Does Al Jazeera enjoy being controversial?

sexydoctor, you say that I am defensive, and you say that people refuse to accept the truth because the truth is inconvenient.

I am not at all defensive, what do I have to be defensive about? I am not the one who is making allegations. I am simply asking for clarification and confirmation before I accept your version of events as fact (which I think is reasonable on my part, given that you are an anonymous user of a website forum, whose identity and credibility is unknown to me).

I've asked you for confirmation of your allegations, and you haven't given me any, except to re-iterate and re-assert your own allegations, which amounts to 'hearsay'.

Again, I'm not saying that your allegations are absolutely and definitively untrue, I'm saying that your allegations are untrue *to the best of my knowledge and understanding and belief*, because you have made seemingly unfounded allegations, and not supported them with checkable facts such as the name of the person/victim, the date of broadcast and so on.

You're mistaken, I don't work for the London Al Jazeera bureau. I do, however, have a legal background, which might explain my pedantry when it comes to facts/details, and my unwillingness to accept your hearsay as fact.

I'm just interested in the truth (which can be demonstrably proven in the case of a broadcasting organisation), and you've yet to prove your allegations.

Again, I will be very happy to stand corrected if you can verify and provide confirmation of your allegations.

BTW, again, I'd recommend you watch the documentary Control Room. The very premise of your initial posting is that Al Jazeera courts controversy. If you were to watch the documentary you might have a different view of the motivations of Al Jazeera journalists.

Hmmmmm.... You speak with so much of disbelief that I find it frustrating but thats how the world is... people refuse to accept thetruth cos truth is inconvenient....

Its true in your case... just becos I dont remember the dates or provide you a link you are trying to sweep truth under the carpet... no point in arguing anymore... al jazeera dint telecast any beheadings... i was merely passing off my whims and fancies in my attempt to ssmear mud on it... does this make you feel better....

In future Im sure many more similar clippings would be shown... let me restart what i had stopped for several weeks now.... i will get back to you with proof and i would give you docentary proof to show i wasnt imagining.... Going by how defensive you get about this organisation i can understand you are related to this news channel sumhow... maybe you work for the london al jazeera beureau... i will get you the facts you want and i would be very happy to see ur assumptions corrected....

As long as you are trying hard, you are never failing....

The only failure is failing to try harder.....

Are you sure you saw that on Al Jazeera?

I ask because if you couldn't understand the Arabic, are you sure it was Al Jazeera and not another Arabic language channel?

If it was a year ago, and your recollection is so hazy, can you be certain? You haven't actually provided any confirmation, just relayed more unsubstantiated rumour. Given the time lapse and your hazy recollection, it's possible that you saw these images elsewhere and have confused the source.

If there is a link out there to the actual footage of this, I'd very much like to see it, to confirm for myself.

Again, to my knowledge and understanding, Al Jazeera has not broadcast a beheading and you have provided no proof to confirm to the contrary.

Anyway, no disrespect is intended, but surely you can understand why I cannot simply accept your assertion as 'confirmation'? You have not provided any firm details as to the name of the person concerned, what date it was broadcast, details which would be checkable. And to me, you're an unknown source, you're an anonymous person on a website forum and I have no way of knowing whether what you say is credible or not.

Again, no disrespect is intended by saying that. I mean, personally speaking, I can say I have watched one of the beheading incidents over the internet (NOT on Al Jazeera). There are very many sources out there where you can watch that kind of thing, should you choose to do so.

I thought very long and hard before I decided to watch the footage. It wasn't something I did lightly. But having an interest in news and current affairs and also broadcasting, I found it incredibly hard to hold and express any opinion on something I had not personally seen (a debate was raging in the UK at the time about the footage being 'out there' and there were arguments for and against its broadcast).

I might be telling you the truth by saying that I have watched the footage, or I might not be. But you don't know me. So you cannot know for sure, you cannot really take my word for it.

Serendipity

P.S. I enjoy a good (and good-natured) debate too! :)

Hey Serendipity,

Thanks for such a long and exhaustive.... shud i say exhausting!! reply....

Jokes apart i really liked your polished and informative response...

Now coming to your reply.... You HAVE to stand corrected becos i have personally seen an american being beheaded on aljazeera .... this wasnt live... cos it wud sound absurd... if it was live... however it was almost a year ago.... i wasnt in Doha then .... cant remember this guys name.... he was beheaded after several days of suspense filled talks ended in deadlock....

