Why Egypt Hates Al Jazeera

For the past eight weeks, three Al Jazeera English journalists have been imprisoned in Tora Prison in Cairo. The three were arrested in their Cairo hotel room on December 29th and charged with conspiring with a terrorist group and producing false news. This is not an isolated incident; more than 80 journalists have been jailed in Egypt in the past year, many of whom were released within several days. In addition to the three Al Jazeera journalists being held, seventeen other journalists affiliated with various news outlets were also charged “in a prosecution statement leaked to local media on January 29...It accused 20 journalists, many of whom had no connection to Al Jazeera, of broadcasting false information to ‘convince the international community that Egypt was undergoing a civil war.’” A main reason for Egyptian hostility toward Al Jazeera is that it is owned by Qatar, which supports the Muslim Brotherhood, which was declared a terrorist organization by the Egyptian government. This hostility is exacerbated by conflation of Al Jazeera English with AJ Arabic. Adel Fahmy expressed his apprehension about the hostility: "[Al Jazeera English] is totally different, and should be perceived in a different way, but unfortunately it's not ... so we had a slight fear, but we never thought [the arrests] would actually happen."

The attacks on Al Jazeera journalists are not limited to the Egyptian government. An angry mob in Tahrir Square attacks two newspaper reporters who were suspected of working for Al Jazeera. “The New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists said in its annual report that Egypt was the third-deadliest country for reporters in 2013, and the country ranked 159th on Reporters Without Borders's annual press freedom index, a notch below Pakistan.” Hate for the Muslim Brotherhood is widespread in Egypt, many citizens as well as the government have designated the brotherhood a terrorist organization, and have transferred that hate to Al Jazeera. This may be because the Arabic counterpart of Al Jazeera “routinely gives airtime to guests with sharply sectarian and reactionary views, which often go unchallenged.” The channel hosts many exiled Islamic leaders and members of the Muslim Brotherhood, however none of this makes it onto the English channel. They are totally separate news outlets, yet the Egyptian government and people fail to recognize this, conflating the two channels and targeting any journalist affiliated with Al Jazeera in any way. In further evidence that the journalists detained since Decemeber are not Brotherhood sympathizers, Al Jazeera’s Mohamed Fahmy joined in two large anti-Brotherhood demonstrations last year, not as a journalist, but as a protestor.


Source Article: http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2014/02/19/why_egypt_hates_al_jazeera

Freedom of the Press in Iran

Many NGOs agree that Iran is one of the worst places in the world to be if you are a journalist. Iran currently imprisons the second most journalists in the world, second only to Turkey. As of December 1, 2013, thirty countries were holding at least one journalist prisoner, including the United States. The number of journalist prisoners Iran holds, 35 as of December 1, 2013, has actually decreased since 2012. In 2009, Iran imprisoned just over 20 journalists, but by 2012 they had incarcerated nearly 45 journalists. Iran maintains stringent controls over every aspect of media. In 2010, Iran banned the sale of any books that had received a publishing license prior to 2007. In 2012 one of the largest publishing houses in Iran had its operating license revoked. Television and radio broadcasting are directing controlled by the government, and satellite dishes are illegal. The government regularly bans media coverage of international sanctions, oppositional leaders, and criticism of the country’s nuclear policy. In addition to specific controls such as these, the government has some very vague rules in place that can be implemented in just about any case of media coverage the authorities do not find favorable. Journalists can be prosecuted for “mutiny against Islam,” “insulting legal or real person who are lawfully respected,” and “propaganda against the regime.” Many social media sites are also blocked in Iran, including Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube.

It appeared that there was hope for the situation in Iran during the presidential race of 2005, when Mahmoud Ahmadinejad ran on promises to fight corruption and redistribute wealth to the poor. Once elected, however, Ahmadinejad launched an ultra-conservative administration that actually tightened governmental controls in many arenas, which led to a decrease in civil liberties and even stricter morality laws.

In addition to the egregious restrictions placed on media coverage and journalists, religious, gender-based, sexual and intellectual prejudices are prevalent in Iran. Converting from Islam to another religion is punishable by death. Scholars can be detained, intimidated or forced to retire for expressing their own political views. Women are barred from studying many fields at university, and are widely regarded to be worth about half of what one man is worth. A woman’s testimony in court is regarded with only half the weight of a man’s testimony. Similarly, the damages awarded to a female victim are routinely half of that awarded to a male victim. People who are accused of a crime and arrested may be refused legal counsel and may be tried in closed sessions. Iran’s penal code is based on Sharia, which mandates the death penalty for a wide range of offenses; consequently, Iran executes more people than every other country in the world except for China.

