conference reviews |
|
MAPPING THE AL-JAZEERA PHENONMENON AND ITS IMPACT ON AUDIENCES AND INTERNATIONAL JOURNALISM PRACTICE Hosted by the Centre for Arab and Muslim Media Research (CAMMRO) This conference took place over the course of one day and involved professors specializing in media research, staff from Al-Jazeera - including the Director General, Mr. Wadah Khanfar - and the BBC, as well as two individuals involved with military communications. The following notes are descriptions of each presentation. All perspectives are those espoused by the speakers. first session | second session | third session | fourth session | final session | First Session: What Impact on Audiences, Journalism and Social Change? Clearly indicating that Al-Jazeera has become a new force within world communications, Thussu said it has 'disturbed and enriched the flow of ideas across the world'. He reiterated old arguments within academia that still apply today - namely, that there exists a limited and unequal flow of ideas, news and information in the world due partly to the fact that most of what people see comes directly from APTV News and Reuters TV. The same source is typically used in foreign news around the world and therefore the same pictures will be used. This domination is arguably even stronger than what existed when these same debates occurred in the 70s and 80s. While Thussu recognizes that the advent of Al-Jazeera represents an important site of study due to its geopolitical and economic significance, many academics are merely falling into the temptation to view it as a phenomenon which will challenge air waves around the world. He also pointed out what he considers to be a 'fundamental problem' that Al-Jazeera promotes, which is exemplified in their decision to air a video of a suicide bomber involved in the 7/7 attacks on London on the one year anniversary of the event. From a journalist's perspective Thussu can understand that it is a wonderful news story, but he appeared to be encouraging greater sensitivity. People were mourning on that day and therefore it may not have been a good decision to air the video. Thussu argued that there is a certain element of sensationalism that is almost integral to this kind of news organisation. Still, Al-Jazeera arguably provides a perspective that the BBCs of this world try to avoid - 'the ugly side of conflict'. He went on to talk about Al-Jazeera's decision to 'go global' with an English language channel: 'We'll see how different it is from mainstream networks'. Thussu wondered if the people who are meant to run the station are essentially the same as those in charge of Western networks. He asks if this is all in fact part of a wider Western hegemony.
Sim notes that those in Asia who wish to receive Al-Jazeera must pay for a pricey cable package. Considering regional media, she describes the existence of a different model of journalism wherein voice is emphasized. This model presents a challenge to traditional models of media that rely on neutrality. While interviewing taxi drivers in Thailand, Singapore and other locations in Asia, Sim found sympathy for Iraqis and references to American imperialism. She also notes the ventriloquism evident within Central Chinese Television whereby the US is not directly criticized but there is a willingness to showcase voices that do. Regional media are claimed to serve a particular audience and include individual voices while Fox News and Al-Jazeera maintain what Sim calls 'partisan professionalism'. Including 'voice' decidedly results in the unravelling of objectivity and neutrality. While this regional context is challenging the traditional model, partisan media has experienced tremendous growth. Al-Jazeera is the best known non-Western example while Fox News is the medium through which 1 in 4 Americans get their news. However, Sim claims that traditional media have failed to maintain an audience and a growing credibility gap exists. She suggests that this crisis of traditional media will spread. Fox and Al-Jazeera make it impossible for other voices to become visible. The admission of voice and perspective vitally challenges neutrality. The most important challenge to universalism is nationalism and identity politics. Dr. Marie Gillespie (Open University, UK) Gillespie's research is based on two empirical audience studies: (1) in-depth interviews with 300 people in London in 2001-2002 (post-9/11); and (2) in-depth interviews with 200 people as part of a 3 year follow-up in 2004-2006. Her research delved into the question of how active audiences make sense of the information they receive and had the stated intent of tracking trends over the last 5 years. Gillespie asks: Do multi-lingual and multi-cultural practices contribute to a cosmopolitan