Abu Hatem أبو حاتم

It is funny how much time people spend blaming the media for bias and complaining about the news media. I am an avid news fan who watches almost every cable news channel, every day. Thus, I know the good and the bad of the media. Obviously an intelligent hour with PBS’ NewsHour with Jim Lehrer or the BBC World News is going to give you much more information on what is going on in the world than the flagrant opinions of Lou Dobbs on CNN.

Nevertheless, there is a lot of good which comes out of all of the punditry opinion shows on TV. While you may not agree with all of them, and I certainly don’t, and while some networks are almost pure propaganda sometimes (like Fox News, right-wing fascist central), let us remember the importance of not just news but discourse in society.

Many have written on discourse in society, most notably political theorist Hannah Arednt’s works on discussion in the Greek polis. While the range of discussion is more limited on cable TV, and on the op-ed pages of newspaper, with freedom of speech and the existence of so much media whether internet, blogs, international TV stations (such as the pro-Arab al-Jazeera), etc. one cannot truly complain about a few opinions on a TV screen.

I have blogged about this before.

However, it is always posed by conspiracy theorists and the far left such as Noam Chomsky that the media is a corpratist entity aimed at destroying America. There is indeed a media-government complex which exists, and which was most notable during the run-up to the Iraq war. “If you don’t cover us favorably, then there will be less access!” the government says. Government coercion with the private sector is termed fascism. I have blogged about Bastiat and corporatism before, so no need to rehash.

Yet, the media, like all corporate business entities, must satisfy the people. If the people did not like what was on the TV they would not watch. An example is the English al-Jazeera, BBC World, and CNN International. All three are international TV stations with in-depth hard news and loved in Europe. No cable company in the U.S. except a few in Atlanta which carry CNNI, will carry any of those networks. They simply are not profitable - this is what Al-Jazeera’s Rob Reynolds told MSNBC’s Tucker last January. “It is not because they hate America, it is because Americans don’t want international news!”

Yes. This is true. Don’t blame the media for covering things, blame the people who demand it. Value is subjective, and subjective demand for goods determines their supply. The principle of marginal utility and the law of supply and demand. Lesson 1 economics, not complicated.

Here is an example of the ratings of a typical night of cable news, taken from my favorite blog TVNewser:

	5p:	6p:	7p:	8p:	9p:	10p:	11p:
FNC	ElectionHQ:	Hume:	Shep.:	O’Reilly:	H&C:	Greta:	O’Reilly:
	860	1289	1169	2837	1866	1392	1377
CNN	Blitzer:	Blitzer:	Dobbs:	Brown:	King:	Cooper:	Cooper:
	678	655	914	589	782	856	604
MSNBC	Hardball:	Gregory:	Hardball:	Countdown:	Abrams:	Countdown:	Special:
	690	693	845	1255	619	552	356
HLN	Prime:	Prime:	Beck:	Grace:	Beck:	Grace:	Showbiz:
	191	177	363	528	454	349	333

As one can see, the highest rated show on cable news is Fox News’ conservative idiot Bill O’Reilly. The next highest rated are Hannity and Combs, Greta Van Sustren’s crime and celebrities show, and then liberal pundit (he is actually very funny too!) Keith Olbermann. The least rated are Headline News’ newsbroadcast Prime News, and CNN’s The Situation Room.

Companies make money by serving people’s wants. If nobody is going to watch hard news, there will not be hard news. Don’t blame the media for bias or punditry, blame the people - they want it!

Share This

The most offensive thing concerning the media coverage of the WV primary is how stupid they think West Virginians are. Instead of putting WV in the spotlight and highlighting the positive, the media has made people in WV, my home state, seem like backwards uneducated racist people.

I cannot truly fathom how they can get away with this coverage. As if it is the fault of West Virginians that they are “too stupid” to know that Obama would be good for them. I am with Obama, but this bias is ridiculous. Indeed, it makes me very angry, hateful, and spiteful. Argh.

Share This

This long drawn out primary process has shown just how bored many in the media are getting. A cursory glance at the New York Times op-ed page everyday will find Maureen Dowd, William Kristol, David Brooks, Tom Friedman, Bob Herbert, et. al. discussing some new feature about Hillary or Obama.

