Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Wikileaks Takes Down the Head of Al Jazeera

readwriteweb.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 65 posts

Re: Wikileaks Takes Down the Head of Al Jazeera

#31

Post by raganwald »

sliverstorm wrote: post #18

I continually wonder if Wikileaks has considered that, in their fiery no-compromise campaign, they may actually be setting back progress? What on earth could I mean? Well, in this particular case- I respect Al Jazeera. I am generally pleased with their journalism as compared to many American firms, and they have a different perspective from many American journalists, which is valuable. It could be a really good thing…

If that's all for the good, what is wrong with being transparent about it? If you respected Al Jazeera before and they are still worthy of respect, no harm has been done.

Re: Wikileaks Takes Down the Head of Al Jazeera

#32

Post by phillmv »

robchez wrote: post #27
hristov wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? He has been their chairman of the board all this time and this seems like a interim measure until they find a new CEO.

Sheikh Hamad bin Thamer Al Thani is the chairman of the board. Sheikh Ahmad bin Jassim bin Mohammad Al Thani has been appointed as new director general. Also[1] : The U.S. State Department clearly views Al Jazeera as a tool of Qatar's foreign policy; one cable from November 2009 claims that the Persian Gulf state uses the channel "as a bargaining tool to repair relationships with other countries, particularly those s…

I don't understand why people think "objective news reporting" is possible within this universe.

Anyone trying to sell you that line is lying to you; much better to at least have theses bias' be overt.

Re: Wikileaks Takes Down the Head of Al Jazeera

#33

Post by thaumaturgy »

sliverstorm wrote: post #25
thaumaturgy wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You respect Al Jazeera because of the differences between it and nearly all (if not all) American media. I don't understand how you could support the erosion of those differences and still expect to have in the end a media organization that you respected. Or, to put it another way: by the time Al Jazeera became a popular source for news in the USA, it would no longer be Al Jazeera.

My hope would be that with small compromises made in key areas, it could be widely accepted otherwise unaltered. It is a common enough occurrence in plenty of industries. Japanese auto makers are heavily shaped by the demands of the American car industry- but did they wind up just another GM, another Chrysler? No, they retained many of the vital qualities that differentiated them and made them worth importing.

Probably you and I just have different ideas of what an acceptable compromise is. If the request were to use news paper instead of parchment, or to bleep out profanity on basic cable channels while on primetime (which I personally think is stupid, but I might as well start suggesting that people raise their own children), or if the request were to blur graphic images of mutilated bodies under the same circumstances -- I might, after a bit of thought, decide that those were reasonable compromises.

But that's not what this was.

This was the U.S. "asking" a foreign journalistic organization to be less critical of U.S. activities -- and that organization agreeing. This really should be bone-chilling, not just a reasonable compromise.

Re: Wikileaks Takes Down the Head of Al Jazeera

#34

Post by sliverstorm »

thaumaturgy wrote: post #33
sliverstorm wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My hope would be that with small compromises made in key areas, it could be widely accepted otherwise unaltered. It is a common enough occurrence in plenty of industries. Japanese auto makers are heavily shaped by the demands of the American car industry- but did they wind up just another GM, another Chrysler? No, they retained many of the vital qualities that differentiated them and made them worth importing.

Probably you and I just have different ideas of what an acceptable compromise is. If the request were to use news paper instead of parchment, or to bleep out profanity on basic cable channels while on primetime (which I personally think is stupid, but I might as well start suggesting that people raise their own children), or if the request were to blur graphic images of mutilated bodies under the same circumstances -…

Al Jazeera has a long-standing strong and vocal bias against the USA. It seems to be pretty well known.

I have been reading their articles for months. I guarantee you that bias still shows through. Even in their "toned-down" state, I have felt my ears get red reading some of their articles.

They have hardly been warped to be "pro-US". I would be more concerned if their voice had actually swung to be "pro-US"; as things stand, they seem to have gone from "extremely critical of the US" to "still critical but a little nicer about it".