democracy? Al-Jazeera was not looked at specifically. With 40-50 million watching Al-Jazeera, and an increase after the second intifada, Gillespie notes that Al-Jazeera is speaking for and to the Arab world. A notion of joint destiny is said to bring Arabs together. Al-Jazeera is helping to forge a transnational political consciousness, which contributes to the formation of a politicized identity. The images shown by Al-Jazeera create profound anger and sadness and become objects of contemplation while intensifying realities. Rather than desensitizing audiences, Gillespie argues that these images have mobilized a political consciousness. Still, she does not think that Al-Jazeera has fanned the flames of religious fundamentalism. While these images may shock and move us, only narratives can help us understand their content. Images of bin Laden and Al-Qaeda and the repetition of these images in the Western world have persuaded Al-Qaeda to seek revenge. Gillespie claims that audiences view Al-Jazeera positively since it offers an alternative perspective, illuminating what is hidden or omitted in Western news. These images speak to her respondents, even if they do not happen to speak the language that Al-Jazeera broadcasts in. To her respondents, Al-Jazeera is rarely seen as the sole, exclusive, or primary channel viewed. Instead they maintain a complex news menu. Respondents are sceptical and engage consistently in comparative analysis by contrasting the BBC with CNN and Al-Jazeera. Within Gillespie's first study, many saw Al-Jazeera as emancipatory. She sees Al-Jazeera as entering a new phase wherein it must adapt to increasing competition since, for instance, the BBC will be releasing a new Arabic service next year. Al-Jazeera's 'near mythical status' as an alternative source is waning as Gillespie claims it is losing audiences. Its style of debate is becoming mainstreamed. Her research suggests that most people seek out news media that confirm rather than challenge their view of the world. Audiences were advised to see www.mediatingsecurity.com for more information on Gillespie's research. Mr. Khaled Hroub (Al-Jazeera Channel, London) Hroub begins by explaining that his talk will likely reveal the two hats he wears - Cambridge University and Al-Jazeera. He questions why Al-Jazeera, after ten years, has not brought political and social change. High hopes and expectations were pinned on Al-Jazeera. Complete control of governments and states over the media existed before Al-Jazeera suddenly appeared in 1996. Suddenly one could seemingly debate freely and 'think the unthinkable'. The station provided an unprecedented atmosphere of media freedom in the region. Motivated by Al-Jazeera's success, other media began competing with the station. Al-Jazeera was certainly highly welcomed but everything changed with Afghanistan and Iraq. People who had once sympathized with Al-Jazeera became critical, claiming it had become the 'mouthpiece of bin Laden', etc. Al-Jazeera became seen by Western and American viewers as a station that helped to create radicalized Arab opinions. Hroub argues that this criticism is unfair because in reality Al-Jazeera exposed the existing status quo of Arab anger. This opinion is not radical. Arabs have suffered for so long and the establishment of Israel was seen by the vast majority as the greatest act against them. This fact has been marginalized and overlooked. The West maintains a self-denial of responsibility in creating such an environment. Al-Jazeera allowed the complete exposure of this anger, which impeded advances of democracy and political change. Hroub stresses that Al-Jazeera should be assessed and judged according to media criteria, not political fairness or responsibility. Unless major changes occur to the existing status quo vis a vis Western foreign policy, Arab anger will continue to exist and Al-Jazeera will expose it. Hroub concludes that images are the most important feature of news since it does not matter what you say about reality - it is reality itself that matters. ______________________ to top Mr. Wadah Khanfar (Director General, Al-Jazeera Network, Doha, Qatar) Speaking of the political role of Al-Jazeera, Khanfar notes that carrying a political agenda contradicts the essence of balanced journalism. Everyone looks at Al-Jazeera as a political actor instead of just a TV channel. On a recent trip to Egypt Khanfar spoke with angry political and civil social leaders who accused Al-Jazeera of furthering Zionism. They claimed the channel should not play host to Israeli actors. In Monaco people were also angry with Al-Jazeera - why are terrorist organisations given a platform to express their views? Turkey has kicked Al-Jazeera out of Ankara while China has been critical of Al-Jazeera's coverage