# USA and Al Jazeera.. how to handle this relationship ? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 14, 2004, 4:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/usa-and-al-jazeera-how-to-handle-this-relationship/245073 "2004-05-14T04:45:43Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 17\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Rashak\_Mani](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ea666f/32.png) [@Rashak\_Mani](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rashak_Mani)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2004, 4:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/usa-and-al-jazeera-how-to-handle-this-relationship/245073/1 "2004-05-14T04:45:43Z")
Trying to leave my Bush hate aside… I was wondering today how the US should best deal with Al Jazeera (AJ). After all Al Jazeera does seem to have a wide reach amonst arabs and muslims… whilst the US should be trying to win these same “hearts and minds”. Simply acting like Al Jazeera doesn’t exist or is too biased does little good to US future prospects. Points to be considered as regards this issue: (Feel free to criticize) - AJ coverage tends to not to be good as regards americans. - AJ coverage is overdone and inflamatory - US officials responding to AJ or appearing there might legitimize AJ. - Not appearing in AJ simply lets them free to do whatever they want. - Hostile attitude to AJ hardens AJ even more in its anti-US stances… ? - AJ existance is better than no Arabic news at all. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2004, 4:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/usa-and-al-jazeera-how-to-handle-this-relationship/245073/2 "2004-05-14T04:57:25Z")
Personally I doubt that whatever the US did, whether it was Bush OR Kerry would make any difference at all to AJ’s stance, so it would be meaningless to even try. AJ writes for its target audiance, which isn’t a standard western view point (whether liberal or conservative)…it writes to an Arab view point. Its inflamatory because thats what its target audiance wants to hear, just like western news organs like Fox, BBC, CNN, etc write to THEIR target audiances. I think the US should engage with AJ but only peripherially, perhaps granting interviews occationally if requested, and perhaps allowing them access to offical news if they are interested, just to get something of the US’s point of view across (if thats even possible), but it shouldn’t be a full engagement. For one thing, if AJ changed its tune it would alienate its target audiance, which wouldn’t do either them or us any good (even assuming they WOULD, which I doubt). If Arabs want some balance to their news, they have the same options you and I do after all…they can read a wide variety of slants on things and make an informed decision after weighing views from multiple sources (I read AJ myself to see a different viewpoint). So I don’t think the US should do anything at all as far as AJ goes, not attempt to influence it at all. Just possibly engage them a bit closer as far as interacting with them. Just my opinion of course. -XT ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2004, 4:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/usa-and-al-jazeera-how-to-handle-this-relationship/245073/3 "2004-05-14T04:59:29Z")
That should have been ‘official sources’, not ‘offican news’…like White House access and such. Oh well. -XT ---
**Author:** ![Rashak\_Mani](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ea666f/32.png) [@Rashak\_Mani](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rashak_Mani)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2004, 5:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/usa-and-al-jazeera-how-to-handle-this-relationship/245073/4 "2004-05-14T05:02:19Z")
> [@xtisme](#): > > So I don’t think the US should do anything at all as far as AJ goes, not attempt to influence it at all. Just possibly engage them a bit closer as far as interacting with them. Just my opinion of course. > > -XT ``` Is AJ better than no AJ ? ``` Also they should “interact” more nicely. I saw footage where US officers in an interview in AJ saying that AJ reports were lies and false… talk about bad press relation. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2004, 5:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/usa-and-al-jazeera-how-to-handle-this-relationship/245073/5 "2004-05-14T05:15:55Z")
> [@Rashak Mani](#): > > Is AJ better than no AJ ? Of course there should be an AJ if there is a market for it, reguardless of its content. Understand I’m a big believer in a free press, that information and points of view, even radical ones, should be allowed to be expressed even if I don’t personally believe in them. As I said, I actually go to their english web site periodically if I’m cross checking a story associated with the ME to see their spin on things. It gives you perspective IMO. > [@Rashak Mani](#): > > Also they should “interact” more nicely. I saw footage where US officers in an interview in AJ saying that AJ reports were lies and false… talk about bad press relation. They should do as they choose to do to meet the needs and wishes of their target audiance IMO. So no…they shouldn’t ‘interact more nicely’ in any way, unless they determine internally that this is how they want to spin things. As to the ‘lies’ part, well, thats why we have multiple news sources so you can see things from different angels and determine for yourself…make an INFORMED decision on any subject. What are ‘lies’ to a US official might not be to AJ…or it might all be in the spin. Still, I think they SHOULD tell the news as they see fit, reguardless of how the US or anyone else feels about it. -XT ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2004, 6:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/usa-and-al-jazeera-how-to-handle-this-relationship/245073/6 "2004-05-14T06:37:00Z")