Of course the narration was in arabic and i cudnt follow a word.... but i cud see an unkempt unshaven scared white man being slowly behaded by a group of almost 4 men who were masked....

two held him down and two did the gruesome act... for all those who dont feel disturbed by gory pictures i wish i had recorded the telecast... u wud have stopped watched al jazeera... like i did...

i dont need to disseminate wrong info like u have assumed ... i dont gain anything from this...

I have many smart arab friends and i like arab people... but im not fanatical to condone anything in the name of religion or race like how most muslims keep doing the world over....

the reason why i spoke about me not being an american was how you started talking about american tv channels when i was discussing al jazeera.... i find this logic very vain.... just becos american channels are sanitised in their war reports doesnt mean you have to be expilictyly horrific in your reportage....

two wrongs doesnt make a right....

having said all this in the short span of 2 weeks or so that i have beeen a member on this site you have been the first person with whom i have enjoyed sharing info...

I have had people pass jokes on my name and mock at the issues... but u seem to be genuine... though we disagree on issues i like ur postings....

keep the good work going....

As long as you are trying hard, you are never failing....

The only failure is failing to try harder.....

I will answer your points in turn:

sexydoctor: "And i find your arguement amusing when you say why shud ABC and other American networks support American terrorists..."

Serendipity: I wasn't saying that ABC and other American networks should support American terrorists. Nowhere did I refer to the likes of Ann Coulter as "terrorists". Yes, I believe her and her ilk have extreme views, but holding an extreme view does not make a person a terrorist.

Broadcasting differing views with the intention of airing all sides of a debate is not the same as 'supporting' them. In the case of Al Jazeera, they also air interviews with Israeli officials, and also the views of Islamic extremists; this does not mean that they support those views, simply that they are providing a channel of communication (and also through questioning, asking interview subjects to support their own views).

* * * * * * * * * *

sexydoctor: "Firstly Im not American so if you are trying to discuss about whos morally right, you are talking to the wrong guy...."

Serendipity: I did not assume you to be American, nor did I refer to you as an American. You have made some comments about Al Jazeera being controversial. In response to that, I made a general comparison with other broadcast media from other countries. I was comparing the output of Al Jazeera with the output of other international broadcasters, including British and American broadcasters; I don't see how my comments comparing the respective editorial policies of other broadcasters bears any reflection on your own personal nationality, with regard to which I made no comment.

* * * * * * * * * * * *

sexydoctor: "Secondly terrorism anywhere is reprehensible and shud be condemned... whether its arab or american in origin...."

Serendipity: I totally agree with you. Nowhere in my responses to you did I condone, or even appear to condone terrorism, at all. I am confused as to why you are making this point to me (as if I hold an opposite view to you) when I am, in fact, in agreement with your sentiments.

* * * * * * * * * * * *

sexydoctor: "Thirdly even the American networks dint become so starved like Al Jazeera which made it a regular feature to telecast beheadings and torture of people on tv...."

Serendipity: Again, you are disseminating misinformation about Al Jazeera. Al Jazeera, I understand, has NEVER broadcast a beheading. Please check your sources. If you can confirm to me that Al Jazeera (Arabic or English) HAS broadcast a beheading, then I will be very happy to stand corrected. Alternatively, if you are unable to confirm your allegations, would you kindly please desist from repeating them? Thank you.

It's my understanding that Al Jazeera has broadcast some footage that some viewers may have found disturbing, such as captive hostages pleading for their lives. But Al Jazeera was not alone in broadcasting that footage. I am currently based in the UK and such footage was widely broadcast by British media. In that respect, Al Jazeera did not (to my knowledge) broadcast any footage that was not aired by other international broadcasters.

Al Jazeera has broadcast some footage of US and UK troops that some viewers, particularly those in the UK and US, may have found disturbing. It's my understanding that objections have been raised by those governments in respect of such footage. However, UK and US broadcasters have shown footage of injured and killed Iraqis, so there appears to be a problem with double standards.

If footage of injured and dead people is disturbing, then it should be disturbing and objectionable whether the dead and injured are UK/US military or Iraqi (military/militia/civilian).

In my opinion, it is hypocritical of people to object to the sight of injured/killed US/UK troops when they don't even raise an eyebrow regarding the sight of Iraqi casualties on their TV screens.

