« Al-Jazeera and Israel | Main | Kefaya, Iraq, and the Kuran thesis »

October 06, 2006



makes perfect sense...sadly what do you think the chances are of them actually doing this?!

Carmen Grayson

Perhaps your advice to al-Hurra suggesting in depth, realistic coverage of American politics would do as well for ABC/FOX/CNN/CBS etc. etc.


heh, carmen. funny.

Tiffany Campbell

I think that the sugesstions might be taken to heart because the climate is ripe for changes like this to be made- I think the powers that be have realized that publications, like "Hi" magazine, etc are not the way to proceed.

Being open and honest in a journalistic setting is so very difficult when eveyone has a spin- and it seems impossible to seperate an American TV station's programing philosophy from the $ that created it...perhaps we should all pool our $ and buy our own Arab Satelite TV station and become VJ's.

What is the rubric for establishing effectiveness of the television programing once the new format is established? For that matter, other than counting viewers, how was the effectiveness of the old format evaluated? I've read the GAO reports and I understand that PD efforts are being compared to PR efforts, and a "feedback loop" should be established...but what about people not technologically engaged?

The Lounsbury

Wise advice, although not likely to be followed.


to Prof. Lynch and to the above posters: why do we "want" al-Hurra to adopt these ideas and reform and be successful? and why do we want to volunteer them advice and counseling in the first place?
al-Hurra is a government sponsored media outlet, it is not even allowed to broadcast within the US (as you probably know, the American law protects its citizens from government-sponsored propaganda).
I understand that it is more or less normal for American academics to meet with state officials, consult with American security agencies and the like. But you guys take it too far at times, and act like unappointed government consultants. In my home country, if we as much as suspect that a colleague of ours has dealings with security or military services, he would probably be shunned and boycotted (not that several of our academics don't do it regardless).
Now, I understand that it has to do with different ideas concerning the role of "the intellectual" (and there are very few debates about this topic among academics in the US-save for political theorists, and who -among state officials- wants their advice anyway?).
But my point is, professor Lynch: if you want to carry yourself the way you do, you should not be surprised when Arabs view you and your American colleagues with suspicion, and you should not expect me, when I am back home, to say very nice things about you to my colleagues.


Well, I'd like you to say nice things about me to your colleagues, but I really can't make you...

But as to why offer advice (and the role of the intellectual in offering policy advice) I think you're totally wrong. The fact is that the US is going to use its power and do things in the Arab/Muslim world no matter what. I'd rather that it do what I consider to be good things and to use its power wisely. Following your counsel and not offering advice to policy makers just means ceding the field to people who - in my opinion - either have bad goals or bad advice about what to do. Anyway, if it makes you feel better, I don't think anyone in power actually listens to my advice. But it would be irresponsible to not at least try.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Blog powered by Typepad