And now for something totally different
Anna Smart pays homage to Al Jazeera English…
the midas touch | global news, global views | teacups and terrorism
I’ve been irritated by the BBC’s narrow news coverage for a while. Reports on whether spring is the new summer, what British dog owners buy for their pets and a warning that broadband connection-stealing is the latest street crime don’t really do it for me. Where the Beeb does feature news from Iraq or Afghanistan the context is how many British soldiers have died; mention of civilian casualties is extremely rare.
The Midas Touch
So skimming through the channels on my Skybox this Easter, desperately searching for a reason not to get on with my essays, I was delighted to discover Al Jazeera English. Broadcasting since November 2006, it is the world’s first English language ne
ws station to have its headquarters in the Middle East. In a language I understand but free from a Western bias towards content, I soon realised that I had found gold. I was immediately hooked by its penetrating insights – the station has reported on a petition campaigning for women’s rights in Iran, the AIDS crisis facing India, corruption threatening the current election in Nigeria, and the dire humanitarian situation in Darfur, Sudan. Crucially, Al Jazeera is the only foreign broadcaster with access to a live newsfeed from Zimbabwe.
News broadcasts are complimented by outsta
nding feature programmes. Former BBC correspondent Rageh Omaar, who, along with David Frost and several others, has made the switch to Al Jazeera, fronts the cutting show ‘Witness’. The line-up has so far included; in-depth pieces on the plight of the Kurds in Iraq and Turkey, women forced into prostitution in Yemen, the reality of living in Gaza and being a homeless child in Russia. Better yet, there are hardly any adverts.
Global news, global views
It is not merely the knowledge that I’m getting the most important news that draws me to Al Jazeera but the refreshing global perspective that it provides. I will happily admit, for example, that watching this channel has challenged my subconscious preconceptions about Muslim women in the Arab world. And it’s made me sharply aware that Middle Eastern peace negotiations do, in fact, proceed in-between visits from US and British dignitaries.
“Wait a minute!”, I hear you cry…“Isn’t Al Jazeera the one that keeps showing videos of Osama bin Laden and kidnapped hostages?” This is certainly how the channel is portrayed in most Western media, the implication being that the station promotes terrorism. But if the 
station is first to receive such footage it is surely a testament to its respected objectivity and influence as the main broadcaster in the Middle East. In instances of kidnappings, Al Jazeera has, in fact, broadcast pleas from family members and government officials in an attempt to secure the release of victims. Moreover, and contrary to some allegations, beheadings have never been shown on the channel (such clips have appeared on numerous websites that have sometimes been misattributed to Al Jazeera).
Prior to the events of 11 September 2001, the station was widely heralded across the world, including in the U. S., as the Middle East’s only independent and international-looking news station. Many critics from within the region had actually accused it of being too Western-looking. Since then, the penetrating journalism of this controversial news broadcaster has proved unpopular with various governments. Banned in Bahrain for supposed “bias towards Israel” (May 2002), the channel has also been prohibited in Iran, accused of inflaming ethnic riots (April 2005), and on several occasions in Iraq for “inciting anti-United States violence”. The most recent ban came from the authorities of Afghanistan, which claims that Al Jazeera is damaging the “cultural order and the legal authority of the government” (April 2007). All of these claims have been strongly disputed by Al Jazeera which emphasizes the objectivity and balance of its reporting.
Teacups and Terrorism
Particularly ferocious is the storm that the station appears to have brewed in the White House. Seemingly targeted as part of Bush’s ‘war on terror’, Al Jazeera cameraman Sami Al Hajj has been held in the U.S. detention centre Guantanamo Bay without charge for the past six years. Furthermore, on 22 November 2005 the
Daily Mirror claimed that it had obtained a leaked memo from 10 Downing Street saying that U.S. President George W. Bush had considered bombing Al Jazeera’s headquarters in Qatar. The mere prospect of such a raid with little excuse in one of the most Western-looking economic powerhouses of the region is surely extremely troubling. This allegation has prompted Al Jazeera to question whether it has been targeted deliberately in the past — the station’s Kabul office was bombed in 2001 and another missile hit its office in Baghdad during the invasion of Iraq. Both of these attacks occurred subsequent to Al Jazeera’s disclosure of the locations of its offices to the United States.
It seems clear to me that at last we have a news channel that refuses to shy away from reporting what it regards as important, regardless of political pressures to remain silent.
Intrigued? If you’re looking for a more global perspective on the news, then Sky Channel 514 is where it’s at. Clips are also available at www.youtube.com/aljazeeraenglish
You've been watching the BBC's 6 o'clock news too much. Try the World Service, you can get it on digital or Sky. It's brilliant.
