division between the poweful and the people, is the basis of all the problems around the world. The powerful corrupt, in Western, Israeli, Arab, African, Asian governments and corporations are doing things for their own profitable interests, not the interests of their people. There is a major problem in that. Wether it affects us economically, politically or socially is insignificant, we must be free to express ourselves and BE HEARD, and we must be provided with the best possible situation in which we are able to be productive and provide to our family. And that is not the case, not even in the West, for example poor or even no public health care.
Great, so why don’t you approach Iraqis and tell them that things are getting better without ever having been to Iraq and relying solely on what you see on TV and the internet. I’m sure they will be very relieved to hear this breaking news, and will soon forgive the US for putting them through the nightmare that they have been suffering from for years and for whom many lost their families, homes or children. Surely it was all worth it. It’ll be like nothing happened.
Esra’a:
I have yet to see anyone denounced as racist for criticizing the US. Also, for the record, I am not intimidating.
Anti Americanism is a real force in this world, it represents a continuation of the soviet line of propaganda, and reflecsively spins anything the US does as bad. A position being anti American does not in and of itself discredit it, but a tirade of talking points which exclusively fits in this tradition does, in my eyes, discredit the speaker.
Esra’a:
Look, if someone thinks there is an intricate conspiracy to steal Iraqs oil, or that 9/11 was perpetrated by Israeli’s, then I will correctly identify their notions as conspiracy theories. There are people who will dedicate their time to debunking those, I am not one of them.
I will also call any “theory” that the Iraq war is a grand smokescreen to organize “shoot an arab” safaris, or to get rich selling bottled water, or anything similar, a conspiracy theory. I consider these suggestions to be self discrediting, and I will not waste my time discussing them. I know what people here, and in the US are like (I have family there), and I can guarantee that no program to fill Iraq’s rivers with sharks could ever be carried out without some whistle blower calling attention to it.
Any “theory” that requires a massive number of people to be secretively acting in bad faith, in an organized manner, is a conspiracy theory. It is discredited by that fact alone.
Esra’a
I do not find that the least bit surprising. You will find Iraqi’s on every side of every issue, they do not think with a collective consciousness.
According to polls, and according to their elected representatives, the majority want us to stay and help provide security for a while longer.
Esra’a:
I am not appealing to my own authority in making my argument here, I am citing a remarkable reduction of violent deaths in Iraq, by all accounts, and suggesting that they reflect real progress. Those are numbers coming out of Iraq. Coalition assessments of enemy activity are coming out of Iraq. The articles I linked were written by Michael J Totten, in Iraq.
Esra’a
Which brings me to the following question:
Wasfi wants all coalition forces out immediately, leaving the Iraqi army and police alone battling it out with insurgents and militias. Do you agree with this recommendation?
Do you think our guys are doing more harm than good?
Esra’a
I don’t have to, they tell me. The local hairdresser is a Kurd with connections in northern Iraq. Of course that place has been steadily progressing ever since the invasion. Also, here is one Iraqi blog which is reporting progress.
For the Kurds alone it will have been worth it, what they suffered trough under Saddam is unspeakable. Also, it’s not breaking news to Iraqis, they have known for some time now.
Tamara
I don’t think reporters and editorializers are all that restricted by the news agencies. Media bias is the aggregate bias of the people who make up the media, not some centrally organized phenomenon.
Also, there are more than two sides to a story, and I don’t have time to read them all. I make it a point to read my side, and the side of the mainstream left. That doesn’t stop me from being blindsided by people here, but then reading your side of stories affecting you is really why I am here in the first place.
Tamara wrote:
You probably already realize this, but Iraqis fleeing the country represents a skewed sample of Iraqis. You’re oversampling people from bad and deteriorating parts of the country, and you’re oversampling pessimists. As for the Reuters journalists, are the green-zoners or out in the field reporters? I’d be surprised if they didn’t acknowledge progress at this point.