Personally speaking, I do find such images gruesome and disturbing. But I do think that they are essential in reporting the reality of war/conflict. If people only see a sanitised version of events, then how is democracy supposed to work in supposedly democratic countries? If the people who voted for Blair and Bush are shielded from the consequences of the decisions of politicians, how can they be educated and informed about the consequences following their own exercise of their democratic right to vote?

* * * * * * * * * * * * *

sexydoctor: "I dont understand the logic in seeing beheadings of hostages on TV when a guy lies on the floor begging for mercy when some masked men shout Allah O Akbar........"

Serendipity: Again, you are spreading disinformation; beheadings have NEVER been broadcast by Al Jazeera.

Yes, some disturbing footage has been broadcast of people begging for mercy, but again, that footage has been broadcast by other international broadcasters.

* * * * * * * * * * * * *

sexydoctor: "This only projects Islam in bad light and Im sure this isnt written in the holybook for Islamists....."

Serendipity: I agree with you that such actions (by those involved in the hostage taking and executions) present Islam in a very poor light. As to what is or isn't supported by the Qu'ran, there are different interpretations, and those carrying out these acts appear to believe that their acts are supported. Other muslims, I'm sure, would disagree. For those believers, they will also know that only Allah knows, and He will judge them when the time comes.

I'm assuming that you are referring to those incidents when you say they project Islam in a bad light? Or are you also referring to Al Jazeera's broadcasts? Please clarify.

I'd also like to correct some disinformation:

Sexydoctor, you state: "If its a live recording of an american being beheaded live and exclusive on al jazeera then im not interested... we have seen enuf of this garbage..."

You seem to be implying that you have seen a beheading on Al Jazeera.

You absolutely have not.

Al Jazeera has NEVER broadcast a beheading (neither Arabic nor English language versions).

http://www.guardian.co.uk/leaders/story/0,3604,1649144,00.html

Here is the imdb (international movie database) reference:

http://imdb.com/title/tt0391024/

Note the User Comments about Control Room from an American who's seen the documentary.

For more information about the documentary and what it contains, read the wikipedia entry:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Control_Room

I havent watched control room..... serendipity can you tell me whats control room about?

If its a live recording of an american being beheaded live and exclusive on al jazeera then im not interested... we have seen enuf of this garbage...

And i find your arguement amusing when you say why shud ABC and other American networks support American terrorists...

Firstly Im not American so if you are trying to discuss about whos morally right, you are talking to the wrong guy....

Secondly terrorism anywhere is reprehensible and shud be condemned... whether its arab or american in origin....

Thirdly even the American networks dint become so starved like Al Jazeera which made it a regular feature to telecast beheadings and torture of people on tv....

I dont understand the logic in seeing beheadings of hostages on TV when a guy lies on the floor begging for mercy when some masked men shout Allah O Akbar........

This only projects Islam in bad light and Im sure this isnt written in the holybook for Islamists.....

As long as you are trying hard, you are never failing....

The only failure is failing to try harder.....

P.S. Have you seen the documentary 'Control Room'? I'd really recommend you watch it; it might answer some of your questions.

Sexydoctor asks: "Why should cheap sensationalism and opinions of fundamentalists be substituted for news????"

I'm curious, why are different points of view seemingly so objectionable to you?

In the US, the likes of Ann Coulter are regularly interviewed and her opinions are widely reported. She holds some quite extreme views, yet they are presented as just another opinion. I'd argue that she isn't representative of the views of the majority of Americans.

Likewise, the opinions of some interview subjects on Al Jazeera aren't necessarily reflective of the opinions of all Arabs.

Some of the views might be extreme, yes, but why do people want to 'shoot the messenger' when the messenger is Al Jazeera?

I don't hear parallel calls questioning the credibility of US broadcasters simply for airing the views of the likes of US extremists.

Isn't one of the mottos of Al Jazeera: 'the view and the other view'.

It's possible to give a platform for people to air their views without necessarily agreeing with those views.

Sexydoctor asks: "Why should cheap sensationalism and opinions of fundamentalists be substituted for news????"

I'm curious, why are different points of view seemingly so objectionable to you?

In the US, the likes of Ann Coulter are regularly interviewed and her opinions are widely reported. She holds some quite extreme views, yet they are presented as just another opinion. I'd argue that she isn't representative of the views of the majority of Americans.

