• Rentlar
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    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.

    • circuscritic
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      41
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      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+++

      • Rentlar
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        8 months ago

        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.

        • circuscritic
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          21
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          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.

          • Rentlar
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

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

            • circuscritic
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              8 months ago

              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.

              • Rentlar
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                8 months ago

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

        • circuscritic
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          bEcAuSe iM a GiFtEd CoMmUnIcAtOr.

          This isn’t a business email, article, or academic paper. It’s social media, and sometimes CAPS LOCK EMPHASIS is useful tool to draw eyeballs in a sea of other people’s writings.

          Why do all of your comments barely contain half a thought?

    • hoshikarakitaridia@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months 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.