I don’t know all there is to know about blackwater, I can’t comment on weapons finding their way to the black market or such, but I know enough to dismiss speculation that they offer Muslim-hunting tours to pot-bellied americans.
Figures have been constantly changing for the better for a couple of months now, and quite a lot too. I happen to think that matters.
Tamara:
The point of capitalist democracies is to have the two coincide. The measures most often advocated by those who blame the ills of the world on the rich are not only counterproductive, but also detrimental to individual liberty. Shifting power to governmental institutions will not make the powerful less powerful, or less corrupt, only less accountable.
Tamara:
I am not being censored, and I have as much of a chance of being heard as an average citizen should expect. I wouldn’t want the government to force people to listen to each other. Also, with labour, skilled or unskilled at an all time high here, making ends meet is easy. All government needs to do to facilitate productivity is provide law, order and infrastructure, and otherwise but out. While we do have public health care in Norway, even people delivering newspapers for a living could afford private insurance if they really wanted it.
The last thing we need is more “progressive taxes” discouraging production. (I am assuming you are a run of the mill leftist here, because you sound like one)
YES WESTERN MEDIA IS LEFT WING… YES FOX NEWS IS LEFT WING… DAMN THOSE COMMIES… RUPERT MURDOCK THE COMMIE… SIGH!!!
Ray Hanania
Coverage on Israel/Palestine is one of the few topics on which European media diverges significantly from the American media. This is a reflection of, and is reflected in, public opinion.
And the crusades are only ever brought up, in regards to the current war on terror, by leftist war opponents looking for moral equivalence with the jihadis. No one here gives a damn about loosing the crusader kingdoms, honestly.
And yes, we are most concerned about WMD’s in the hands of those who would presume to use them against us, especially those with a history of carrying out terrorist attacks by loosely affiliated proxies. Shocking isn’t it.
There is various evidence that proves that the content of the mainstream media is significantly determined by their investors. The dominant media establishments are profit orientated establishments that are owned by either very wealthy individuals or very wealthy mega-corporations. Now, of course, that implies that the media will adhere to what their owners want them to do and what information they want them to spread.[32] Although there are a large number of media entities,[33] a significant number of them are just small local companies that are either dependent on the large national companies or are subject to subsidiary ownership. When it comes to dealing with international news, there are even fewer top conglomerates that have even more control. (an excert from Constructing Reality). You can find a number of studies that have been conducted on this topic in this piece of research.
Tor, You openly admit that you don’t even bother to look at an alternative information source, so how would you really be able to claim that your theories have any validity at all? You say you come here for an alternative, but consistently are adament that anything contrary to your already held beliefs are incorrect or skewed. You are not coming here with an open mind, you are coming here to spread your word, because it makes you feel intellegent and powerful, just like your buddies in the facist governments that you appear to be promoting.
Ofcourse I realise I can not take the word of a ‘fleeing Iraqi’ as the whole truth, but I can combine the stories of horror they have faced, with the stories of horror that the very brave journalists in Iraq share with me. And to answer your question, they are not working from the Green Zone, they are still speaking of the atrocities and some of them have died as well.
I have learnt not to put anything past the corruption of the powerful, I do not claim this idea of ‘Muslim-hunting tours to pot-bellied americans’ as fact, I simply mention that it is a possibility in light of their unquestionable and unanswerable status, in a place that is so fueled with hate and death. We really know so little about what is going on, that something like this could well be possible. We have heard of far worse crimes throughout our wars.
I dont think a capitalist society is constructive at all, it is exploitative and destructive for all except the powerful who are making all the profit. And as for your point that a capitalist democracy is to have the two coincide – the only place the two coincide is between the selling of the information/product and the buying of information/product. My ideas of our capitalist world are by far not counterproductive to individuality and freedom. Having our minds filled with bullshit, mindless news, TV, movies, advertising is what will crush our individuality and our creativity.
Life is not easy for the majority of the population in either America or the UK. A number of countries in Europe are far better off than either, with much better free health care. To say that to make ends meet for most people is easy, is ridiculous, life isnt really like you see in the movies you know. Look at just of example in the revealing facts in the aftermath of Katrina.