Likewise, the opinions of some interview subjects on Al Jazeera aren't necessarily reflective of the opinions of all Arabs.

Some of the views might be extreme, yes, but why do people want to 'shoot the messenger' when the messenger is Al Jazeera?

I don't hear parallel calls questioning the credibility of US broadcasters simply for airing the views of the likes of US extremists.

Isn't one of the mottos of Al Jazeera: 'the view and the other view'.

It's possible to give a platform for people to air their views without necessarily agreeing with those views.

There is another way of looking at this sexydoctor:

Instead of wondering whether Al Jazeera courts controversy by airing gruesome images, you could instead be asking why don't other broadcasters such as BBC, CNN show the full horrors of war?

Why do those other broadcasters shield their viewers from the atrocities committed against people in other lands by the governments in their home countries (i.e. US govt for CNN and UK govt for BBC)?

Its nice to see people commenting on thought provoking issues as to whats Al Jazeeras role in Middle East Polity.

Nevertheless the topicc was very clear... we are just getting carried away from the topic by peoples temper tantrums...

The issue was not whether Al Jazeera is right or wrong... The issue is be it an Arab Channel or an American Channel...Why should cheap sensationalism and opinions of fundamentalists be substituted for news????

If you watch Al Jazeera for 2 days you can understand this. You dont need to be a rocket scientist to decipher that sensationalism has become its main stay of reporting....

As long as you are trying hard, you are never failing....

The only failure is failing to try harder.....

is good we have somebody like aljazeera to remind us(with the raw images) from time to time what are we doing to the world, whom we are voting for and what means our democracy.

the rich guy this morning, remember? And he threaten us to be deported :{

Ignore him jolene and he will go away.

Ignore him jolene and he will go away.

There is really no need to react like that, Rugerbyrd.

You punks watch Bill O'reilly and have the nerve to call Jazeera controversial you damn hypocrites!!! It is no secret Bill hates black people regardless of what he says on TV. Screw him I hope he dies of cancer.

There's also an article in Private Eye, in the print version only, it's not online.

You might be interested in this article from the Guardian newspaper (UK):

http://media.guardian.co.uk/mediaguardian/story/0,,2015932,00.html

Hey at the end of the day if we all saw the truth of what war really is (seen enough of it in my time on first hand basis) then we would all make a stand and try and resolve our differences without sticking an AK47 up each others noses.

Yes we DO need to see the carnage that is caused by either side no matter who it comes from, as for the presenters etc they should be completely biased and not lay blame on anyones shoulders but to show nothing but the truth behind the matter!!!

We came we saw we were Qatarized

The Saudis hate Al Jazeera for being far too Liberal, in fact the reason they struggle to gain advertisers on the Arabic channel is because of Saudi pressure on the Advertising companies.

Al Jazeera does have people on its Arabic channel that will, on occasion hold a hardline on a subject, these commentators are generally part of discussion programmes and are usually counterpointed with someone with the opposite or very different view on the subject. This occasionally makes for very lively debates.

Look at Bill O'Reielly on the FOX news channel, his programme airs, some would say, extreme views. He attacks many different people and many different targets he enjoys being controversial and says so himself.

The Editorial on both channels tries to stay neutral and would never advocate for any of these points of view.

Unlike FOX News, The two Al Jazeera channels are not out right attacks on the left or right. Which is why I always laugh when AL Jazeera is accused of many different things none of which come close to how FOX deals with their targets.

Al Jazeera prides its self on telling every angle every side, whilst this is not always possible it certainly does a much better job of giving people a wider world perspective than any American channel ever could.

The problem is some people don't want you to know all the facts or question a given message, hence the Bush administrations attacks on the channel. These attacks were driven by the fact that AL Jazeera reported the war like it was, and not how the administration wanted it to be.

AL Jazeera called the war in Iraq an unwise move much earlier than other outlets because they understood the deep divisions in that country, they could foresee the consequences of such a move. This did not make them popular in the west, sadly the tragic outcome of that war has sadly proved them to be true.

I have no great desire to defend Al Jazeera, I'm just not sure what examples you are speaking of. I'm sure there is reactionary comment on their channels, but that is also in the eyes and ear of the beholder. What you call "stoke[ing] the flames of sensitive issues" someone else might call fair and balanced. Every news channel has a political perspective, you just seem to disagree with theirs.