In 2013, Freedom House gave Iran a 6 Freedom Rating, a 6 in Civil Liberties, and a 6 in Political Rights. The scale ranges from 1 to 7, 7 being the worst. The media in Iran is absolutely “not free” according to Freedom House. In 2013 there were only six countries less free than Iran, according to Freedom House, one of which is North Korea. Iran did manage to be the least free state in all of the Middle East and North Africa, which is generally considered to be the world’s least free region. I was mildly surprised by just how bad it is for media in Iran, but I can’t say that I was taken aback by any means. I knew there were extremely limited free speech and civil liberties in Iran, but after doing some research I know more specific details about how these liberties are limited.

Response to Josh Singer's Israel Apartheid NYT Article Review

An op-ed published in the New York Times last month compares Israel’s policies toward Palestine and Eritrean and Sudan refugees to South Africa’s Apartheid. Israel has been engaged in ongoing disputes with Palestine over whose land it rightfully is, and countless people have died for this cause over the course of the past 65 years. Josh’s blog even notes the barrier fence at the West Bank separating Palestinians from Israelis. The fact of the matter is that Israel has made every effort to guarantee its security. It releases very limited information regarding its military, and even refuses to admit that it possesses nuclear weapons (it is generally believed that they have about 100 warheads). Israel has ensured that it would be a formidable opponent on the battlefield, but that is not what matters in a propaganda war. The op-ed argues that peace is the only way to end this war, not the use of force or the threat thereof.

Josh argues in his blog post that it doesn’t really matter whether or not people think Israel is an apartheid state because Israel will continue to do what it is doing to keep its people safe regardless. In reality, it matters quite a bit whether or not people think Israel is an apartheid state. South Africa saw in the 1980’s,  “possessing nuclear weapons may deter foes on the battlefield, but it doesn’t help you win a propaganda war.” According the the op-ed, delegitimization is Israel’s soft belly and apartheid is the buzzword to make it happen. Israel may not be able to just ignore the opinions of other states and continue doing what it is doing. Certain members of the EU have already begun to divest and boycott Israeli banks and other business. According to the finance minister even a partial European boycott could cost Israel 20 billion shekels (about $5.7 billion US). Even the new generation of Palestinians understand that stones and suicide bombers are the weapons of yesterday. They understand that the most effective weapons are boycott, divestment, and sanctions. The op-ed closes with: “As anyone who has bought a “Gucci” bag in a Bangkok market can tell you, it’s all in the label.” Even if it is not empirically true that Israel is an apartheid state, all that matters is that it gets labeled one.

Egypt: Al Jazeera journalists 'to face charges'

There have been several journalists affiliated with Al Jazeera languishing in Egyptian jail cells since December, charged with conspiring with a terrorist group and for producing false news. The group includes Al Jazeera's Mohamed Fahmy, former BBC Correspondent Peter Greste and producer Baher Mohamed. The “terrorist group” with which they are charged with conspiring is the Muslim Brotherhood, which was labeled a terrorist organization by the Egyptian government last year. Part of the reason Egypt may fear conspiring between Al Jazeera and the Muslim Brotherhood is because Al Jazeera is primarily funded by the royal family of Qatar, which supports the Muslim Brotherhood. Jon Snow of Channel 4 News, based in the UK, interviewed Ambassador Salah Abdel Sadek, who wholeheartedly supports the charges levied against the journalists. He claims that they were unaccredited journalists working in hiding without permission from the Egyptian government. The Ambassador goes on to claim that the material being produced by the journalists was “maliciously edited and montaged to leave some wrong impression not reflecting the truth. And that - it is breaking the law". He says that the material was edited so that it "would make Egypt look like it is in civil war or that there is a crack within society".

The online report from Channel 4 News includes two video elements with other printed text. This combination of media do a good job at punctuating the text with videos to complement it. The article includes a video interview with Ambassador Salah Abdel Sadek, which was easier to glean information from than a text transcript might have been because the Ambassador’s mannerisms and inflections contain information that his words alone might not. Another thing I noticed about this report was that it focused primarily on the former BBC correspondent, Peter Greste, and much less on the other two. I do not recall seeing this event broadcast in popular news media in the United States, and I had never even heard about it until I read this article on Diigo. Perhaps this is an indication that I need to make myself more aware of world news and current events, but it could also be an example of selective reporting. If one of the journalists being charged and jailed in Egypt had been an American citizen, I would bet that it would be covered on CNN on a daily basis for weeks. I was surprised to learn that Egypt had jailed these journalists for essentially fabricated charges; I knew that Egypt had recently undergone what amounts to a military coup and that there was much civil unrest in the region. I also knew that for years the United States military has held an annual war games event with the Egyptian military to promote stability and confidence in the United States in the region. Reports from AJ, CNN, and Channel 4 News (based in UK) all report journalists charged with conspiring with a terrorist organization (the Muslim Brotherhood) and producing false news. Reports seem to be consistent across the board, even Daily News Egypt reports fairly accurately the state of affairs with the jailing of the journalists and protests thereof.

https://www.diigo.com/bookmark/http%3A%2F%2Fwww.channel4.com%2Fnews%2Fegypt-al-jazeera-journalists-to-face-charges-greste-fahmy?gname=mena-media-09