You've been watching the BBC's 6 o'clock news too much. Try the World Service, you can get it on digital or Sky. It's brilliant.
You've been watching the BBC's 6 o'clock news too much. Try the World Service, you can get it on digital or Sky. It's brilliant.
Speaking of news channels with a better global perspective and less buffoonery than BBC News 24 & CNN, try France 24. Their cultural reports are particularly good: informed, erudite questioning and responses, distinctly different from the brain dead tosh which is sadly becoming the norm on News 24. Also highly attractive is that there's none of this Have Your Say nonsense on France 24.
The BBC had a real chance with News 24, and what started out as being a good, solid news service has unfortunately become remarkably closed-minded and second rate, pandering to sensation much like the rest of the British media.
Speaking of news channels with a better global perspective and less buffoonery than BBC News 24 & CNN, try France 24. Their cultural reports are particularly good: informed, erudite questioning and responses, distinctly different from the brain dead tosh which is sadly becoming the norm on News 24. Also highly attractive is that there's none of this Have Your Say nonsense on France 24.
The BBC had a real chance with News 24, and what started out as being a good, solid news service has unfortunately become remarkably closed-minded and second rate, pandering to sensation much like the rest of the British media.
Speaking of news channels with a better global perspective and less buffoonery than BBC News 24 & CNN, try France 24. Their cultural reports are particularly good: informed, erudite questioning and responses, distinctly different from the brain dead tosh which is sadly becoming the norm on News 24. Also highly attractive is that there's none of this Have Your Say nonsense on France 24.
The BBC had a real chance with News 24, and what started out as being a good, solid news service has unfortunately become remarkably closed-minded and second rate, pandering to sensation much like the rest of the British media.
Alternatively: open your door, step outside and meet some real people.
Alternatively: open your door, step outside and meet some real people.
Alternatively: open your door, step outside and meet some real people.
I feel the praise you heap upon this newscasting 'gold is misplaced. Firstly your attack on the BBC news is limited – of course their television news will be focused towards what people are interested in i.e. WHAT AFFECTS THEM DIRECTLY. The BBC's internet and radio coverage is far better (I have reviewed them for a job). Secondly the British slant on stories from Afghanistan is due to the fact that the people watching them are British themselves. I'm sure Afghanistanis don't want to be hearing about the 'terrible death tolls' of British soldiers. I'm not saying it's not right that casualties are not reported for the other side, but how much emphasis was placed on German casualties in WW2?
Thirdly 'free from Western bias' does not mean 'free from all bias' – the exclusively Middle East orientated stories you recount from Witness bear that out. So why would European, British people choose a TV station that is not tuned into their cultural perspective and norms, over one that is, the majority of the time?
Finally Rageeh Omar didn't leave the BBC for pastures new and 'unbiased' – he was fired for presenting the disinformation of 'Comical Ali' Muhammed Saeed al-Sahaf as fact without checking it; and for getting pally with the Ba'athist Information Minister, compromising his journalistic integrety.
I feel the praise you heap upon this newscasting 'gold is misplaced. Firstly your attack on the BBC news is limited – of course their television news will be focused towards what people are interested in i.e. WHAT AFFECTS THEM DIRECTLY. The BBC's internet and radio coverage is far better (I have reviewed them for a job). Secondly the British slant on stories from Afghanistan is due to the fact that the people watching them are British themselves. I'm sure Afghanistanis don't want to be hearing about the 'terrible death tolls' of British soldiers. I'm not saying it's not right that casualties are not reported for the other side, but how much emphasis was placed on German casualties in WW2?
Thirdly 'free from Western bias' does not mean 'free from all bias' – the exclusively Middle East orientated stories you recount from Witness bear that out. So why would European, British people choose a TV station that is not tuned into their cultural perspective and norms, over one that is, the majority of the time?
Finally Rageeh Omar didn't leave the BBC for pastures new and 'unbiased' – he was fired for presenting the disinformation of 'Comical Ali' Muhammed Saeed al-Sahaf as fact without checking it; and for getting pally with the Ba'athist Information Minister, compromising his journalistic integrety.
I feel the praise you heap upon this newscasting 'gold is misplaced. Firstly your attack on the BBC news is limited – of course their television news will be focused towards what people are interested in i.e. WHAT AFFECTS THEM DIRECTLY. The BBC's internet and radio coverage is far better (I have reviewed them for a job). Secondly the British slant on stories from Afghanistan is due to the fact that the people watching them are British themselves. I'm sure Afghanistanis don't want to be hearing about the 'terrible death tolls' of British soldiers. I'm not saying it's not right that casualties are not reported for the other side, but how much emphasis was placed on German casualties in WW2?
