JAZEERA ADIEU
YOUR LETTERS
DEBATING NET NEUTRALITY

DOHA, QATAR February 2/3: When the second Al Jazeera forum came to a close, it was left to the Channel’s charismatic director Wadah Khanfar to say good bye to the several hundred guests or “delegates” who trekked to Doha on the tip of the Arabian Gulf to discuss a wide range of media freedom issues.

Instead of political homilies, he unexpectedly delivered up a personal admission that he felt he was changing as a person. He said that the media world he is leading is akin to being part of a “tribe” of truth seekers that transcends nationality and national origin. He acknowledged the well-known channel he runs often feels like a cause that has grown into a community built on a shared sense of mission and a commitment to diversity. It is for many not just a news outlet but a source of Arab identity, change and personal alignment.

It has become a non-state player more respected than any politician. In fact, one speaker, Hugh Miles who has written THE book on Al Jazeera believes that if the station was a political party it might have “won” recent elections in Palestine or Egypt because is a popular force for democracy, human rights and compassion.

Journalists rarely are introspective. We usually hide behind the veneer of objectivity and neutrality. And yet as the fault lines in our profession become more apparent, as pressures grow including the kinds of threats that AlJazeera has been subjected to, this band of accomplished professionals who take pride in their work has not lost its humanity and openness to theres.

After the sessions had ended, I sat with Wadah and members of his team over a Sheratonized Thai-like meal and listened to him describe a report he filed from Mosul in Iraq right after the invasion. He was among the first to report live from that Kurdish area and watched as looters destroyed the ancient town’s great library in a fit of criminal appropriation and protest against the old regime. After he packed up his transmitter, he felt that it was not enough to describe the scene of thousands of years of Arab culture were going up in flames. He was driven to do more.

So he went back to the scene of the crime, and set up another live shot, and began just standing there on camera, appealing to the town to come out and save its cultural treasures. He read from ancient texts about that city on a hill and its rivers and many resources. He fought back his tears and prompted eyes to water in the audience. He called on viewers, many trapped at home, terrorized by gun fire and US military occupation, to do something before it was too late.

“I didn’t know who was listening or what would happen,” he admitted. “But many were glued to our reports on Jazeera and they came out, first a few, and then many, to defend their cultural treasures. They came by cars and by foot and they stopped the looting. They saved the library. They heard my appeal.”

Was that journalism or something more? Wadah says he was inspired by the ideas of the “journalism of attachment” first enunciated by former BBC stalwart Martin Bell who stood up in a similar way for Sarajevo when that city was burning. His experiences there convinced him to stand for Parliament where he later served for five years. Bell was one of the many international media people who heeded Al Jazeera’s call to make a Haj to Doha because of its small oasis of social concern in the Arabian desert and larger media desert.

For me this conference was more than just another big shmooze. Yes, it was another chance to mingle and meet media colleagues. But it was more than that because here, at last, was a real functioning TV station that is showing that there is a market for journalism in what is being touted as a “post-journalism” era. I am not sure what comes of all these events, but the do help end the isolation I sometimes feel as an often marginalized voice in a media world dominated by bottom-line oriented corporations.

I had hoped to hook up with the new Al Jazeera channel but it seems to be recruiting more from established media brands than independent or alternative media circles. They want “Names” more than critical spirit (or skills) and are still being cagey about when they will launch, where they will be seen, and what they will offer. There is unlikely to be room for an Amy Goodman or a News Dissector in their present media mix.

One thing is clear, the new Channel will not be just an English version of the Arabic language channel but a full-fledged programming service in its own right with talk shows, issue-oriented strands, women’s programs and news from all over the world reported by correspondents from all over the world out of decentralized studios. They need to be judged on what they do—and they will.

There’s a British TV orientation here that may not have any room for more passionate players. I want them to be successful and, so far, they are navigating a minefield of worries fueled by legitimate questions and some resentment and jealousy.

Some fear that Jazeera’s brand has been “hi-jacked” or will have its brand diluted. Steve Tatham, a British author who works for the Royal Navy, and who has written a a new book called “Losing Arab Hearts and Minds: The Coalition, Al-Jazeera and Muslim Public Opinion,” warns “trouble ahead.” He fears that if the new channel falters, it will lose credibility for the Jazeera brand. He spoke on a lively panel featuring a critical assessment of Jazeera’s impact.

The fact that the network would present critics of its own work is itself brave and something that our networks could learn from. (While in Doha I was asked by CBS’s new Public Eye website to critically assess that network which one former correspondent described as a “one time great network.”)

The new channel to be has been reacting to many concerns and fears with patience, and by downplaying the clear differences between the two approaches. They are trying to be sensitive to their Middle Eastern colleagues in their “sister channel” but are clearly going another way.

AJI’s Managing Director Nigel Parsons and his very experienced colleagues like documentary maven Paul Gibbs and News Director Alan Clark are not dummies. They may be cautious right now, perhaps overly cautious, for fear that competitors will steal their thunder but they do have some impressive plans. They are still “rolling out” their roster of news presenters and personalities. As they say in TV land, “Stand by” for more. Prepare to be blown away!

A Jazeera-like (or even Jazeera-lite) channel is urgently needed in the conformist and conservative world of think-alike and look-alike TV news. More fearless reporting is needed and will be welcomed by American viewers. However, getting carriage is tough, especially in the US, so it may be awhile before many Americans see the new outlet set for launch this Spring. It was reassuring to find that Jazeera hired Nightline’s informative Dave Marash and telegenic ex-CNNer Riz Kahn as high profile anchors.

