|
|
March 29, 2003
Al Jazeera: evil or just different?
The Arabic-language news station Al Jazerra has been under a great deal of criticism this past week for its use of images deemed crude or heartless in the West. They claim to be independent and unbiased, yet there are continuous accusations that the station is being used as a conduit for Islamic terrorist organisations. I will for the moment leave that accusation aside. I am more concerned with criticisms if the pictures being show by the network in broadcast and online. In a press conference this week, a British office visibly had to restrain himself from violence when encountering an Al Jazeera reporter who rose to deliver a statement in defence of his station. So enraged were some on the internet that they hacked Al Jazeera's English language site. Are we in the West upset because they show dead people or just when they are showing OUR dead people? In a world where Western audiences can see all manner of death on their TV and movie screen why are we so upset about video of an actual execution? Are we the hypocrites or is Al Jazeera just uncivilised? I think that the West's shocked reaction to the content on Al Jazeera demonstrates an ignornance of attitudes toward death and the showing of death in the third world. TV screens in Latin America routinely show corpses and the human debris resulting from natural disasters and human atrocities. Whereas in the US or the UK we would see covered or bagged bodies, in other parts of the world you would see the body uncovered and uncensored. Why is this? It is possible that in other parts of the world they are so used to mass death that they have a different reaction to it. When one sees death and destruction on the streets in your country and on your TV, you become less aware of it. Public executions occur in the Middle East frequently and are shown on the TV. Why would it be more offensive to see Americans die than say so-called Palestinian "collaborators"? In this Islamic world, nations under sharia routinely cut of hands, fingers, ears and other body parts for criminal activity, in many cases publically. It is possible that Islamic world does not understand why the Allies are so upset about the broadcast of the images of the POWs and Daniel Pearl. Another point that could be made is that Western networks routinely show dead people from other parts of the world, especially those in the third world. Have we not seen bodies from Latin America, Africa and Chechyna on our screens? Why is it ok to see dead Chechen fighters or Russian conscripts but not Americans? We in the West have a different view of the dignity of real death than does the rest of the world. Al Jazeera merely reflects the values of its viewers, as do our networks. Is it fair to fault them for doing what to them seems normal and natural, even if we would find it reprehensible and repulsive? Posted By Andrew Ian Castel-Dodge at March 29, 2003 12:33 PM | TrackBackComments
I think a lot of the anger has to do with the way al Jazeera uncritically disseminates propaganda. The tapes of tortured and executed American POWs were pure propaganda. Anyone who disseminates propaganda is acting to support whoever is putting it out - I really think it is that simple. The tape currently being broadcast of the Baghdad markets fits into the same category, in my opinion, although it is not as blatant. While we don't know for sure, I think the odds are pretty good that those explosions were staged by the Saddam regime, but there is no question that the tape of people waving body parts and shouting God is great was made and broadcast as propaganda. If you want to be a propganda tool, fine, but when you lay down with dogs, you get up with fleas. Put yourself in the business of disseminating Saddam's propaganda, and you put yourself in the firing line, morally if not militarily. Posted by: T. Hartin at March 29, 2003 01:13 PMSelf-induced orwellianism. Islam Double-plus-good. Posted by: BobbyV at March 29, 2003 04:59 PM"I think a lot of the anger has to do with the way al Jazeera uncritically disseminates propaganda" How come "being sensitive" only runs one way? We are told that we must understand where they're coming from and respect their ways, yet never the reverse. "When in Rome, do as the Romans do." I don't care if these people sit on mushrooms and bark at the moon in their own country -- when they travel to our part of the world, or otherwise deal with us, how about coming up to OUR standards, and not insisting we lower ourselves to theirs? Posted by: Curmudgeon at March 29, 2003 10:26 PMI was in Costa Rica a few years back. Wonderful country. Very liberal media, though. There were an emergency that interrupted a scheduled program about, of all things, a shooting in the capital (which at that time was only about 1.5 km from where I was). The camera was hovering right over the EMT crew who are rapidly trying to save the life of this guy. No censorship, no nothing. It was a disquieting experience, and something I definitely do not want to wish upon anyone -- having their face beamed to their family's TV. But when I heard about the POW being shown, I pretty much understood about their point of view -- it's just news. Posted by: Teej at March 30, 2003 09:00 PMYour Damn Right we dont appreciate seeing ourselves portrayed in this inhumane way. Post a comment
|