of Taiwan. He has also been warned against giving a platform to Chechnya. Khanfar argues that this landscape he encounters goes beyond professional standards about what is politically correct or not. His duty is to guard the institution from external political pressure. Political pressure does create problems for journalists. The bureaus do not want to wreck their relationship with officials or they will lose access. Some journalists turn to self-censorship. Does Al-Jazeera really have a different philosophy? Most employees are ex-BBC staff. The initial start of the station is rooted in the West, in London. When Al-Jazeera began interacting with the Arab world, priorities and a school of thought began to develop. No official guidebook has been published by Al-Jazeera. The news Al-Jazeera is covering is not ordinary. The station does not have the luxury of living far away from hot spots. It is in the heart of the biggest hot spot in the world. Are 50 people dead in Iraq a headline? Maybe not in London but for those whose families are affected, it is. Is Al-Jazeera creating blood on the street or is this the reality? If you change the channel, you won't change the reality. It is the journalist's responsibility to be as close as possible to reality. With respect to conflicts, Khanfar suggests that coverage should be obvious. If you know all the facts you just need to be as visible as possible. Concerning the 7/7 video aired, he reminds the audience that bin Laden has sent 6 or 7 tapes to Al-Jazeera since 2001. Al-Jazeera was not the first to broadcast his tapes - a US station broadcast a full version that was 40 minutes long. He considers the tapes a scoop, not something to hide away from. In the US sources were protected in order to bring down the president - no one said it was wrong. Khanfar feels that Al-Jazeera is restoring confidence in journalism because they are not necessarily taking political correctness into consideration. Certain news items from bin Laden's tape were worthy enough to be heard. He stresses that Al-Jazeera is not a reform movement. It is just a TV network that cares about ethics. Their code of conduct is made publicly available on their website. The Arab audience is politicized and therefore political news is important in the region. They care about international news because it affects them - you have to know politics or you could be shot. Khanfar claims that audiences are able to decode editorial policy and understand what is being said. He also feels that people do trust Al-Jazeera but credibility must be earned. Al-Jazeera has made mistakes but has also been brave enough to correct them and make this known to the public. One example that Khanfar gives to offer assurance to the audience that Al-Jazeera is committed to ethical reporting involves the June 9 th 2006 incident wherein most of Huda Ghalia's family was killed on a beach in Gaza, allegedly by Israeli shelling. He notes that while interviewing an Israeli spokeswoman about the incident, an Al-Jazeera reporter did not say 'Thank you very much' at the end of her interview. The reporter was reprimanded since Al-Jazeera's code of ethics involves including such a statement at the end of an interview, regardless of one's personal feelings towards the interviewee or his/her comments. Khanfar stresses that one can never follow emotional feelings or political opinions about someone while working as a journalist. He notes that he and his staff do have opinions within the organisation but policies are agreed to and the station operates on that basis. In the past every statement made in the media was controlled but now journalists have been freed from oppression and the tyranny of the state. Khanfar says that his job is to keep the newsroom very far away from political influence. If the government of Qatar were to interfere in his newsroom, Khanfar says it would result in the end of Al-Jazeera. They must remain distant from the newsroom or else Al-Jazeera will not be regarded as anything in the region. Politicians should not define for the journalist what their priorities should be. Al-Jazeera International represents a challenge, a new initiative. Still, the global perspective must be rooted somewhere. The strength of Al-Jazeera is in the Middle East. Al-Jazeera is located in the south and so that fact will have an impact. Question Period for Second Session Q: How are Western governments reacting to Al-Jazeera? When will Al-Jazeera get back into Iraq? Is there an economic model for Al-Jazeera International? A: There is no unified Western perspective regarding Al-Jazeera. There is a lot of respect for Al-Jazeera within Europe. In the US, Rumsfeld and others have made harsh statements against Al-Jazeera. Two of Al-Jazeera's bureaus have been destroyed