Thirdly 'free from Western bias' does not mean 'free from all bias' – the exclusively Middle East orientated stories you recount from Witness bear that out. So why would European, British people choose a TV station that is not tuned into their cultural perspective and norms, over one that is, the majority of the time?
Finally Rageeh Omar didn't leave the BBC for pastures new and 'unbiased' – he was fired for presenting the disinformation of 'Comical Ali' Muhammed Saeed al-Sahaf as fact without checking it; and for getting pally with the Ba'athist Information Minister, compromising his journalistic integrety.
Thanks for all of your comments. Some specific responses:
Zaki, I would love to have access to the BBC world channel but sadly it does not broadcast in Britain.
Becky, I have to say this is quite a personal attack when you have no idea whether I am a politically active person or not. Writing this article was certainly not about saying 'look at me', it was about sharing an excellent source of news with others who might be interested in having the same experience. You say 'what difference does knowing make to our actions' – well surely it fundamentally shapes our perceptions, which direct our actions. We could all use a bit more toleration and understanding of other cultures. I don't mean that in a wooly way, I could elaborate if you like.
Anon2, whoever you are…what you say is fair enough, but note that I directed the article at people looking 'for a more global perspective'. If people are happy with the BBC then good for them, I'm not going to order them to watch something they're not interested in! As for the Rageeh Omar point, I had not been aware of this. I would still say, however, that the quality of his work on witness is good.
Thanks for all of your comments. Some specific responses:
Zaki, I would love to have access to the BBC world channel but sadly it does not broadcast in Britain.
Becky, I have to say this is quite a personal attack when you have no idea whether I am a politically active person or not. Writing this article was certainly not about saying 'look at me', it was about sharing an excellent source of news with others who might be interested in having the same experience. You say 'what difference does knowing make to our actions' – well surely it fundamentally shapes our perceptions, which direct our actions. We could all use a bit more toleration and understanding of other cultures. I don't mean that in a wooly way, I could elaborate if you like.
Anon2, whoever you are…what you say is fair enough, but note that I directed the article at people looking 'for a more global perspective'. If people are happy with the BBC then good for them, I'm not going to order them to watch something they're not interested in! As for the Rageeh Omar point, I had not been aware of this. I would still say, however, that the quality of his work on witness is good.
Thanks for all of your comments. Some specific responses:
Zaki, I would love to have access to the BBC world channel but sadly it does not broadcast in Britain.
Becky, I have to say this is quite a personal attack when you have no idea whether I am a politically active person or not. Writing this article was certainly not about saying 'look at me', it was about sharing an excellent source of news with others who might be interested in having the same experience. You say 'what difference does knowing make to our actions' – well surely it fundamentally shapes our perceptions, which direct our actions. We could all use a bit more toleration and understanding of other cultures. I don't mean that in a wooly way, I could elaborate if you like.
Anon2, whoever you are…what you say is fair enough, but note that I directed the article at people looking 'for a more global perspective'. If people are happy with the BBC then good for them, I'm not going to order them to watch something they're not interested in! As for the Rageeh Omar point, I had not been aware of this. I would still say, however, that the quality of his work on witness is good.
It was your notion of the 'global perspective' that `i was taking issue with. Al-Jazeera has a predominantly MIDDLE EASTERN perspective, interspersed with a wider look, but this is not any more than Italian, French or even Chinese broadcasters. If you had told readers to tune in to a middle eastern channel, among others, it would have made more sense.
It was your notion of the 'global perspective' that `i was taking issue with. Al-Jazeera has a predominantly MIDDLE EASTERN perspective, interspersed with a wider look, but this is not any more than Italian, French or even Chinese broadcasters. If you had told readers to tune in to a middle eastern channel, among others, it would have made more sense.
It was your notion of the 'global perspective' that `i was taking issue with. Al-Jazeera has a predominantly MIDDLE EASTERN perspective, interspersed with a wider look, but this is not any more than Italian, French or even Chinese broadcasters. If you had told readers to tune in to a middle eastern channel, among others, it would have made more sense.
I said *more* global perspective. I never said it was the definitive objective provider of news! Al Jazeera provides an alternative outlook to Western media by being based in the Middle East. It is surely by receiving news from a variety of sources that the best possible 'global perspective' can be achieved.
I said *more* global perspective. I never said it was the definitive objective provider of news! Al Jazeera provides an alternative outlook to Western media by being based in the Middle East. It is surely by receiving news from a variety of sources that the best possible 'global perspective' can be achieved.