I think the the U.S. government should engage AJ in the same way that they engage Faux News, or, at least, in the way they engage the Beeb. AJ has produced a fair amount of inflammatory stuff, but most of the news has either been pretty accurate or misled because they could not get the U.S. to provide the U.S. perspective. AJ editorials are clearly biased (in the way that “we distort, you decide” Faux News is clearly biased). We’d be far better off engaging them so that they have to at least acknowledge our views rather than shunning them and forcing them to invent positions for the U.S. I have heard multiple comments on AJ productions from people in the administration and people in the media. The rather universal party line from the administration has been vague claims of bad journalism with a conspicuous lack of citations for genuine errors. The fairly consistent reports from AJ’s competitors in the business have been that they are doing a rather respectable job of presenting the _facts_ that they are able to ascertain. (Contrast that with the “Iraq media,” under-funded by the U.S., that has seen its U.S. manager resign in protest that the U.S. has refused to provide the tools to permit accurate reporting while insisting that they report the “feel good” reports scripted by the U.S. propaganda ministry.) ---
**Author:** ![Rashak\_Mani](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ea666f/32.png) [@Rashak\_Mani](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rashak_Mani)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2004, 11:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/usa-and-al-jazeera-how-to-handle-this-relationship/245073/7 "2004-05-15T11:50:38Z")
Not too sure the US can avoid AJ from messing up the truth… especially when the AJ will be suspicious of US motives. I agree that US sponsored Arab media isn’t the answer. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2004, 2:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/usa-and-al-jazeera-how-to-handle-this-relationship/245073/8 "2004-05-15T14:45:05Z")
> [@](#): > > Not too sure the US can avoid AJ from messing up the truth… especially when the AJ will be suspicious of US motives. Which is no different than any other news outlet. Treat them honestly and fairly without hampering their efforts (and deliberately harrassing and interfering with their reporters) and Al Jazeera will (based on history-to-date) produce relatively fair and accurate stories. Their editorial policy will probably continue to be hostile to the U.S., but it would seem to me that to the extent that their news does not support their editorials, the U.S. has a better chance of being correctly understood by the people of the region. Every complaint that I have seen lodged against Al Jazeera by the current administration (that was more specific than a petulant “They’re not _fa-air_”) has been directed to the Arab equivalent of the O’Reilly or Hannity shows–not genuine news reporting. (This is not to say that Al Jazeera has never made an error or reported from an anti-U.S. perspective, but their _news reporting_ tends to be as accurate as most mid-level U.S. or European services.) U.S. funded Arab media _might_ have been a decent effort, had the U.S. provided sufficient funds to let the new Iraqi news service actually produce their own news (and if the U.S. had not so obviously used them as a propaganda mouth-piece). Had the Iraqi service been permitted to actually report both the good and the bad, the Iraqi people might have come to trust it and begun to actually believe some of the U.S. pronouncements. That policy worked amazingly well with Radio Free Europe for forty years. Since RFE reported the bad along with the good regarding the Western Democracies, (and the good along with the bad regarding the Eastern socialist states) the people of Eastern Europe came to trust it when it reported the bad about Soviet actions instead of regarding it as simply the Western anti-Pravda. ---
**Author:** ![Finagle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/b19c9b/32.png) [@Finagle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Finagle)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2004, 3:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/usa-and-al-jazeera-how-to-handle-this-relationship/245073/9 "2004-05-15T15:33:05Z")
I imagine we should handle Al Jazeera like most people on the Straight Dope handle a Rashak Mani post. Look at the title, look at the author, and realize that we don’t even have to open it up to know what’s inside and what it’s slant is. In the meantime, support and encourage other less biased news sources. tomndebb: If Al Jazeera is getting tipped off in advance about terrorist operations ([http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=2224342](http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=2224342)), does that step beyond the bounds of responsible news coverage? Or are we just being petulant? ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2004, 3:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/usa-and-al-jazeera-how-to-handle-this-relationship/245073/10 "2004-05-15T15:51:42Z")