I have read them all. I am the definition of a newsjunkie. Not only do I read the New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal and Christian Science Monitor everyday including their op-ed pages, but also websites Real Clear Politics, The Politico, CNNPolitics.com, and who can forget MSNBC.com “the place for politics,” as well as the blogs The Huffington Post and of course The Drudge Report.

I usually watch every single political program after 5 pm, including their reruns during the night. I watch all the cable networks, even the neoconservative Fox News, as well as PBS, the ABC 6 o’clock news, NightLine, and the BBC World News at midnight. Yes I am a news junkie. To top it off I listen to the right-wing nut Sean Hannity sometimes on the radio, as well as the 24-hour political talkshow (and free) XM station “POTUS08.” I even edit the Wikipedia page for “Hillary Clinton 2008 Presidential Campaign” (I am supporting Ron Paul, but Hillary is the most strategic actor in this battle).

Day after day since October I have heard almost every single pundit in the media and their opinions on this election. I know many by their names, what they do, and yes, who they’ve married.

It is a passion of mine. I always loved the news, and this long drawn out primary is something else.

But is there anything else to talk about? Watching MSNBC’s Morning Joe yesterday I began to think, no, really there isn’t. We’ve heard about the super delegates multiple times. We know each candidate’s base and strategy. And we also have a good understanding of their background and tactics.

Here is the entire campaign summarized into a few paragraphs:

Hillary Clinton’s campaign:

1. First strategy - “the inevitable candidate” crafted by Mark Penn. Hillary makes it that she will never be defeated, there is no use running against her, and is confident. Almost all of the media agrees, and says it is over. Chris Matthews says the only chance Obama would ever have is to win Iowa and then the newspapers around the world will go insane. A few Clinton advisers actually asked her to skip Iowa, she did not listen. William F. Buckley told Charlie Rose he had no doubt what so ever Hillary would be the next President. Then came Iowa.
2. Second strategy - “show emotion,” this is when Hillary began to tear up in New Hampshire and get women to feel sorry for her and support her. NBC’s Brian Williams had a big interview with Obama as the new “super star.” MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell said the only question of the day was if Hillary would lose by double digits or not. Hillary turned a 2-point victory into a “roaring comeback” simply because she played up expectations, “I found my inner-voice.” she says. It turns out to be a delegate tie in the end however.
3. Third strategy - Latino vote. Hillary revs up the Latino’s in Nevada, she still has support of a minority of blacks, as well as women. Hillary wins but loses by delegates.
4. Fourth strategy - post-Super Tuesday there is no strategy. Hillary goes downhill…
5. THE KITCHEN SINK - Maggie Williams tells Clinton as the New York Times reported to throw everything at Barack Obama including the kitchen sink. Huge attack mode, comeback…
6. Sixth strategy - White working class voters. Hillary fires Mark Penn because he lobbied for a trade deal that she opposed. Hillary re-invents herself in PA as being “that girl from Scranton” and one of them, even though she made 100 million dollars last year. Wins by 10-points.
7. Seventh strategy - go ugly. Hillary loses NC bad, the media says Obama is the nominee, Obama beats her in super delegates, Hillary is going to go down - and as Bob Herbert of the New York Times said, go down ugly.

And that is the history of the Clinton campaign in 5-seconds. By the time it got to the kitchen sink and the girl from Scranton, Hillary became strategically a better candidate. But it took a lot of mistakes to realize that. And Obama’s people, including David Axelrod, got him gung-ho with the Deval Patrick (governor of MA) strategy of talking about lofty things such as “hope” which average joes would go googley-eyed for and be “inspired.” Obama’s Reaganite strategy of being that new charismatic “great communicator” payed off, although he hit some bumps in the road from March 4th (the day of TX and OH), to April 22nd (the day of PA), culminating in the first week of May and the resurgence of Reverend Jeremiah Wright.

Obama versus McCain is going to be interesting. As Ralph Nader said, if the democrats lose this election they should pack their backs and go home. The economy is almost in a recession, if not in one already, the war is going bad, there is Republican-fatigue (only Bush I took the White House for another 4-years after an 8-year hold by Reagan), and Bush’s approval ratings are the worst ever. It would seem like a certain for the Democrats.