and one camera man remains in Guatanamo Bay. Our role is not to please governments. The problem with the US comes from Iraq and Afghanistan. What we covered in Iraq was not wrong. Others have apologized for their mistakes in coverage. Iraq has been closed to us for one and a half years; however we are still covering it through our bureau in Doha. We'll go back as soon as the Iraqi government gives us the green light. With regards to the 7/7 video, we do not decide on the timing of showing anything. Al Qaeda decided the timing by passing on the information. We have a clear code of conduct dealing with tapes. We all condemned the showing of that video on a personal level but Al-Jazeera exists to broadcast news. Showing tapes and speeches within a context is important for creating rational judgment. Whenever bin Laden is shown, he is always followed by a discussion. We are broadcasting it because it is the news - it is not up to us when the tape is released. We have no intention to interfere in any government processes. Al-Jazeera International presents an economic challenge since news does not make money but instead it actually consumes a lot of money. Our strategy is to make money from other channels - the sports or documentary channel - since it is easy to make money from them. If we maintain a holistic approach, we can make money. Saudi Arabia does not allow us to cover their country - there is an unofficial embargo on Al-Jazeera in terms of advertising. We need a more creative model, more diverse. Q: This question involves balance - you have sympathy for one side and a lot of the time you put the other side in a corner. What is your code of conduct? Islamic vs. Western values? You mention interviewing the killer and then saying 'thank you'. Do you show Israeli suffering as much as Palestinian suffering? What other pressures are you subjected to? A: We have 40 to 50 pages of a code of conduct. This manual is made public and news and opinion are defined within it. News involves credible sources, double-sourcing of any item, and opinion plus the other opinion for everything. Opinion involves people expressing what they wish and ensuring that it is made known to the public that it is merely opinion. The rules regarding opinion are easier to handle than those for news. There is one talk show we have that has caused many problems for Al-Jazeera. The presenter is critical of all authorities and hosts people of all opinions. It is the most popular show on Al-Jazeera. With respect to thanking the Israeli - our code of conduct defines what is personal and what is professional. The journalist must take off their own hat. It is up to the audience to judge whether the Israelis are criminal. Otherwise we have a big mess on the screen. We cover Israel as we cover the region and anywhere else. We represent the Israeli and Palestinian position on the screen. We show the frustration and anger against Israel. We cover all of these aspects - the massive march in Istanbul against Israel. We are covering reality but have no policy to be pro-anyone. The terminology we use is a free-value terminology. We can't say 'Hamas is a terrorist organisation according to the US, etc. but Arab governments say ...'. We don't use the term terrorism - or if we do we put it in quotations or find another word. We don't use 'resistance' for Iraq but we do for Palestinians because it is occupied territory. The term 'shahid' has been used since the beginning of Al-Jazeera to refer to Palestinians killed in the conflict. It is not literally translated into 'martyr' but along those lines. It must be remembered that the majority of our audiences are Arabic. We translate the term for English audiences into a value-free term. Q: How will you talk to such diverse audiences (including South America, etc.) with Al-Jazeera International? Is there a relationship between Al-Jazeera and Qatar? Do you cover the internal dynamics within Saudi Arabia but not those within Qatar? Does Al-Jazeera represent Arabs/Muslims around the world? A: The bureau chief in Palestine is often mediating between correspondents and their wives due to the violent environment. We have more than 50 nationalities working for Al-Jazeera. We maintain as much diversity as possible. We would like to see a strong presence everywhere. Religion is vital to economic and social life. Religious talk shows are important for our audience - discussing issues of modernity, for example. There are 150,000 people living in Qatar and so we cannot compare with Saudi Arabia. We would not report on Qatar or any country just because of personal interests, yet when events newsworthy enough occur we must cover them. But Saudi Arabia is strategically important. We do not single out countries in order to criticize them. In our