> [@](#): > > Trying to influence Qatari government to soften AJ wasn’t exactly playing straight I feel. My understanding is that Al Jazeera IS the Qatari government; at least, every employee of Al Jazeera is an employee of the Qatari government. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2004, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/usa-and-al-jazeera-how-to-handle-this-relationship/245073/11 "2004-05-15T18:09:04Z")
> [@](#): > > does that step beyond the bounds of responsible news coverage? Or are we just being petulant? From the article: > [@](#): > > Neither Mr Rumsfeld nor General Myers provided details of any evidence. The issue has been addressed on several occasion by the international media (and it is a problem that does not have a unanimous agreement for a solution). The situation has repeatedly been, not that (corporate) Al Jazeera has advance warning of an event, but that an individual newsman or cameraman, either connected to or a stringer for any number of MENA news organizations, has gotten an abrupt phone call that “something” is happening at a particular location, right now. When the newsman shows up, the insurgents do their bit. Now, it can be argued that if the people with cameras would simply not respond to such phone calls, the events might not take place. (Although I cannot imagine anyone from Fox, CNN, or ABC staying home, having received a similar call.) In point of fact, there have actually been a couple of cases where the newsman was given _advance_ notice of an attack on civilians and has reported that to the IRC. The administration portrays that as an Al Jazeera situation, while carefully not noting that every news organization in the region has had similar experiences. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2004, 6:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/usa-and-al-jazeera-how-to-handle-this-relationship/245073/12 "2004-05-15T18:22:41Z")
[An earlier thread on this topic.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=3768276#post3768276) ---
**Author:** ![komrade](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/838e76/32.png) [@komrade](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/komrade)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2004, 5:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/usa-and-al-jazeera-how-to-handle-this-relationship/245073/13 "2004-05-16T05:38:22Z")
it is of my opinion that “we the people” must have unconditional access to all media/ propaganda in order for us to engage/ refute/agree/ make up our minds about “whats going on”. remember that during ww2 there were lots of “bad germans” listing to the bbc (at low volume) to find out whats happening at stalingrad. ---
**Author:** ![Rashak\_Mani](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ea666f/32.png) [@Rashak\_Mani](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rashak_Mani)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2004, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/usa-and-al-jazeera-how-to-handle-this-relationship/245073/14 "2004-05-17T21:37:02Z")
> [@Finagle](#): > > I imagine we should handle Al Jazeera like most people on the Straight Dope handle a Rashak Mani post. Look at the title, look at the author, and realize that we don’t even have to open it up to know what’s inside and what it’s slant is. In the meantime, support and encourage other less biased news sources. hhmmm… could you point out in this thread where I have been “biased” and “slanted” ? Thanks. ``` How do you encourage "less biased news" sources when these sources are catering to Arabs ? Would that mean the US simply neglecting totally Al Jazeera ? ``` If money is given to other networks then by definition they become western biased ? ``` Al Jazeera is financed by the Qatari govt. but is given independence as regards their reporting. A fact that has angered many an arab govt... and now a few western ones too. If they are in fact independent is another debate... I feel its true that the Qatari govt. gives them free rein. ``` ---
**Author:** ![Alien](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/57b2e6/32.png) [@Alien](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alien)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2004, 12:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/usa-and-al-jazeera-how-to-handle-this-relationship/245073/15 "2004-05-18T00:47:02Z")
[RM], I encourage you to read Marc Lynch’s article [Taking Arabs Seriously](http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20030901faessay82506/marc-lynch/taking-arabs-seriously.html), which appeared in Foreign Policy last year. It talks a great deal about Arab media and their role, including how western governments could approach them more effectively. If you are to read only one such article this summer, this one should be it. Sadly I can only quote bits and pieces