I’m unsure of what you mean, progressive taxes? run of the mill leftist?
Depends how you define a terrorist attack.
In my opinion the conflicts that were made possible by U.S funds as as well as U.S military intervention are both solid examples of terrorism.
Like you, we are also concerned that you will use your weapons against us, no matter what the justifications are.
Tor,
You really just need to open your eyes to what is really going on in this world, and what has happened throughout our history. You need to broaden your searches, you need to be willing to see the corruption in too many governments, especially the current American one. And that is not anti-american, there are many americans that would agree.
And to say that you would dismiss an idea/thought, regardless of evidence, simply because it meant it would require the thought that a number of people were pursueing something with bad intentons is absurd. Are you saying that you really think governments in the past have never done things with bad intentions? And it doesnt require a massive number of people to carry out such an act, it requires a few powerful that are able to use powerful tools to keep the ‘truth’ away from us.
I know of the bottleneck in international news, I even touched on it in my response to Esra’as first post in this thread. I’m not sure I follow the argument that these companies are therefore institutionally biased. It does make the system less resilient against the effects of such abuse, but I would expect any significant attempts to skew coverage to be exposed by whistle blowers in the business.
I gather news from a variety of sources I consider reliable, TV, papers and bloggs, Norwegian and english, and I read the opinion pieces and bloggs of some people who disagree with me (the local opposition) evaluating their arguments and sources. I can’t be expected to read everything under the sun so the more obscure takes on things, such as opinions scarcely found on my continent, fly below my radar until I am confronted with them.
On topics where I have preconceived notions, and on which I consider myself informed, changing my mind will take some doing. It has however happened before, credible verifiable sources and solid arguments will do the trick.
What I read here is one of my primary sources on the attitudes of people in the region, and of stuff I just didn’t know, such as the electoral history of Iran posted a short time ago.
I am coming here to exchange ideas, when I see things stated that I disagree with, often about “the west”, the US or the prevailing opinions and attitudes there, I will attempt to set the record straight. I expect the lot of you to do the same with regards to your region. Right now I can dispel the notion that the governments I support are fascist by any stretch of the imagination.
Blackwater almost exclusively hires people with a background in the special forces. Training is exceptionally demanding, most people would never make the cut. These people have passed extensive background checks. While bad apples, or pockets of assholes, can exist anywhere, institutionalized abuse would be exposed by people on the inside.
Most of the value added is split between salaries and taxes, only a bit goes to the shareholders to compensate them for incurred risk.
That covers most economic activity. When does the two not coincide and how can we change that?
By most of the worlds standards, yes it is.
I know, I live in one of them. There are regions in the US though that are better off than Norway.
And NO after Katrina is not representative of the US?
run of the mill => Standard, ordinary, typical
A lot of the left like to “tax the rich” by which they mean adding taxes that kick inn just where most peoples salaries end, thus maximizing the effect of discouraging overtime work, while minimizing revenue. They call these taxes “progressive”.
The first blockquote above is an accident, please ignore it.
I have fixed it.
Tamara
My eyes are wide open, where should I look? I see petty corruption, but no giant conspiracies.
Governments are just a bunch of people in offices, powerful people need many less powerful people to carry out their orders. The more people that would need to be in on something, and the more heinous that thing, the less likely it is that it could be carried out without someone exposing the operation from within.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, conspiracy theorists make the first without providing the latter.
Thanks
Tor,
I am well aware of what ‘run of the mill’ means, I was referring more to your use of the term with regards to describing me. We start from such a contradictory perspective that I really do not see the point in continuing this dialogue with you. Your knowledge of political and economic theory appears to be very limited, and your view of the world very naive.
You also seem unable to take in all that is said to you. My part of the world, as you describe is not just the Middle East, I am half British and have been living in the UK for the last 7 odd years and I have first hand experience of the terrible conditions the majority of the British population is forced to put up with. You either have your rich, your trashy poor that scrounge off the taxes of the working people, and then you have that majority, the working people.
