When looking at the objectives of Al Jazeera as outlined by Powers-to create a democratic, participatory pan-Arab community, but also a news outlet that is independent from external influences-it becomes clear why it is a point for some optimism in news reporting. They are admirable goals to puruse in a difficult environment, one that is heavily fragmented on religious, political, and social grounds. They become even more valuable when used as a standard in which to examine the nature of US mainstream news media. While there are similar divisions along social, political, and religious lines-there seems to be less of an effort for reconciliation and balance. Rather, Al Jazeera has a bit of advantage, being able to create a reputation that rises above the mediocre level of its national media peers. In the US, it seems like that same mediocrity just ends up competing with other mediocrity, resulting in a cycle of unfulfilling and heavily biased coverage.
But, the Middle Eastern dynamic does demand a different kind of international news than the US reality. A lot of our focus is on domestic political division, and that is what much of our news revolves around-spinning both international and domestic events around a political framework that is relatable and personal to both sides of the political spectrum. The Middle East has a much more diverse and fragmented set of political entities to dance around-which makes its efforts even more impressive. But, it also makes me wonder how the same, very admirable, guidelines that Al Jazeera operates along, could ever be applied into our international news media. Maybe Western news media doesn't feel the same kind of challenge to produce credible and balanced news because it operates under the safety of the American umbrella and therefore the need to balance a variety of viewpoints is not as urgent.
Hopefully, the same demand for credibility finds its way into US news outlets that tackle international news. The fact that viewers gravitate toward what they find relatable, and that news is almost always reported through various cultural and political filters-is one that doesn't eliminate the possibility for good journalism. Done reasonably, the result will attract reasonable people who will interpret news with a reasonable perspective. To have two competing viewpoints presented on one mainstream network has the potential to set a new standard for what is a productive discussion, and ultimately gives the viewer agency to participate in the discussion, rather than passively absorbing it.
I think that the views that you have on Al-Jazzera are very insightful and it does make me wonder about America's news broadcasting. I think that something like creating objective and credible news is something that is unfortunately more easily said than done. For instance, as we have talked about in class, who is to say what is objective? You touched upon this at the end of your blog and I think that it is a very cyclical cycle of having opinions reflected in news to reinforce opinions. In order to break the cycle I think there needs to be a change in the worldview of viewers before there can be a change in the worldview of the news. Not only is objectivity a point of contention, but what about credibility? For the most part the news that we see on television isn't completely untrue, newscasters and news stations don't feed us utter lies, so what is the appropriate level of truth in order to obtain credibility? I don't have answers to all of these questions but your article has made me think about these questions.
ReplyDelete