How Can Arabs Influence the Media in the West?
Ramzy Baroud, Aljazeera.netHow can Arabs influence Western media, combat its inherent bias and grotesque misrepresentations of the Arab and Muslim world?
Despite the perpetual need to address this issue nothing noteworthy has been achieved on this front, particularly after the attacks of Sept. 11, with the awesome, intellectual, social and cultural backlash unleashed thereafter.
Many of the attempts to bridge the gap between East and West have been crude at best. They facilitated the emergence of two groups of Arab intellectuals and media spokespeople.
One group was “uncompromisingâ€. It refused to acknowledge that a Western audience has an entirely different frame of reference and thus cannot subscribe to an Arab or Muslim argument that simply conforms to what is accepted and what is not in an Arab society.
The other group just wanted to “fit inâ€. Intellectuals of this type told the media what the media wanted to hear. They preferred to draw the audience’s applause, rather than risk its taunts and heckling.
Needless to say, both groups have failed miserably. This is not to suggest that a common ground is far-fetched and that an eloquent as well as courageous third voice is impossible.
This is a very interesting article by one of the editors of Al-Jazeera TV. He’s trying to do an analysis of why Arabs have such a hard time connecting to American (and other Western) audiences. I think he pretty much misunderstands the problem.
I think the major problem–in both directions–is too little respect for the intended audience. This lack of respect is shown through not making any attempt to understand where the audience is standing, what the audience believes to be true, what values the audience has.
In this piece, the writer is inclined to blame it all on the super-smart Israelis. There’s no doubt that Israel has one of the most effective PR operations in the US. But that success comes from understanding those things that make Americans respond. The writer is wrong if he thinks that’s a bad thing.
What Arab media need to do is to make a better attempt at understanding those same things. The buttons are there to be pushed by anyone who cares to do so.
Instead of just declaring, “America is anti-Muslim/anti-Arab” (which is factually false), it might be useful to try to understand why many Americans tend to think there’s something wrong with Islam and the Arab world. Blaming that attitude on superior Israeli propaganda doesn’t cut it. Sitting down with typical Americans and discussing–not arguing, not claiming–as is often done–that the “truth” is self-evident and any refusal to accept the “truth” is stubborness, might make for more effective communications. How, after all, can you talk to anyone if you’re not using the same words with the same meaning?
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
February:09:2005 - 12:57
Another why Arabs could influence Western media is by blowing fewer things up and trying not to kill as many civilians. OK, I know he was talking about the Arab media. I think his two groups are right. I read a lot of Arab media and much of it falls into two categories: a) the ranters, and b)the liars
Either way, when they right about politics it is unbearably predictable, and often not well supported. They should start by acknowledging some faults in their positions and trying to use a bit more integrity in their work. Much of Arab media sounds exactly like propaganda.
Of course, I am biased.
February:09:2005 - 14:48
I guess I’d have to agree with your self-analysis!
Because I read a lot of Arab media, I’m somewhat inclined to agree with your comment about it being full of “ranters”. About “liars”, though?
I think “self-deluded” is more accurate. Most Arabs’ knowledge of America is based on third-hand information at best, with a bit of American TV thrown in for relief. That’s a pretty poor database from which to make sweeping conclusions about anything.
Too, because Arab culture has been until very recently–and continues to be in many places–of the patron/client sort, there’s a tendency to see the world through those lenses. That may work well when an Egyptian paper talks about Lebanon, but it simply inapplicable when talking about the US.
This is why I’m rather fascinated by the current crop of journalists in Saudi Arabia. They’re not–usually–repeating the time-worn clichés, put instead taking hard, self-critical looks at their own society, and finding major faults.
February:09:2005 - 17:15
How can the Arab media sway Western minds? It seems to me that the answer is clear, and you mentioned it in your post: the Arab media must tap into an “understanding [of] those things that make Americans respond.”
So what appeals to the American or Western sensibility? I think the answer is grounded in 1) principles of the scientific process, 2) moral appeal, and 3) increased cultural awareness.
1) During the European enlightenment and the Age of Reason, governments and individuals in the West turned away from religious explanations for phenomena – in everything from the study of disease (the origins of microbiology and immunology) to analysis of governmental power structers (divine right to rule vs. rule by consent of the governed). Because of this, Western news organizations rely solely on what they can prove to be true (with the exception of Dan Rather and Mary Mapes, of course). If Arab media focuses more on facts, supported by credible, vetted, OBJECTIVE evidence, instead of wild speculation, baseless allegations, and blatantly absurd conspiracy theories, their arguments will continue to be ignored. The current understanding of the West is why bother even listening to the Arab media if all they have to offer are theories which are all to easily disproved by even the most cursory fact-checking.
2) Moral appeal. Arab society, and thus the Arab media, as well, must appeal to the American sense of morality. This can be found in Judeo-Christian values, the principals of western judicial systems, and most especially in historic rules of war.
When a Palestinian is killed by IDF troops, or a would-be insurgent is shot in an Iraqi mosque, the attitude of the west is generally on the side of US or Israeli forces. Why? Is it a knee-jerk reaction based on racist stereotypes? I would argue no. We accept the Israeli/US explanation because they often have what western audiences see as a morally superior argument: “We abide by clear cut rules of engagement, our enemies will do absolutely anything to further their goals.” And this is proven time after time: American soldiers wear uniforms which identify their status as combatants. The insurgents hide as civilians. American forces respect women and children as non-combatants. The enemy recruits women, children, even the mentallly handicapped, to carry out suicide attacks. Americans respect houses of worship and vehicles with Red Cross/Red Crescent markings as neutral and sacrosanct, the enemy uses these as military bases and vehicles to target our soldiers. The list is long and varied, but ultimately the same in one regard- the Arabs never seem to want to occupy the moral high ground. In debasing themselves with attacks and methods we deem cowardly (such as intentionally targeting innocent civilians), they garner zero sympathy from Western media and audiences.
Sadly, this “moral high ground” is both surprisingly easy to obtain, and far more productive. The best examples are the non-violent campaigns for justice led by Martin Luther King inthe US, and the struggle for independence led by M. Ghandi in India. If the Palestinians adopted these tactics, they would achieve enormous sympathy from around the world, most especially in the US.
3) Cultural understanding. This is much more nebulous, so I’ll stick with a single example: straightforwardness in negotiation. In Arab society, it seems, there are always multiple levels of meaning, often contradictory. For example, an Iraqi cab driver may protest payment, but in reality, this is a facade – we wants, needs, and expects to be paid, but does not want to appear as if he needs the money. the social convention is not understood by western foreigners, who assume that individuals mean what they say. In New York, if a cabbie refuses payment, you get exactly that – a free ride.
What does this have to do with swaying American audiences? Arab media must say what they actually mean. They cannot say one thing to the US in English, and then turn around and broadcast something very different (or opposite) in Arabic. They must also act in accordance with what they say. Words mean little without concommitant action, and when peace treaties, contracts, or other negotiations, etc. are abused or contravened, those who are responsible must own up to the real reasons why, rather than rely on tired excuses or wild conspiracy theories aimed solely at placating Arab audiences.
Just my thoughts on the matter…sorry for being so long-winded!