Arab media and the US elections

OK, just a few thoughts on the Arab media today before I get back to grading.

There isn't yet much commentary about yesterday's elections in the Arab media, mainly because of the time differences, so that most of the newspaper columnists haven't had time to analyze the results yet - tomorrow will have more.  As for the TV websites, al-Jazeera's headline just reports the White House conceding Republican defeat, while al-Arabiya's headline says that Democrats had taken the House and were fighting for the Senate.   Both of those major networks gave full live coverage to Bush's press conference just now.

Despite this delay in reactions, it's clear that American domestic politics are clearly seen as an internal Arab issue - followed intensely, if not always accurately, with a keen eye towards how the elections will affect American foreign policy (especially towards Iraq).  In one entirely typical example, al-Ghad's Ibrahim Ghurayba pointed out before the election that it had become impossible to discuss events in Iraq independently of American politics, and vice versa.   This can lead to repercussions which really should be taken into account by foreign policy makers.   For instance, the perception that the timing of the Saddam verdict was motivated by Republican electoral considerations is pretty much universal.  Even the usually pro-American head of al-Arabiya Abd al-Rahman al-Rashed wrote in his column today that he thought that the timing of the Saddam verdict was clearly motivated by Republican electoral consideration.  When Bush has lost Rashed, he's really lost all sectors of the Arab public.   Well done. 

One of the most interesting emerging questions has to do with why al-Qaeda did not intervene with a videotape.  I'm going to defer that to another post down the road, since I really do have to get back to grading right now. 

Last point:  while Americans are obviously consumed with the outcome of the elections, the American elections are not the primary focus of the Arab news right now.   An Israeli shell which killed at least 18 civilians in Bayt Hanoun in northern Gaza has been the lead story almost everywhere.  While al-Arabiya followed Bush's press conference with coverage and discussion of the elections, al-Jazeera's regularly scheduled prime time Behind the News program focused not on the American elections, but on the Gaza bloodshed:

Even al-Arabiya, often accused of downplaying Palestinian issues, has been covering this story fairly heavily.   While al-Jazeera went directly from Bush's press conference to Gaza, al-Arabiya was only 15 minutes behind - by 1:45, its coverage had shifted to the "massacre" (as it is being routinely described everywhere).  Afterwards, al-Arabiya went back to the elections, with its prime time Panorama show devoted to the American scence, while al-Jazeera has stuck with blanket coverage of Gaza. 

The American elections certainly did capture the attention of Arab viewers, and the outcome is clearly seen as directly relevant to Arab politics, but the bloodshed in Gaza has quickly pushed it off the front burner (especially on al-Jazeera).  A quick reminder, I suppose, of the different news agendas and priorities - how different the images and frames in the two media spheres remain, even as something like the coverage of the US elections demonstrate unprecedented convergence. 

Comments

[guerrilla radio]

--Blogs alliance proposal to the freedom in Palestine--

"A man who looks the wall is only a man alone.
But two men who are looking the wall are the beginning of a escape"

Dear Friend,
do you want to exchange link with us?

http://guerrillaradio.iobloggo.com/

The power of a union is the power of the numbers.

We are a strong blog PRO-UMANRIGHTS, so
for a FREE PALESTINE.

My name is Vittorio,
and for my peace-activism i was in also in prison in Israel,
http://www.aljazeera.com/cgi-bin/news_service/middle_east_full_story.asp?service_ID=10235
(nice democracy there...)
I propose to you this exchange also if my blog is in italian;
sometimes the feeling of images, sentiments, ideals,
are more strong than the different of language.

respect
Al Mukawama!!!

Vittorio Arrigoni.
http://guerrillaradio.iobloggo.com/

[Judd]

It will be interesting to see how the English-language AJ handles this balance. Any thoughts on that? (Feel free to refer me to old posts; I've been away and not checked the Aardvark as often as I'd like.)

[Tom Scudder]

So far, the thing that I've heard from people multiple times (other than the obvious) is about the first Muslim congressman.

[aardvark]

Tom - right, I should have mentioned that - Ellison is a big deal. Talk about a public diplomacy coup - a Muslim congressman could be great for that, depending on how his term goes. I'll try to write something about that later.
Judd - don't really know yet about AJI - there's been so much analysis and bitter debate (both internal to AJ and from outside analysts) that at this point we just have to wait and see what they do.

[Badger]

Meanwhile, may I recommend my analysis of Western journalistic standards in dealing with the Middle East called News for kids !.

[jonst]

Its amazing (even though I have seen it many, many, many, times before)how little play the murder of 18 Palestinians, including 8 children and 6 women is getting. I am not naive about this. I have been following this since 1967. When, a neighbor of mine, I was then a teen, was killed while serving in the Navy. He was on the USS Liberty. A ship that came under fire from Israeli gun boats. I asked my Father how come the press was not making a big deal of it. He sat me down and I got my first lesson in this dynamic. Yet, still, even with all that is going on....this is a big deal and worthy of some mention. You get, if you are lucky, 20 seconds on the TV.

[Yohan]

As someone who lives in Ellison's district and who voted for him in both the general election and the primary, I'm pretty excited about his election. He should have as long a career in the congress as he wants since the Minneapolis district is heavily democratic and well in line with Ellison's views(the previous, Scandinavian, democratic congressman had been in the seat since 1978). Without being an incumbent he beat his nearest opponent by 35%.

This election cycle brought many moderate-to-conservative Democrats to congress but Ellison clearly isn't one of them and so I don't know how much of his agenda he will be able to realize. His positions and rhetoric will be very well received in the Middle East I think(he's the only candidate that I know of who unequivocally advocates an immediate pull-out of Iraq), but he's very much an American and a liberal(even on social issues). He has great potential to bridge the two cultures and greatly benefit US-Muslim relations if he is in the public eye and perceived to have actual power rather than just being a token. Being liberal, I don't know if Ellison can be considered part of the "pious middle," but he is a clear personification of how American values and real Islamic faith can easily coexist.

If Keith does come out fighting though, things could get ugly. There are still many people in America who are reflexively Islamophobic and some of them happen to be congressmen. During the campaign Republican and Democratic opponents of Ellison tried to tie him to the Nation of Islam and thus tried to depict him as anti-Semitic. Ellison was never in the organization, though he felt compelled to come out with a statement saying that he regretted not scrutinizing their anti-Semitic views when he worked on the Million Man March more than 10 years ago. Ellison later received the support of the local Jewish newspaper in Minneapolis and the accusation never really stuck, but I would not be surprised if his congressional enemies didn't try to drag that up again at some point. Online partisan hounds(including none other than David Horowitz's Front Page Magazine) went after Ellison for working closely with and receiving campaign contributions from Council on American-Islamic Relations(CAIR), which they claim supports terrorism and is in bed with Hamas.

If this nonsense comes up on the international stage of congress rather than just in the darkest dungeons of the internet then US-Muslim relations will definitely be damaged. Muslims will see in it yet more evidence that Muslims will always be stereotyped in America as anti-Semitic terrorists who are denied participation in public life. We shall see.

[magdi habachi]

The greatest comment was the opinion of the Iraqi ... even if they didn't have the right to vote.
Are we all going to vote the American elections? After all we are all children of the world.
(that was purely sarcasmic)
Our presidents are not to be taken as idols as they all look corrupt, stupid or even better came out of a movie. Planet of the Apes was a very good one. We couldn't accept such an image like Mss America for foreign affairs if we didn't have the planet of the Apes.
(This is not America)