The Arab Media

“Al-Jazeera has revolutionised our region” –
Akram Khouzam, Moscow Bureau Chief, Al-Jazeera television channel

With the rise of Al-Jazeera and other channels in the Arabic language, the battle for the world’s airwaves has never been more intense. Al-Jazeera is moving into programming in English and other Arabic channels are drawing up expansion plans, heating up the battle for global television audiences.

For some people, this could mean an attack on journalistic credibility and objectivity. In some quarters, Arabic television is viewed with scorn. But for others, it is a welcome development.

Nik Gowing, who chaired a frequently ill-tempered and acrimonious session, believed the Arab media was an “attractive compelling force that keeps all of us on our toes. It is good for journalism.” The BBC World TV presenter said Arab media and powerful new websites were challenging orthodox television.

At the other end of the spectrum, Ariel Cohen, a senior research fellow at America’s Heritage Foundation and an expert on the Arab-Israeli conflict, claimed most of the Arab media had an “anti-US agenda and the US does not like it”.

From the Arab perspective, Dr Ammar Bakkar, head of Al-Arabiya News Channel’s new media unit, said: “The Arab media is very connected to our understanding of the Arab world. Real dialogue had been limited but now the Arab media has become a central forum for discussion.

“The internet is also becoming important for the Arab world. People use it a lot more than they do official web sites and newspapers…. Connections in the Gulf are good but there is always a level of censorship in some more conservative states.

“The Arab media is trying to be balanced as much as it can. It is a new form of media after previously being mainly government owned. The situation is developing for the best.

“The most pressure comes from the US government. US embassies in most Arab countries call, sometimes angrily, to give their points of view. Al-Arabiya has a special situation as it is in Dubai but you are never fully free in the Arab world,” Dr Bakkar said.

Akram Khouzam, Moscow Bureau Chief for the Arabic Al-Jazeera channel, said: “Al-Jazeera… helps to preserve our national and religious peculiarity. It is a unique attempt. In fact, Al-Jazeera has revolutionized our region.

“For the first time Arab viewers have seen representatives of Israel. Before that it was just propaganda against Israel. They have now seen the face of the enemy,” he said.

Nigel Parsons, the managing director of Al-Jazeera television, an English-language 24-hour news channel expected to go live in late 2005 or early 2006, said: “Wherever you are situated, you do have a different perspective on events. I think that as we are in the Middle East, we would expect to have an Arab perspective on world events.”

Al-Jazeera International will transmit from four centres – in Kuala Lumpur, Doha, London and Washington, mainly with nationals of the various regions reporting to the centres.

“We are giving viewers a choice by offering something different. We are comfortable with the name ‘Al-Jazeera’ because they have broken new ground by offering both sides of stories. It only incurred US displeasure when it showed the ugly side of war. There are a lot of people who want to know both sides of the story,” Parsons added.

During a verbal clash between Al-Jazeera’s Khouzam and the Heritage Foundation’s Cohen, Khouzam said: “I justify the killing of US soldiers (in Iraq) because the occupiers kill peaceful citizens.” He said he was speaking as a private person, not as a journalist.

Parsons, asked whether he was comfortable with such comments, said: “We will not be anti-US or anti-anybody. Our position is to put both sides of the story… We will bring balanced news and both sides of the story.”

A continuing tirade, largely between Cohen and Khouzam, began to sour the debate amid threats to quit the stage.

Earlier, Cohen had said there were different opinions in the Arab mass media. “There are different levels of extremism but the agenda for the destruction of Israel that justifies the killing of women and children, that is widely there. This leads to a justification of terrorism.”

Dr Bakkar accused Cohen of looking at only extreme media examples, while Khouzam said: “Ariel is bluffing. That is nonsense.” On Al-Jazeera, he said the channel from the start had objectivity and professionalism but admitted mistakes were made in coverage from Afghanistan and Iraq.
But the temperature rose when Cohen, using graphics, drew comparisons between an extreme Arab television channel and propaganda in Nazi Germany that likened Jewish people to vermin.

“Here, there is no balance,” said Khouzam. “I could have brought examples of Israeli web sites showing Arabs in diminishing views… there is no objectivity here.”

Commenting on Cohen’s slides, Parsons said: “I think the demo we just saw underlines what I am saying. We need to see both sides of the story.”

At the end of the debate, Keith Bowers, a former senior BBC producer and journalist and a member of the EAMF Organising committee, said: “We, as the organisers, do not take responsibility for the views of any panelist… We welcome open debate.”