Re: Wikileaks Takes Down the Head of Al Jazeera

#35

Post by mkr-hn »

sliverstorm wrote: post #34
thaumaturgy wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably you and I just have different ideas of what an acceptable compromise is. If the request were to use news paper instead of parchment, or to bleep out profanity on basic cable channels while on primetime (which I personally think is stupid, but I might as well start suggesting that people raise their own children), or if the request were to blur graphic images of mutilated bodies under the same circumstances -…

Al Jazeera has a long-standing strong and vocal bias against the USA. It seems to be pretty well known. I have been reading their articles for months. I guarantee you that bias still shows through. Even in their "toned-down" state, I have felt my ears get red reading some of their articles. They have hardly been warped to be "pro-US". I would be more concerned if their voice had actually swung to be "pro-US"; as thin…

Can you cite a few so there's a basis for discussion? I see a lot of people saying they're anti-US, but it's usually supported with articles and video critical of government actions, not the country itself.

Re: Wikileaks Takes Down the Head of Al Jazeera

#36

Post by sliverstorm »

mkr-hn wrote: post #35
sliverstorm wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Al Jazeera has a long-standing strong and vocal bias against the USA. It seems to be pretty well known. I have been reading their articles for months. I guarantee you that bias still shows through. Even in their "toned-down" state, I have felt my ears get red reading some of their articles. They have hardly been warped to be "pro-US". I would be more concerned if their voice had actually swung to be "pro-US"; as thin…

Can you cite a few so there's a basis for discussion? I see a lot of people saying they're anti-US, but it's usually supported with articles and video critical of government actions, not the country itself.

I have been reading their articles less frequently in the last month, and do not have any good examples in memory or on hand.

Edit: Today AJE has presented me with a decent example! http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/09/2011920...

In regards to the anti-US bit- I do not mean to say they hate America. I have no reason to believe they wish America ill- though they certainly seem to wish America would get out of the Middle East. What I mean is they appear to have a very critical bias towards the actions of America, and I suspect this is what most people mean when they describe Al Jazeera as "anti-US". This bias is not unilaterally a bad thing- but that does not mean it does not exist.

Re: Wikileaks Takes Down the Head of Al Jazeera

#37

Post by [deleted] »

sliverstorm wrote: post #36
mkr-hn wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you cite a few so there's a basis for discussion? I see a lot of people saying they're anti-US, but it's usually supported with articles and video critical of government actions, not the country itself.

I have been reading their articles less frequently in the last month, and do not have any good examples in memory or on hand. Edit: Today AJE has presented me with a decent example! http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/09/2011920... In regards to the anti-US bit- I do not mean to say they hate America. I have no reason to believe they wish America ill- though they certainly seem to wish America would get…

[deleted]

Re: Wikileaks Takes Down the Head of Al Jazeera

#39

Post by delackner »

sliverstorm wrote: post #36
mkr-hn wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you cite a few so there's a basis for discussion? I see a lot of people saying they're anti-US, but it's usually supported with articles and video critical of government actions, not the country itself.

I have been reading their articles less frequently in the last month, and do not have any good examples in memory or on hand. Edit: Today AJE has presented me with a decent example! http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/09/2011920... In regards to the anti-US bit- I do not mean to say they hate America. I have no reason to believe they wish America ill- though they certainly seem to wish America would get…

Conflating "America" with "the US Government" plays into the simplistic arguments of those that try to paint their enemies as "hating our freedom" when they simply take issue with having their families murdered.

Re: Wikileaks Takes Down the Head of Al Jazeera

#40

Post by mkr-hn »

sliverstorm wrote: post #36
mkr-hn wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you cite a few so there's a basis for discussion? I see a lot of people saying they're anti-US, but it's usually supported with articles and video critical of government actions, not the country itself.

I have been reading their articles less frequently in the last month, and do not have any good examples in memory or on hand. Edit: Today AJE has presented me with a decent example! http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/09/2011920... In regards to the anti-US bit- I do not mean to say they hate America. I have no reason to believe they wish America ill- though they certainly seem to wish America would get…

That's an opinion piece. It's even filed under "opinion" with a big section header so you can't confuse it for a news report. Are we talking about bias in opinion pages or news reporting?
Post reply on HN