editorial meetings we don't say, 'Ok, we're picking on Egypt'. We would like to be professional journalists. If Al-Jazeera should do anything, it should be useful in restoring confidence in the profession. ______________________ to top Third Session: Media in the Midst of Wars Captain Frank Pascual (Director, Dubai Media Engagement Team, US Central Command, UAE) Pascual explained that he represents one part of a two-person Dubai media team. He sums up his work by saying, 'If we don't engage with the media, someone else will tell it for us'. His team offers the point of view of US Central Command. The relationship between the US and Al-Jazeera is at all times adversarial. His team does criticize Fox, and the Washington Times, etc. It is important for them to talk to everyone. Pascual reveals that his team has been busy as they have had more than 1000 news media engagements in 12 months. 'But this doesn't mean they roll over for us'. While their responsibility is to make themselves known, he suggests that they are not right all the time. What he hopes to achieve is 'a professional media engagement'. He does not expect any media to take their line as it is. Pascual also mentions that they asked Al-Jazeera to visit a Royal Navy ship. Lt. C. Steve Tatham (Former Royal Navy Spokesman) Tatham argues that the weaker are gaining strength over the stronger. With respect to 'embeds', he stresses that the issue is less about military control and more about personal and moral integrity. He feels those in charge should have been much smarter in terms of whom to embed. There is an increasing demonisation of Arabic media. He recounts a moment where a spokesperson said, in response to a question about what provisions are required for journalists from Arabic media: 'I always give them seats at the front of the auditorium and there's a prayer room 'round back'. The information campaign in Iraq is much more difficult now than during the war. Today there is so much technologically sophisticated equipment and yet most of the world's media stay behind the walls of Baghdad's green room. The internet has become another useful tool and insurgents are using it to recruit, to gain technological advantages, and repudiate statements. Tatham asks: How do we enable the inclusiveness of voices to rise above the exclusiveness of voices? He also argues that the fallacy of the 'clash of civilizations' should be exposed. There is a lot of ignorance over the Arab world. Doing a google search will result in 25 million pages for 'Islamic terrorist' and 35 pages for 'Roman Catholic terrorist'. There is a need to provide an awareness of the world in which journalists work. The Arab media must also be convinced that they are not our target and therefore we should open an investigation into [Tareq] Ayoub's death, the Haditha massacres, etc. Tatham does not believe one can use objectivity and impartiality as measure-sticks. Another issue he brings up is the fact that there is no dedicated military correspondent in Al-Jazeera. Al-Jazeera is not just a media outlet - it is an important actor. There are also not enough diplomats on staff. Dr. Noureddine Miladi (CAMMRO, London) Miladi does not consider the BBC to be impartial and feels that Al-Jazeera therefore filled a 'simple but crucial gap'. Still, Al-Jazeera has been accused of pandering to popular Arab sentiment, of being the mouthpiece of Al Qaeda, etc. Recalling Khanfar's point about the airing of the 7/7 video, Miladi notes that Western media, including the BBC, will also say 'yes we look for scoops - if we have them, we'll definitely show them'. He points out that Al-Jazeera's coverage provides challenging accounts. ______________________ to top Fourth SessionMr. Richard Porter (Head of News, BBC World) Al-Jazeera grew out of the ashes of the BBC Arabic service, which began nearly 20 years ago. Porter explains that public service values embodied by the BBC involve the following elements: impartiality, accurateness, fairness, an assurance that all parts of the story are told, relevancy, a high quality of reporting, and the aim to remain the most trusted news source - not the most popular. As well, a news organisation should prepare to explain and admit its mistakes. Porter points out that the BBC is the only British broadcaster with a permanent presence in Baghdad. One third of the budget is dedicated to security needs. He stresses that the BBC is not stranded in the green zone, nor is Fox News. A continuing presence in Iraq provides even more legitimacy. Audiences are being encouraged to participate through new technology and this aspect of news will continue to grow. Instant news brings with it challenges and it is technology that is enabling this instantaneous footage. As well, the audience are demanding live