Arab News reports that Saudi media are being given a longer leash. In his remarks at the opening of the current session of the Shoura Council, King Abdullah said that constructive criticism of government operations is a legitimate subject for local media. This might sadden some ministers and other bureaucrats who believed they (and their ministries) were immune.
Of course, the King called for ‘responsible’ criticism. I don’t fault him there. While the Saudi media has improved over the years, many elements still lack a high level of professionalism. Too, they can be subject to pressures from publishers to take on the publishers’ personal agendas. It’s not as bad as in some Arab countries, but it still needs to be corrected.
King: Constructive criticism on govt’s performance is welcome
RIYADH: Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques King Abdullah has given a boost to local media by allowing them to constructively criticize the government’s performance.
However, he warned against using the media as a tool to settle internal disputes and personal accounts and making false accusations.
“I ask all people to fear God in their words and deeds, to shoulder their responsibilities consciously and not to be a burden on their religion and homeland,” he said on Sunday.
…
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
March:09:2010 - 10:33
This kind of conditional freedom of expression doesn’t mean anything.
March:09:2010 - 11:43
That sounds like a very good start–if it is properly used and maintained–with appropriate caveats.
When Mohamed VI of Morocco relaxed press restrictions some in Morocco used it well, but others used it to say hideous things about his wife–never a good idea. Restrictions on speech about the Royal family were thus tightened again. Other critical magazines and newspapers have considerably more freedom than under his father, but there have been some arrests, fines, and closures.
Again, a good start–hopefully.
March:09:2010 - 12:38
as long as the al-sauds are untouchable, it doesn’t matter.
btw, this use of the word ‘homeland’ is getting annoying!
March:09:2010 - 22:37
Those who argue for a conditional freedom based on a distinction about misuse of freedom of expression and a legitimate use of freedom, will never agree to similar kind of legislation in their own country. The fact is that saying hideous things is a part of freedom of expression and restriction on this is a very clever strategy to suppress dissent against authority. Rather than advocating this kind of patronising attitude towards “granting” freedom in other countries, I would like to see such advocates saying the same in their own country. The truth is that they want complete freedom in their own country but want to argue for a partial freedom in another country as a charitable gesture. This is not only patronising but also following double standards.
The State is no one to decide what the people should say and what they should not say, no matter however hideous.
March:09:2010 - 23:33
I don’t think anyone’s arguing for conditional freedom, only applauding a small step toward greater freedom.
March:10:2010 - 01:50
Daisy–by your repeated use of my word “hideous” I gather you are referring to me specifically, as well as perhaps others, in your comment #4.
Canada does have greater restrictions on freedom of the media than the US does, for example, and I applaud it. They aren’t so great as to prevent criticism but they are tighter about hate speech, and privacy. Also, it is more common to have a publication/ broadcasting ban on court cases, which I have agreed to and supported.
Saying hideous things about a leader’s wife’s physical appearance or false accusations about sexual mores does not seem to me to be a good use of freedom of the media. It is silly rather than substantive criticism of a leader, or his policies, or politics.
Certain things should not be said, as they constitute libel, hate speech, incitement to violence or are harmful (eg instructions on how to successfully commit suicide).
Rather than paint all who applaud this news with the same insulting brush of being too simple-minded to understand strategies of restriction, patronizing, and holding double-standards, perhaps you should consider that in countries with highly restrictive policies, and powerful conservatives who want them maintained it is better to proceed in a stepwise fashion than to set about with a revolution, reign of terror, backlash, and counterrevolution/repression as is one common pattern of revolution, and one currently being played out in Iran.
It is patronizing to assume that you know what other commentators think and want beyond what they choose to say, or that you have the prescription for all the ills you have diagnosed in Saudi Arabia.
Judging by the news, your diagnostic and prescriptive powers are needed at home.
March:10:2010 - 05:23
John,
Saudi Government/King is arguing for conditional freedom – I don’t mean you are doing it. It is exactly in this manner that freedom of the people has been encroached upon in many countries – under the guise that criticism is not constructive. This is basically a tool in the hand of the authorities to portray themselves to the world as taking small steps towards freedom of speech, but in reality it is a very clever strategy to restrict the freedom of the press by the Saudi State without attracting criticism from the world.
I think you completely miss the point if you see it as a small step towards gaining complete freedom. Sorry to differ with you on this point.
March:10:2010 - 07:29
No, Daisy. Restrictions have been much greater in the past. Gradually, the government’s been removing its hand. That is clearly an improvement. It’s not yet where it should be, but it’s clear movement from point A (totally government controlled) to Z (totally free).
I’m not saying this is great, that Saudi press is free. The government still tries to exert too much control.
I’m just saying that it’s better than it was last year, which is better than it was the year before that. Compared to where the Saudi media was 20 years ago, it’s much better.
March:10:2010 - 12:16
John–I would agree based on increasing press freedom in other countries, particularly Morocco, which is the most analogous and the one I know best in this context ie new King, still old guard members in power, conservative populace, and gradually movement towards freedoms, while the press itself grows to learn how to handle them, and about responsible reporting or applying it in their home countries.