The problem is Obama is a weaker general election candidate since he cannot connect with white working class voters in Ohio, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia (he will probably still win PA). He will also probably lose Florida. And it will be tough for him to take McCain in VA, although Iowa is a good shot. That already puts him at disadvantage. But with more money, and a weak GOP it looks like the first black President may be coming sooner than we expected.

Share This

I have blogged about this before, yet more thoughts…

Much of the media is biased, at least according to many definitions of the term. However, people are not as dumb as others give them credit. There are many types of media. The television media is extremely diverse. PBS, CSPAN, al-Jazeera International, and France24 (a new English language television news broadcast) all provide pro-Islamic viewpoints many times and it can often be excessive. On the internet one can easily find thousands of sources of media. There are many leftist sites, socialist sites, paleoconservative sites, and others which provide a pro-Islamic viewpoint. There are dozens of liberal newsmagazines in the United States which provide a viewpoint that is often favorable to Islam - The Nation, Harpers, and Mother Jones just to name a few. When it comes to radio, NPR - available all throughout the country - almost always includes a pro-Islamic speaker when giving an audience to critics. Intellectual journals, such as the New York Review of Books and the Harvard journal “International Security,” often provide pro-Islamic viewpoints that are anti-Israel. And foreign newspapers are available on the internet from every single country for anyone interested to read.

Even in terms of newspaper columnists who write weekly, there are many who are strongly anti-Israel. Pat Buchannan, an American conservative commentator, strongly criticizes Israel, the neoconservatives, and the term “Islamofascism,” in his weekly commentary. Buchanan is also a commentator on MSNBC news everyday and often lets his views be known. Robert Novak is also very anti-Israel. He has stated the fact numerous times whether on CNN’s old “Capitol Gang,” or CSPAN’s “Q&A,” or in his weekly column. Novak appeared weekly on CNN for over 20 years, and has one of the most highly respected newspaper columns in the nation. He is now a weekly pundit on Bloomberg TV.

There are more yet still. Reza Aslan, a Muslim himself who strongly rejects the notion of Muslims being terrorists, is actually the local “Islam expert,” on CNN. Keith Olberman has a daily TV series where he has been extremely critical of anti-Islamic sentiment, numerous times on the show he has called people bigots for supporting the term “Islamofascism,” and even chose David Horowtiz as his “Worst Person in the World,” in his daily “worst person,” segment. CSPAN often airs pro-Islamic and anti-Israel speakers alongside with anti-Islamic and pro-Israel speakers.

Many university professors, and high school educators, make it a point to teach students that there are moderate and good Muslims and that not all Muslims are terrorists. John Esposito, Robert Bulliet, and many others make this point clear. There are many books published in this regard - such as “The Case for Islamo-Christian Civilization.”

All of these are cases against the thesis that it is the media’s fault for people’s attitudes towards Islam or the Palestinians. There is significant proof that there is ample media available to show the other side of the story, even in mainstream U.S. television media. Yes, there are channels such as FoxNews which give a conservative perspective - yet remember that the media in the United States was primarily left-leaning until the introduction of FoxNews.

America runs on the ingenious principle of free markets. The more media diversity the better. I think that it is a good thing that there are conservative networks such as Fox, although I highly disagree with their stances. The sheer amount of media which is available to the average American is so much so that they should be able to decide for themselves. I don’t believe people are so stupid so as to be influenced by certain television or radio commentators who say things about Islam. Many of these people only tell people things that they want to hear and are only listened to by people who have already formulated these views.

Although the media is not supposed to “praise or condemn,” people enjoy listening to the opinions of others in society. Plato defined the essence of society as discussion. Many of the people who appear on the media daily are unreasonable and even bigots in their assertions. However, many are not, and there is a wide variety of views represented in all the channels of the media - even the television media. People use discussion to persuade and convince others to support their cause, yet it is up to one to use their own intelligence and reason to support such causes. None are compelled.

We must be honest with ourselves. Not all of the media is FoxNews, and the Weekly Standard. The media I believe does a good job at representing many of the opinions held on many of the issues. However, the one place where diversity in the media, at least on the cable news networks, is the question of Israel - although as aforementioned, many anti-Israel pundits exist and are prominent. The reason why this is the case is not because of “control,” of the media by any one group - but because the Israel lobby attempts to get its point across. Read John Mearsheimer’s “The Israel Lobby,” book about this - he discusses the topic in depth, and concludes that “Jews controlling the media,” is an antisemetic assertion, but that people with pro-Israel opinions in a democracy have attempted to gain clout in much of the mass media. However, often the opposing view comes out as I mentioned previously.