and breaking news. The audience do not want to see the Israeli-Palestinian conflict on the news and yet the BBC has to report it. Therefore time, energy, and resources must be committed to reporting in that region. The world of broadcasting is changing rapidly. Broadcasters who maintain trust can cut through all of the competition, through all of the gatekeepers, and still find a place. But that trust needs to be earned. Porter also mentioned the BBC's Creative Future, an editorial blueprint released in April 2006 that plans to 'deliver more value to audiences'. Dr. Chris Paterson (University of Ulster, Londonderry) Paterson argues that the violent side of media-state relations is largely ignored. Since 1999 the media has changed dramatically - which is the year that NATO bombed the media. Today, violence against journalists shapes reporting like never before. The number of journalists killed is Iraq falls between 100 and 130. The US has been ranked as one of the worst offenders of press freedom. Paterson showed a list of those believed to be killed by US troops. He argued that there is an increasing tendency to attack individual journalists and an increasing tendency to attack media facilities. Accompanying this is a denial of responsibility and intent. No effective legal protectors have been put in place for journalists. Local laws are ineffective in Iraq while military law has, to date, exonerated troops or refused investigation. The US unilaterally withdrew from the ICC [International Criminal Court]. Even more, when journalists wear weapons, as embeds, they endanger the limited protections they do have. Families of victims can take action in national courts, as can governments. In conclusion, Paterson emphasizes that without reform of international protectors for journalists, the end of media coverage of war as we know it is upon us. Dr. Christopher Tulloch (International University of Catalonia, Barcelona, Spain) Tulloch points out that during 2003 the vocabulary of embeds was filtering over into other journalistic commentary. He argues that the use of such words as 'phase 3 targets' - an internal military term - softens reality. 'Pockets of resistance' and 'windows of opportunity' are other such phrases. This is the result of being so close to the US propaganda machine. 'Operation Shock and Awe' and the 'coalition of the willing' are other examples. It has become an osmotic process, especially on television news, wherein phrases have seeped into the standard journalistic discourse. The idea of embeds was to offer all the right 'news buttons' but it didn't work like that. Tulloch comments that if the military are happy, it makes one uneasy. A converted narrative of war has overtaken the discussion in which the sides are identified as 'good vs. bad'. It has become a pseudo-post-modern-Western scenario. Within Greece embeds are referred to as 'military personnel' and considered as such. A lot of self-censorship takes place and the military accuses journalists of this as well. Tulloch relates the scenario to the 'Stockholm Syndrome' whereby the difference between 'we' and 'them' becomes blurred. Having embeds eliminates other sources. It plays into the hands of anyone wanting to direct the media. Today, the more you watch the less you understand. Twenty-four hour news does not give a more complete picture - just a picture that lasts longer. The patriotic myth has become common place on Fox News, BBC, etc. with respect to Iraq. Tulloch asks the audience to consider Oliver North's statement (host of Fox News' 'War Stories'): 'I don't do any of this objectivity or common sense shit'. Levels of patriotism have become measured - advertising is cheaper if there is a negative issue on the news (ex. US troops killed) and vice versa. The BBC has been attacked for its lack of enthusiastic patriotism. Tulloch also argues that the media go over the line sometimes - for instance, AP and Reuters have forced their journalists to go into ambush situations (ex. in Africa). Journalists are completely 'touchable'; there are no more vans with 'TV' on the side which make them 'untouchable' like you see in the movies. Palestine Hotel is an example of this: after the major incident on 8 th April 2003 where two journalists were killed, another journalist was killed on the same floor on 19 th April. ______________________ to top Final Session: Future of International Journalism Face to Political Pressure In this session each member of the panel (Porter, Thussu, Tulloch, and Sim) was asked to say a few words before a question period emerged. Porter The rate of change and how to adapt is what has become most important. This rate is now faster than it has been at any point in our history. We must make the sum greater than its parts. The strengths