I said *more* global perspective. I never said it was the definitive objective provider of news! Al Jazeera provides an alternative outlook to Western media by being based in the Middle East. It is surely by receiving news from a variety of sources that the best possible 'global perspective' can be achieved.
Anon2, having re-read your post I see that we agree on the issue of needing a variety of news media. The purpose of the article was to propose one such alternative to the standard British-based networks. I stand by my point that Al Jazeera provides a *more* global perspective than the BBC though. The headlines regularly come from Africa/South America/South East Asia, not necessarily the Middle East. Plus, the new Al Jazeera English section actually broadcasts from Kuala Lumpur, London and Washington as well as Qatar.
Anon2, having re-read your post I see that we agree on the issue of needing a variety of news media. The purpose of the article was to propose one such alternative to the standard British-based networks. I stand by my point that Al Jazeera provides a *more* global perspective than the BBC though. The headlines regularly come from Africa/South America/South East Asia, not necessarily the Middle East. Plus, the new Al Jazeera English section actually broadcasts from Kuala Lumpur, London and Washington as well as Qatar.
Anon2, having re-read your post I see that we agree on the issue of needing a variety of news media. The purpose of the article was to propose one such alternative to the standard British-based networks. I stand by my point that Al Jazeera provides a *more* global perspective than the BBC though. The headlines regularly come from Africa/South America/South East Asia, not necessarily the Middle East. Plus, the new Al Jazeera English section actually broadcasts from Kuala Lumpur, London and Washington as well as Qatar.
Sorry I should've made that clearer – I was referring to the BBC World Service radio station, which you can get in the UK on digital (and also on Radio 4's frequencies overnight) and not the TV channel, which I've seen a bit of here in Germany and don't rate very highly unfortunately.
Anon2 – you are quite right to say that people will generally watched news aimed at themselves and BBC TV generally does this, although too much introversion leads to isolation. You see this with Britain's ghastly tabloids and their misrepresentation of the news. This Maddy McCann story is awful but we DO NOT need countless BBC newsreaders and reporters flooding to the Algarve to tell us absolutely nothing new. All it contributes to is a parochiality and a mispresentative picture of life – this type of crime is incredibly rare, which is why it gets so much coverage, but paradoxically that leads to unneccesary fear. I think escaping this insularity is what Anna is getting at here. Also, you don't actually seem to have watched Al Jazeera Int. much because it has never seemed to me to be very Middle Eastern-based (or biased) at all. It just gives the world equal coverage, not just based around the same five or so places the domestic news might report from.
Sorry I should've made that clearer – I was referring to the BBC World Service radio station, which you can get in the UK on digital (and also on Radio 4's frequencies overnight) and not the TV channel, which I've seen a bit of here in Germany and don't rate very highly unfortunately.
Anon2 – you are quite right to say that people will generally watched news aimed at themselves and BBC TV generally does this, although too much introversion leads to isolation. You see this with Britain's ghastly tabloids and their misrepresentation of the news. This Maddy McCann story is awful but we DO NOT need countless BBC newsreaders and reporters flooding to the Algarve to tell us absolutely nothing new. All it contributes to is a parochiality and a mispresentative picture of life – this type of crime is incredibly rare, which is why it gets so much coverage, but paradoxically that leads to unneccesary fear. I think escaping this insularity is what Anna is getting at here. Also, you don't actually seem to have watched Al Jazeera Int. much because it has never seemed to me to be very Middle Eastern-based (or biased) at all. It just gives the world equal coverage, not just based around the same five or so places the domestic news might report from.
Sorry I should've made that clearer – I was referring to the BBC World Service radio station, which you can get in the UK on digital (and also on Radio 4's frequencies overnight) and not the TV channel, which I've seen a bit of here in Germany and don't rate very highly unfortunately.
Anon2 – you are quite right to say that people will generally watched news aimed at themselves and BBC TV generally does this, although too much introversion leads to isolation. You see this with Britain's ghastly tabloids and their misrepresentation of the news. This Maddy McCann story is awful but we DO NOT need countless BBC newsreaders and reporters flooding to the Algarve to tell us absolutely nothing new. All it contributes to is a parochiality and a mispresentative picture of life – this type of crime is incredibly rare, which is why it gets so much coverage, but paradoxically that leads to unneccesary fear. I think escaping this insularity is what Anna is getting at here. Also, you don't actually seem to have watched Al Jazeera Int. much because it has never seemed to me to be very Middle Eastern-based (or biased) at all. It just gives the world equal coverage, not just based around the same five or so places the domestic news might report from.
Leave your response!