from it: > [@](#): > > During the second half of the 1990s, however, a genuinely new kind of Arab public sphere emerged, as satellite television brought disparate local debates in the various Arab countries and the Arab diaspora together in a remarkably coherent, common, and ongoing public argument accessible to almost everyone. Even as (or perhaps because) Arab regimes struggled to maintain their control over local media, transnational media emerged as an alternative location of vibrant and open political debate. > > Many intellectual luminaries and influential political figures of the Arab and Islamic world (along with some foreigners) now appear regularly on Arabic satellite television programs or contribute essays to Arabic newspaper opinion pages. The new media outlets spark arguments among viewers and readers, shaping the terms of debate and framing the understanding of the news. Television watching and newspaper reading are often communal affairs. During crises, cafes become virtual political salons, with patrons flipping channels, comparing coverage, and arguing vociferously about what they see. > > The conventional wisdom that the Arab media simply parrot the official line of the day no longer holds true. Al Jazeera has infuriated virtually every Arab government at one point or another, and its programming allows for criticism and even mockery. Commentators regularly dismiss the existing Arab regimes as useless, self-interested, weak, compromised, corrupt, and worse. One recent al Jazeera talk show took as its topic the question, “Have the existing Arab regimes become worse than colonialism?” The host, one of the guests, and 76 percent of callers said yes – marking a degree of frustration and inwardly directed anger that presents an opening for progressive change. > > The Bush administration seemed to recognize this necessity after September 11, 2001, sending numerous representatives on al Jazeera programs, but early enthusiasm gave way to frustration and fury over the network’s sympathetic coverage of al Qaeda and hostile coverage of American policies toward Afghanistan and Iraq. The administration’s pressure on al Jazeera to censor tapes of bin Laden made a mockery of its free-speech rhetoric in Arab eyes, and Arab journalists were disinclined to take advice on objectivity from the United States, where broadcasters wear American flags on their lapels. As for propaganda wars I just wanted to mention that Arabs are quite customed to such tactics from their state media, and they hardly buy it. ---
**Author:** ![Alien](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/57b2e6/32.png) [@Alien](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alien)\ **Post date:** [May 18, 2004, 12:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/usa-and-al-jazeera-how-to-handle-this-relationship/245073/16 "2004-05-18T00:54:28Z")
Sorry, hit the wrong button. Should also have included these two quotes: > [@](#): > > But ignoring al Jazeera and its counterparts will not make them go away. Rather than shun them out of pique, the United States should try to change the terms of debate in the Arab world by working through them and opening a genuine dialogue. Doing so effectively, however, will require more than simply sending more officials onto talk shows, especially because all too often such appearances only confirm the viewers’ worst stereotypes. On one recent al Jazeera program, for example, a running survey tallied votes on the question, “Is the United States acting as an imperialist power in Iraq?” The longer a prominent former U.S. official talked, the more voters said yes, with 96 percent voting yes by the end of the show. > > Despite what some may think, such hostility is neither preordained nor unchangeable. After the September 11 attacks, wide segments of the Arab public expressed sympathy with the victims, and the elite media presented nuanced discussions of the attacks’ implications. Yusuf al-Qaradawi (a prominent Islamist made even more famous by his regular appearances on al Jazeera) and five other leading moderates issued a fatwah condemning the terrorist attacks as contrary to Islam and calling for the apprehension and punishment of the perpetrators – a remarkable intervention that received little attention in the West. Nor did the war in Afghanistan provoke universal opposition (although many initially doubted American claims of bin Laden’s responsibility for the terrorist attacks). The real turning point for Arab public opinion was Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s bloody reoccupation of the West Bank in the early spring of 2002, with anger reaching a fever pitch during the battle over Jenin. ---
**Author:** ![Rashak\_Mani](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ea666f/32.png) [@Rashak\_Mani](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rashak_Mani)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2004, 5:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/usa-and-al-jazeera-how-to-handle-this-relationship/245073/17 "2004-05-19T05:21:57Z")
Thanks Alien for the quotes and link. Especially this part: > [@](#): > > The conventional wisdom that the Arab media simply parrot the official line of the day no longer holds true. Al Jazeera has infuriated virtually every Arab government at one point or another