of the BBC must be held on to - our core values of independence, impartiality, accuracy, and presenting all sides. Our Creative Future project applies to international journalism. Headlines, analysis, debate, and participation are important. If you get it right, you will remain relevant. It is also critical to be a leader in 24/7 news and on demand news. So the way in which you organise your organisation is important and it must be reorganised in order to strengthen it. Relationships with audiences must also be strengthened in order to enable them to participate more. There exists a huge demand for this. Trust is built by being open and transparent. We must recognize that competition is good - it makes us work harder. What can Al-Jazeera do that others have not? Will channels there beam Al-Jazeera? Malaysia has not allowed it. There are serious doubts as to whether Al-Jazeera will be accepted at all. Thussu People in Al-Jazeera see a gap in the international news market. It is exciting and parallels something that occurred in the 70s and 80s. The history of Al-Jazeera involves pictures which show the uglier side of conflict. Sustainability as an independent media organisation is important as the competition will only get worse. Tulloch Will the channel [Al-Jazeera] become less of an island? There is competition from other Arab channels. Even more, there are 400 million Spanish speakers and yet no Spanish international news channel exists! Will Al-Jazeera break the no-win situation? Question Period for Final Session Q: A long war seemingly exists, based on 9/11, and yet there is a massive movement that challenges this official narrative of truth. Are there mechanisms to take on board alternative media? A (Porter): There is nothing in place to stop anyone from publishing their own points of view. This represents an opportunity for the BBC since it becomes a great deal easier to find out what people are saying. However, the definition of research as just doing a search on google is false. As well, audiences for news channels in the UK are rising. A (Tulloch): One result of high technological advances is a visual distraction. Q: This question is about the ads that will reportedly be placed on the BBC website - any impact? A (Porter): This will have no impact on editorial values but instead will be proof that they can co-exist. Q: Do you want more audience participation? A (Porter): Recently we had a live webcast with Putin and invited questions from the audience. The way that audiences put questions are sometimes different from how we would but I wouldn't advocate it as the only way. Many discussions are going on online. This does not translate to a vote on editorial policy but we want to be accountable. The Editor's Blog is also a new feature where editors are expected to write about editorial dilemmas. Through openness we will build trust - it is not just about being right all the time. A (woman from BBC Monitoring): Citizen journalism and blogs are a new feature of the landscape. The BBC encourages viewers to send in pictures. Most pictures shown in the UK of coverage of the 7/7 bombings were from mobile phones. Q: People of Middle East origin tend to think of the BBC as biased, particularly with respect to coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. So more audience participation is good, even within local communities - getting people to participate; but will you have panels where audiences can be involved in policymaking? A (Porter): Everyone thinks the BBC is biased on the Israeli-Palestinian issue. The responses we get on the Editor's Blog are completely divided. We just do the best we can to present a fair and accurate picture and recognize that people will still think we are biased. A (Thussu): It is important to talk to people that may have problems with the BBC. It is stupid and naïve to think it's perfect. High-quality research has already been done on coverage of the Middle East, for instance through the Glasgow University Media Group. A (Porter): I am not trying to give the impression that everything is perfect. We need to listen to what people are saying and to research that has been done. A (Sim): The BBC Arabic service will try to please its audiences a little more because otherwise what's the point? A (Porter): We have audience profiles of BBC World and CNN International - this involves a lot of travellers but also academics, etc. But it's not just people in hotels. Q: Why does the BBC want a slice of the world market? A (Porter): We have government funds to provide that. It is part of our responsibility and people want it. The number of people watching in any one country at any one time is small but it adds up. Conference notes recorded and compiled by Rena Bivens. ______________________ to top |