Well, alright discussion ended. I’m curious as to how you have ascertained my knowledge of economic theory though, when neither of us has even touched on the matter. I have expressed that I favor capitalism, and you have expressed that you do not, offering no alternative for evaluation.
As for my view of the world being naive, I suppose I’ll have to confess. I believe that things are usually exactly what they appear to be, and I find peoples notions of nefarious undetectable conspiracies to be unrealistic.
Nice talking to you
Tor,
These are not undetectable theories, you just need to look somewhere apart from the mainstream media, and the various other sources you deem reliable. And just keep in mind, things, including people are rarely what they appear to be. And I will keep in mind, that there are many people out there that are truly succumbing to the propaganda. The Revolution is gonna be harder than I thought. There lies my naivety.
Just out of curiosity, may I ask what the conspiracy is up to? Who’s conspiring, and what is their motivation?
Feel free to link your sources.
Well the things I mention with regards to the Media, are not conspiracies. They are theories that have been validated through extensive research and analysis.
Have a look at the articles relating to the mainstream media on Znet, there are various to choose from, depending where your interests lie.
Media Lens publications are also insightful. John Pilger’s work is wonderfully presented and includes all the evidence you ask for.
But I think most importantly, is Noam Chomsky and Edward S. Herman’s Manufacturing Consent.
Hey Tor: You should try living in the United States
You point out somethingvery important Tor, that the European Media is very much more open and fair, far more than the US Media … and it is because it reflects public opinion.
In the US, the media reflects public opinion, too, one driven by racist attitudes and also by notions of anti-Islamic feelings.
Some general observations on my part:
There is no media conspiracy. The “Jews” DO NOT control the media (not that anyone has said that here, but it is often argued). The media reflects the views of the public, and in turn molds and redirects or focuses that public opinion.
The media in the US simply sucks when it comes to covering the Middle East. Americans are fundamentally racist — although not everyone is a racist in America. But, their attitudes are impacted by race considerably. The notions about the Crusades (Christianity versus Islam) are fundamental to the Christian ideals.
Christians seem to tolerate Jews, but in a patronizing way. The United States, after all, was one of the most anti-Semitic countries in the world for years. It was only in recent decades that has changed, or at least been pushed aside as the focus turns to others.
Ray Hanania
PS … it is hard to read 47 comments and the temptation to respond to everything is strong. I apologize if I haven’t responded to other points directed at me
I’m sorry Ray, but I think Tor said:
and then only with regard to the Palestinian-Israeli issue did Tor say:
“Hear it from the families who are currently there, they are the ones we should be seeking out.”
I have indirectly, from Iraqis I know who have relatives back in Iraq.
media outlets:–
Left: BBC, AlJazeera International.
Centrist: CNN.
Right: Fox News.
BBC, CNN and AlJazeera are watched by tons of people all over the world.
I tend to agree with Tor on most points. The only difference is that I didn’t support the invasion and I was harshly critical of the war’s mismanagement.
Btw, Esra’a, do you support immediate withdrawal?
I forgot to add that a lot of the news is supplied by Reuters and AP which are both also left leaning.
Certainly not the USA. I don’t think the BBC is a prominent source for news in the USA either, I very rarely see American bloggers refer to it. But that’s just an observational assumption.
Right now they are responsible to take care of the jungle they created inside Iraq. But I support a gradual and careful withdrawal.
Al Jazeera is also not widely accessible in America. Here is an article that is a little dated, but gives at least an idea.
The given guilt rationale is just an ancillary reason.
The US media is overwhelmingly pro-Israeli, ethnically and ideologically, and those who are not are (wisely) afraid of the consequences. Ask Nicholas von Hoffmann, Norman Finkelstein, Vanessa Redgrave, and Congressman Jim Moran.
[...] American media assaults Arab and Islamic media out of guilt Filed under: Media — jr @ 1:46 am American media assaults Arab and Islamic media out of guilt [...]