And the pro-Israel crowd has a rights to their views as well. The myth of Jewish control only contributes to the backwordness of the Arab world and the defamation of an entire community. Are we so fearful that we cannot listen to the arguments of our critics? I support peace with Israel, and co-existence. I oppose the hatred and oppression of the Jewish people. Just as I support the rights of the Palestinian people, and oppose the hatred and oppression of them. Yet I shouldn’t force anyone to take my views, and I should support discussion and listening to the other side.

The media will be critical of Islam, and Christianity, and Judaism, and all other religions or ideologies or philosophies, in a free society. Yet, such criticism which we may respond to - and is often responded to within the media, cannot be confused for a “goal of defamation,” as the media often covers events in a positive light to Muslims - such as the Hajj, Eid, Ramadan, and many positive stories on Muslim Americans which exist. I read the newspaper, watch TV news, and read the major newsmagazines everyday and I always see such articles.

And although some of the news media may blatantly attempt to defame Islam - such as perhaps FoxNews and The Weekly Standard - they do it no more so than the Arab media blatantly and racistly attacks Jews. The defamation of the Jewish people on Arab media is atrocious and often full of blatant lies and antisemetic remarks. Anyone familiar with the Arab media knows this. It is also rampant in our communities. Before we tell Americans to be nice to Islam, we shouldn’t say extremely hateful names about Jews within our masjids when nobody is looking.

All I ask is to be fair and to look within. By changing our approach we can do nothing but help ourselves. It is self-criticism which always led to success, and self-righteouness which often led to failure. It was Ibn ‘Ata Allah, the great Muslim, who stated that every good came from being unpleased with oneself. And it was Robert Neihbur, the American protestat theologian, which stated that arrogance and self-righteousness if not coupled with a notion of responsibility to the Divine can lead to immense injustice in American foreign policy.

Until we remove the problems of ethnocentrism and the blame-game we cannot possibly succeed as societies.

Share This

Internet usage is booming amongst Arab youth. While slow dial up lines are finally beginning to take root throughout the Middle East, in places such as Syria, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Lebanon, and Egypt - a new market for Arabic websites has emerged.

With the new technological innovations of “Web 2.0,” - Youtube, Blogs, Facebook, Lexis Nexus, Skype, Google News, our lives have been changed dramatically. Information is now available at our fingertips like never before. Not only does social networking go on the internet, but everyone has a voice to publish whatever they want - and one can search through the archives of hundreds of thousands of pages of television transcripts, and news throughout the world.

With this new great demand, comes the demand for Arabic information. CNN and the BBC have now opened up Arabic websites. Youtube is full of Arabic content, and Arabic blogs are spreading like wildfire.

Yamli an internet startup company for instance allows transliterated Arabic searching capabilities. The free-market is truly the servant of the consumer, and innovation is only multiplying.

The internet is a great opportunity for spreading knowledge throughout the Arab world. I urge Arabs who go online to not only search around for their favorite Nancy ‘Ajram video clips - but to also be actively involved in reading as many online books as possible, articles, scholarly websites, and everything available in Arabic!

Share This

Robert Fisk, Middle East expert and columnist for the British daily, The Independent, is reporting from Beirut today. The story is extremely insightful and a very educated piece. I mean a country in the Middle East without a President is a pretty big deal, right?

France News 24, the French English-language international broadcasting network, has Lebanon as its top story. The BBC is covering Lebanon’s crisis, as well as the British daily’s The Guardian and The Times of London - who both carry the story as their top headline.

However, moving back to our shores, the story is much different. CNN has barely covered the story, although it does have a piece on its website. The New York Times has the most pathetic half-page article describing the situation, which cannot even be found on the front page of its website.

The only good article about the situation in Lebanon today, on U.S. soil, comes from The Washington Post which has a very well written, detailed, and lengthy article by their Middle East reporter Anthony Shadid, who also wrote the best American piece on the situation yesterday.

Why all the silence in the American media on the matter? Well, the corporate media wants to cover that which makes money, and in a free-market, the consumers in the United States want to hear more about Brittney Spear’s kids than the Lebanese elections. Understandable, but also sad…

Share This