But even if you do, comparing them to the Taliban is itself overly sensational. The Taliban, after all, banned television.

Interestingly, many governments in the region HATE Al Jazeera (and some ban it) not because it is radical, but because it is considered too liberal.

Al Jazeera is a great news source. Arabs hate AJ because they think AJ is too soft on "the West", and westerners hate AJ because they think AJ is too soft on "terrorists"... What better credentials could you ask for?

Thanks for the responses ..... Im not surprised by Al Jazeera contradicting the Qatari Govt on important issues.... May be i wasnt clear enuf or you didnt understand me... My issue was why should Al Jazeera stoke the flames of sensitive issues to make more sensational stories? Is it a cheaap gimmick to attract audience or is it that the nature and work culture of Al Jareeeza is contrary to the more moderate stand of the Qatar ruling family - i.e the Government....

We all know not only in one orr two issues... in many burning issues of Middle East, Al Jazeeera doesnt stop just presenting facts.... most news stories are nothing but running commentaries with hardline stance which is diametrically opposite to the moderate stand of Qatar Government.

While we find educated Qatari women coming out to debate the role of face veil on BBC Doha Debates and openly voting for a motion which brands the face veil as a barrier to integration with nationals from other countries ( hats off to them) .... we find Al Jazeera still taking a hardline taliban like outlook on many issues... I find this disturbing and counter productive...

In the end what makes the world a beutiful place is the fact that people hail from different cultures and backgrounds.... but if we keep harping on the differences and the issues which divide people just for the sake of television rating points, then we wound be defeating the sheer purpose of those brave moderate women and men in Qatar who want to become smart educated and elite citizens of the free world.

As long as you are trying hard, you are never failing....

The only failure is failing to try harder.....

I don't see Al Jazeera as either controversial or sensationalist. They merely have different filters than American news outlets, which are notoriously sheepish about showing violence in war coverage. Implying they have ties to terrorists because they get scoops from them is over the top. The news directors at the BBC or CNN would love the sort of "relationship" Al Jazeera has with various factions in the region.

I'm not sure what your point is about Al Jazeera contradicting the Qatari gov't. Are you saying you are surprised they can or are you saying you are surprised they do because you think news organizations should support the policies of their home gov't?

Al Jazeera is certainly not in League with any terrorists, 90% of footage you see from Iraq is filmed by stringers, these are freelance camera men who supply their pictures to all news agency's, Al Jazeera does have a correspondent in Iraq but due to the very serious security situation they cannot travel freely within Iraq so mainly stay in the Green Zone, Occasionally venturing out using very strict security precautions.

The difference is more cultural, In general the Arab world is used to seeing more gory pictures, from wars zones bombings etc. I don't know why this is the case, certainly the Arab world is not bound for example by Ofcom guidelines such as a British broadcaster would be.

American Television networks do not like to show blood or carnage from war zones and the like.They prefer a more sanitized version of events. A fact I always find puzzling considering that except for Iraq, the States are a much more dangerous and violent place to be.

On many occasions the footage you see on NBC/Al Jazeera has come from the same source its just the footage on NBC has been more heavily edited.

The English al Jazeera channel, is bound by ofcom guidelines, therefore will be much less "gory" than the Arabic channel. Even without these guidelines the channel would still be less graphic than it Arabic counterpart or other Arabic news channels, the fact is Western Audiences are not used to and do not demand that kind of footage, it would not be acceptable.

Al Jazeera Arabic is not deliberately sensational its just a difference in attitudes towards the footage being shown.

In some cases I do feel that showing the full horror of a bombing is valid, an example was last years war in Lebanon where Israel bombed a house in Qana. 16 Children were killed, the BBC, SKY and CNN all covered the bombing showing paramedics carrying broken bodies from the rubble of the building. footage that was tragic but not shocking.

However it was Al Jazeera Arabic's footage of the same bodies being literally dug from the rubble that much better portrayed the full horror of events that day and arguably it was this footage, that caused such outrage across the world hastened the end of the war.

The argument over Bin Laden tapes is pretty much moot, any news organisation presented with the same tapes would broadcast them as some of them, particularly the ones sent immediately after 9/11 were of particular newsworthiness. Bin Laden knows AJI has a large audience. he wouldn't send them to S4C.

cheers