::: The ICBA Channel :::: Media coverage in the Middle East

Sun	Mon	Tue	Wed	Thu	Fri	Sat
	1	2	3	4	5	6
7	8	9	10	11	12	13
14	15	16	17	18	19	20
21	22	23	24	25	26	27
28	29	30	31

Within Arab states, much or all of the media is owned or closely controlled by the government. The government plays an important part in distorting facts so as to promote it’s own ideology and rhetoric. For the regimes, anti-Americanism/anti-Westernization is a way to distract attention from their numerous failings. Instead of pressing for democracy, human rights, living standards, less corruption and incomptetence, a change of leadership or any number of other demands that would damage the interests of governments and rulers, the focus of attention is turned to shouting at the United States. This strategy defuses opposition and takes the pressure off the rulers.

Arab newspapers publishing outside the Arab world may be owned by supporters of a particular government – usually wealthy Saudis connected to the royal family. Al-Hayaat and al-Sharq al-Awsat are Saudi backed; Iraq supported al-Quds al-Arabi. A relative of the Saudi royal family owned the Middle East Broadcasting Center, perhaps the most popular Arab satellite station; Saudis also controlled another station that went out of business when their heavy-handed demand for censorship made it’s BBC partner pull out.

In Saudi Arabia, there are many sensitive stories , especially those concerning religion, women and the military. In Bahrain and Qatar, the prohibited story is their border dispute. And so forth. In al Arab countries, perhaps with one or two exceptions, criticism of the head of stage and his immediate family is taboo. In some cases, it is tantamount to signing one’s own death warrant.

If journalists write about fundamentalists groups in London, they risk being banned in Algeria and Tunisia, if they write about women’s rights to drive vehicles, they risk the wrath of the Saudi censor. Even the peace process if not always a safe topic. Al-Hayat was the first Arab newspaper to interview Israeli government leaders and to publish articles by Israeli writers. But as the Syrians became edgy over their stalemated negotiations with Israel, al-Hayat suddenly came under attack in Lebanon “for dealing with the enemy” and the newspaper had to reconsider their position.

The following common press themes provide a good overview of the dominant doctrine in the Arab and Muslim Middle East from mid 20th century onward:

- The problem of the Muslims and Arabs are almost completely caused by Western and especially US attempts to defeat, humiliate, injure and subjugate them. This argument is made in many different styles, ranging from radical Islamist (Westerners as crusaders) to secular Arab nationalist (the United States as an imperialist power in Marxist terms)

- Since hostility toward the Arabs and Muslim underpins U.S. or Western policy, anyone who likes these enemies or defends them is suspect as a traitor. For an Arab regime to cooperate with the West is treasonous. Of course, Arab states to cooperate with the US, but lip service must be maintained. There cannot be any openly competig doctrine. Saudi and Egyptian leaders don't make speeches to their people explaining why alliance with the US is a good and necessary thing; the Saudi and Egyptian media don't run articles thanking the U.S> for saving them from iraq, expressing gratitude for air or extollign America as a role model

- Israel is an extremely evil state that seeks to conquer much or all of the Middle East. It is simultaneously the West’s tool and master. Even if one makes peace with Israel, this can never be justified in doctrinal terms. At any rate, Israel will eventually disappear, because it is not a real country and future control of the Middle East inevitably belongs to Arabs or Muslims. This one more reason why peace with Israel is unnecessary and why concessions are mistaken. Thus, all pragmatic explanations for compromise are illegitimate. Arab leaders & media cannot say anything positive about Israel or acknowledge it’s efforts towards peace; the Arab media will not present favorable information about Israel or explain its point of view.

- Since Muslims and Arabs are in perpetual conflict with the West and Israel, such things as democracy, human rights, economic reforms, and civil society are dangerous distractions from this struggle and might weaken the Muslims (or Arabs)

- Because Western culture and it’s ideas are so innately hostile and subversive to the Arabs and Muslim way of life, they cannot be adapted by these societies. Democracy, civil liberties, women’s rights, economic reform and other features of the West are poisoned gifts. Of course, in practice many such things are absorbed into the Arab world, but again ideology considers this process to be illegitimate, slowing its pace, limiting it’s extent and ensuring a good reception when radicals denounce such things.

- Islam itself is under attack and must be defended from secularism and liberal-oriented reinterpretation. Even Arab nationalists insist that they are champions protecting Islam. If Islam is threatened by Westernization and modernization, this is another reason to reject reforming it or adjusting it to modern times.

- Since the West follows a deliberate policy of persecuting and destroying Arabs or Muslims, it's victims should unite to combat it. The conflicts and differences among true Arabs or Muslims are of no importance, merely creations of the West or of it's local agent. In practice, this means that moderates must avoid antagonizing radicals and must be careful about seeking Western help to defend themselves from their threats.

- Once Arabs or Muslims unite, they cannot be defeated no matter what the balance of power. Sucide bombing is an example of how a small group of Muslims or Arabs can erase the West's or Israel's apparent strength and shows how easy victory can be.

- No matter how difficult the struggle, it is better to continue in order to leave the door ope for future success. Nonetheless, victory is far closer than it seems. The power of America or Israel is illusory. UNity, the proper ideology, a good strategy, and innovative tactics will biring enemies to their knees. They lack the Arab's and Muslims' steadfastness, readiness to suffer and willingness to sacrifice themselves.

This list goes on and Arab rulers and media usually deal with this worldview from a cynical perspective. Most, but no means all, of the time they are not eager to fight the West or do anything that would endanger their regimes. For them, such propaganda si a tool, a way to ensuring control at home and leverage over other Arab states. They are like a coachman who whips the horses to go faster but keeps tight control of the reins.