I tried to use the conference as a platform to promote Mediachannel’s “Tell The Truth About The War Campaign.” The response was very positive and Democracy Now’s Amy Goodman—who wowed the crowd with her fiery denunciation of propaganda posing as news—supported my call from the platform.

Preaching telling the truth about the war in Al Jazeera land is a bit like bringing coals to Newcastle but my point is that denouncing the coverage is not enough. We have to press the press and move media companies to demand investigations of the targeting of journalists and do a more critical job of reporting. This pathetic media coverage has to become an issue, not just a complaint.

It was great to see many blog enthusiasts in the house including Ethan Zuckerman of GlobalVoices and bloggers from Palestine, Jordan and Saudi Arabia. There are now so many bloggers in Iran that they call their country “Blogostan.” There was even a supportive representative of Google on hand who was checking out the scene and taking part in a panel.

The last event was a youth panel suggesting that there is a new generation in the wings ready to become part of this media. One of the participants was Joslyn Massad, a 22 year old student at the University of Texas, who heads up a National Arab American Journalists Association. She described growing up in a home where Arabic was never spoken and her parents watched Fox News. She revealed that her mother cautioned her not to come to the conference because Al Jazeera backs terrorists. She was gutsy enough to ignore the advice and came anyway. A real dynamo, she is involved with a conference you can read about at: journalismandtheArabworld.com.

The fact that a TV network can excite so many people and win their passionate allegiance is a sign that there is still some life in parts of the TV media. As the author of a new book on “The Death of Media,” that’s a welcome sign. We need more channels like it, but more than that, we need conviction and commitment in journalism. Al Jazeera has more to teach the west, than learn from it.

LETTERS

Frank Meagher writes from Paris:

” I find it ironic that a media forum that is asking for more truth from news reporters is being held in a Middle Eastern country and being hosted by what most Western Press would consider (and have called) a terrorist news tool. Al Jazeera and Qatar are to be complimented for the courage to invite journalist from around the world to voice their opinions on how the improve the way that the world is informed about the events that describe our society.

“I have to believe that such an event, with such diverse opinions could never take place in the USA. Not only would many participants be refused visas, for diverse reasons, but someone would show up with a Tshirt that says “TELL THE TRUTH” and would be arrested for disruptive behavior and protesting in a “free speech zone”. Tell me, Danny, how tight is security at this event? Is everyone required to pass through metal detectors? Do they “sweep” the room for explosives before each session and at lunch breaks? Are there demonstrations outside with burning effigies and mass arrests? I doubt it, and I do not think it is because of oppressive civil liberty laws that would prohibit such actions. We have to go to an Arab, Islamic, Emirate in order to hear diverse opinions about the individuals rights to express perceived truth.”

I AM NOT GOING

London based TV Journalist Bruce Whitehead copies us on a letter that the Guardian would not print:

” I withdrew from a planned trip to Basra to cover reconstruction projects because of the security situation. (Blair refuses to be swayed by death of 100th British soldier, 1 Feb) From briefings given to me in the last few weeks, and having seen video footage of bombing attacks on western targets in Iraq, I am now convinced that coalition forces have no positive contribution to make in Iraq or Afghanistan and must leave immediately. Every single trip or movement by a westerner in these countries puts them, their security escorts and the local population in mortal danger. The sole reason for this lethal presence in Iraq is to maintain the country’s marginal OPEC oil production at levels which ensure prices do not force economic hardship on the west. The deaths of British and American soldiers, Iraqi civilians, police and militia, are too high a price to pay for our right to waste millions of barrels of oil every day simply to nip down the shops or collect children from school. There is next-to no debate on this, the real reason for the carnage, and our forces are being duped yet again by the old lie: Dulce et Decorum Est Pro Patriam Mori.”

YES TO OTHER SITES

Glenda writes: visit NEWS BACK:

” I have already posted your article (”What Now For Al Jazeera?”) in our site, you can check it out here

http://www.newsback.com/forums/news-501-what-now-for-aljazeera.html.

Anamarie Bohus writes:

Danny, I am a regular subscriber to your excellent, informative News Dissector/Media Channel. I would like to ask your permission to partially repost your post “What Next for Al Jazeera?” on my blog:

http://verbena-19.blogspot.com

“Flutie” sends along a quote from a Hamas leader from a pro-Israeli media monitoring source. Is it all he said? Is it in context? I don’t know

February 1, 2006: Hamas Leader Mahmoud Zahar on Al-Manar TV:

”Palestine means Palestine in its entirety - from the [Mediterranean] Sea to the [Jordan] River, from Ras Al-Naqura to Rafah. We cannot give up a single inch of it. Therefore, we will not recognize the Israeli enemy’s [right] to a single inch. That is one thing.

“The second thing is that if the right of return is an individual right, neither Mahmoud Al-Zahar nor ‘Abbas Zaki can relinquish it, because all these concessions will constitute a national catastrophe.

“The third point is that we can found a state on any piece of the land, and this will not mean we give up on any other part of the land.”

http://memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=SD108306

Paul Harrington has a way with words:

” I see you have the usual left-wing wacko media at this event. Any right-wing wacko media there??

NET NEUTRALITY DEBATE

Jeff Chester writes:

“Danny: Here’s my small contribution to the “net neutrality” debate. Nation article below. Please note the documents from Cisco and others I have placed online. They are very revealing of what will happen and how it will work. It’s an attack on cable, telephone industry, etc.

My longer version: http://www.democraticmedia.org/issues/JCnetneutrality.html
Documents page: http://www.democraticmedia.org/issues/netneutrality.html

BEST HEADLINE FROM THE ONION

“President Creates Cabinet-Level Position To Coordinate Scandals”

I am flying home tomorrow with more to say.

Keep your comments coming

Write: Dissector@mediachannel.org