Following up on Tuesday's roundup of Arab responses to the new American Arab satellite television station al Hurra, here are some more.
Samih al Mayateh, writing in Jordan's al Arab al Yawm, says that America's calls for democracy and opening don't sit will with the media model offered by al Hurra, which looks more like "the official media of a totalitarian state, whose owners betray their own lack of confidence in it by giving it the name 'The Free One.'" Mayateh patiently describes Arab political grievances over Israel, Iraq, and American support for Arab dictators, and then says "all the media networks in the world, free or unfree, won't convince Arabs or Muslims or any rational person that America is a force for good.. the failure of all the previous American efforts at public relations have no relation to the technical skill or financing... but rather are due to the contradictions with the daily lives that people experience with their own eyes.. improving America's image with Arabs and Muslims can only happen with an end to the occupation and killing.... What will a satellite television station do in the face of images of the American army occupying Iraq... what word choices and languge will the American media use in the face of pictures of the profound alliance between Israel and America at the expense of the Palestinian people?" And, Mayateh asks, how can the Americans demand a free media for Arabs, when al Hurra "entrenches the idea of a state media... imitating them in their coverage of the kings and princes."
Hey, looks like starting with an interview with Bush wasn't such a great idea after all, Muwafic Harb! You'd think that such an experienced Arab media guy might have foreseen these responses?
Meanwhile, Jamil Nimri, a day earlier in the same newspaper, offers a more nuanced and even somewhat sympathetic appraisal. He starts off by wondering why he should bother criticizing al Hurra, when everyone else has already pointed out its major deficiencies. Nimri instead decides to ask whether al Hurra will succeed. He observes that the station looks good, professional and attractive, and that this alone might put it into the second rank of Arab satellites... since Arabs won't automatically reach for the remote when they see it. He thinks that viewers won't necessarily turn it off just because it is American, and they very well might hang around to see what it has to say. And if they see interesting talk shows or programs, it could arouse interest. Arab listeners never boycotted the BBC, after all, despite their differences with British policy. But, Nimri says, "none of this likely success in reaching an audience will translate into marketing well known American policies." The problem is that the Americans think that their problems come from distortions in other news sources like al Jazeera, and that objective coverage will give Arabs the truth and change their minds. But Nimri argues that Arabs have long been experienced at reading between the lines of official discourse, and seeking out alternative information sources, and that the Americans therefore misdiagnose the problem. Arabs tuned out official Arab television, and they will tune out an official American station for the same reason.
Abd al Rahman Rashed, former editor of al Sharq al Awsat, asks in today's column what all the fuss is about. American news and opinions have long been available on the internet or magazines or CNN, and al Hurra will be adding little new. If Arabs are afraid that the station will reduce Arab opposition to Israel, Rashed points out that Israel itself has been broadcasting in Arabic for some time and he doesn't know a single person who changed his mind about Israel because of it. Rashed thinks that America wants to extend its hegemony to the Arab media, but it won't be able to do this because there are already strong competitors which will not be easily overcome. Overall, Rashed doesn't see much to fear in al Hurra, because he just doesn't think it matters very much.
There was also a great essay by, again, the estimable Fahmi Huwaydi (in al Sharq al Awsat this time), but I don't have time to translate it for y'all right now. Maybe I'll have time to update later!
Comments