this post was submitted on 15 Oct 2023
194 points (96.6% liked)

World News

32385 readers
584 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 32 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Not that Al Jazeera isn't biased, and the organization does receive Qatari government funding...

But they are relatively fair and balanced in terms of coverage and takes. In a conflict like this, they will platform both the Israeli government and Hamas, and have their own or other local reporters provide an accurate as possible picture of the ground situation, where either side in the conflict will try to convince people differently.

People in the Middle East and internationally rely on Al-Jazeera. Removing them means that people will not be as informed of what's really happening, and will cause some to turn to more biased and extremist channels.

[–] [email protected] 32 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

Big caveat: AJ ENGLISH is very different from their Arabic organization.

Honestly, I just saw one of the BEST interviewers, ever, on AJ ENGLISH this past week.

The information in the interviews themselves was nothing groundbreaking, but the AJ hosts UNWILLINGNESS to let either the Hamas spokesperson OR the former Israeli defense minister simply evade his questions was breathtaking and SHOULD be the standard for this format.

The AJ host is Marc Lamont Hill, and here is a link:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UgoUq69NZ30

Again, and I cannot stress this enough, this was phenomenal work by Mr. Hill, massive respect.

He was combative, but not aggressive, just extremely assertive, and very skilled at active listening in order to adjust his questions when the subjects tried to stonewall and dodge. Top notch. A+++

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Though I can't speak a lick of Arabic, I did check both the English and Arabic livestreams of Al Jazeera (Arabic on https://aljazeera.net), they had many of the same videos, a few bilingual reporters talking on the situation that I saw on both casts.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

AJ is Qatari state media and a core component of Qatari statecraft, but AJ English and AJ Arabic serve different state policy projects.

Qatar's World Cup fiasco was an unusual stumble in their generally highly sophisticated and very effective western PR apparatus.

I say this to emphasize that Qatar uses AJ English to raise it's own respectability around the world, and is very mindful to NOT be seen abusing AJ English to blatantly and nakedly advancing Qatari state interests, although that can get a bit fuzzy around it's ME coverage at times. But overall, AJ English is supposed to help present Qatar as a moderate and reasonable government in the eyes Westerners.

Which, again, is why the World Cup was such a gigantic clusterfuck in the context of Qatari foreign policy.

Now, AJ's Arabic organization however is much more direct tool for Qatar to use in advancing Qatari interests in the region, and amongst the Arab world. It's not remotely held to the same western notions of "balanced journalistic" standards, as AJ English is.

That doesn't mean it's like OAN, or InfoWars, just that it's reporting and coverage is designed to fill a different niche of Qatari foreign policy.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Thank you to [email protected] and [email protected] for breaking this down so exhaustively. It was very helpful and informative.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You're absolutely right, I think Al Jazeera fills a similar niche as Japan's NHK and UK's BBC.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Sort of, but there is a significant difference: democracy vs monarchy.

For all of Japan's and the UK's problems, they're still democratic.

Qatar is a Gulf monarchy so the objective of Al Jazeera English is to give the false impression to it's western audience that Qatar shares any of the values that Western democracies do, or at least profess to.

Without BBC, the UK would still have elections and it's global reach to shape global opinions.

Japan would still be a democracy with gigantic cultural and (high tech) economic soft power.

Without Al Jazeera English, Qatar's global perception would entirely be shaped by oil, slavery, and the world cup.

Al Jazeera English pulls a lot more weight than the other two simply because it has to.

Edit: After bashing Qatar, I should circle back and reiterate that Al Jazeera English is generally high quality and reputable news organization. It should absolutely be ONE of the sources you consume.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Qatar sure fumbled their reputation at the World Cup from start to finish, if nothing else.

[–] zzx 3 points 1 year ago

Saw the same interview. I was blown away

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

I was gonna say, for reporting outside of their biased regions, many ppl ranked them almost on par with Reuters, and that's a lot.

Idk how many ppl will realize that, but closing them will be a big loss of fair reporting world wide.