Arab Information Ministers Resolve to Censor Satelite Channels

Ministers of Information from the member states of the Arab League adopted an agreement here in Cairo yesterday to impose restrictions on satellite channels that seemed to be aimed primarily at Al Jazeera and its brand of contentious news and political coverage (It also takes aim at the sex channels and other ‘immoral’ things like drinking and smoking, but I am more interested in the informational restrictions). Reports note that only Qatar did not sign the agreement, although Al Jazeera International reported yesterday on its 5pm broadcast and on its website that Lebanon also refused to sign the document. This "decisive action against...freedom of speech" pretty much covers everything but sports coverage, as Sandmonkey notes. The Egyptian-Saudi proposal would allow governments in countries hosting satellite channels that violate the charter to suspend or revoke its broadcasting license, which would have a dampening effect on existing stations like Al Jazeera, Al Arabiya and Al Hurra, for example, which actually allow free-wheeling debate, uncensored call-ins, and live coverage that often transgress traditional red lines and certainly abridge the draconian press laws and penal codes of each individual country. Saudi Arabic, in fact, already banned live programs on state TV earlier this month. In general the legal framework for communication and expression are bound by the interests of public order, national unity, national security, and harmonization with the laws preventing defamation (broadly conceived) of the president, nation or leaders. The goal of this most recent charter seems to be to send a message to Qatar/Al Jazeera and other uppity stations with the audacity to engage in journalism and critique, and it remains to be seen whether particular laws will be enacted in each of the country. The charter apparently:

"bans broadcasting material seen as undermining "social peace, national unity, public order and general propriety" -- accusations which Arab governments often throw at their opponents.

Broadcasters can not criticise religions or defame political, national and religious leaders, it says.

"Freedom (of expression) is to be exercised with awareness and responsibility to protect the supreme interests of the Arab states and the Arab nation," one clause says.

These restrictions are of course vague and overreaching. The Arabic Network for Human Rights Information points out that "it wasn't a coincidence for the initiative comes from the Saudi and Egyptian ministers of information, as the two countries are actually hostile to freedom of expression and are making every effort to muffle all the calls for democracy and reform. The document approved by the Arab Ministers of Information is actually violating the rights of the legislative authorities, in spite of the fact that this authority is in total submission to the government in Egypt, and is non existing in the first place in Saudi Arabia, while constitutions state clearly that there is no punishment to be imposed except through a legislation ".

Reporters Without Borders also spoke out against this and seems to agree with me that there is no turning the tide back on these relatively free-wheeling and diverse stations, of which there are now more than 900. People like choice. People like debate and contention and variety and entertainment. But the states are losing their grip ever more quickly on the communication spaces their citizens occupy as fewer and fewer deign to watch the state-run networks with their old-school approach to news and entertainment not to mention low-budget graphics and sets.

Hezbollah Commander Imad Moghaniyah killed by car bomb in Syria

Hezbollah Commander Imad Moghaniyah was killed by a car bomb in Syria today, though no claims of responsibility have as yet been made. His assassination comes a day before the third anniversary of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri’s assassination and a demonstration planned by the March 14 movement. News of his death was broken by Al Manar interrupted programming to make an announcement about his death, reporting that he had “joined in the trail of martyrs assassinated by the enemies” (according to Al Jazeera International’s translation). But as I seek to watch Al Manar it is no longer available on either of my satellite (Hotbird and Nilesat). Isn’t that odd. I was just watching it last night…

As head of Hezbollah’s special ops unit, Moghaniyah was accused of being the mastermind behind hostage attacks and bombings including the American embassy and the military barracks in Beirut (Al Jazeera did not mention the death count - which numbered 271 Americans in the barracks – as is standard in reporting by American news organizations). Hezbollah always denied its role but the U.S. never took such protests seriously. Hezbollah is of course blaming Israel for the most recent assassination. But the State Department has said “the world is a better place without him” reports AJI.

The funeral tomorrow comes in the midst of the continuing Lebanese political crisis and a demonstration that organizers hope will attract thousands. AFP reports that “Scooters have been banned from travelling in and around Beirut on Thursday and civilians have been ordered not to carry weapons through Friday, even licenced ones.”

U.S. Presidential Primaries Have Worldwide Implications

Unlike any other country in the world the decision about who will be America's next president affects people throughout the world in nearly every country. This is certainly reflected in the news, and I'm happy to be able to watch coverage of "Super Duper Tuesday" and the race in general on several different channels, but most especially Al Jazeera International. I listen to podcasts of Democracy Now, NPR news, the Diane Rehm Show and PRI, watch TV5, BBC and CNN and have to try hard to suck myself out of the media vortex, which is so much richer and more diverse than what I get in Washington. Yesterday Riz Khan hosted a show with several experts on the election that attracted callers from every region in the world. There was a news piece about what Chinese people think and who they support in light of the ever-increasing importance of China in world affairs and to U.S. policy in general, which is a fascinating way to get outside of the parochialism and narrowness that often dominates U.S. news coverage of this subject. Super Duper Tuesday also led the news on French, British and Arabic channels, with nearly every station devoting a portion of their newscasts to the primary results. What country ever got coverage of their primaries in the U.S. media? Now, much of the coverage on AJI focused on how the candidates - primarily democratic with a possible slight bias toward Obama - would deal with Iraq and Iran, and as commentators on AJI, Diane Rehm and Democracy Now have pointed out, domestic politics is certain to dominate the primaries with foreign policy only becoming central in the actual election race. This is hard for callers to AJI shows to acknowledge but of course makes sense given that the U.S. economy is tanking. I do wish Americans could watch Al Jazeera because the station really has done a great job of covering the election, and even has its own delegate count! Thankfully, though, coverage has also been focused on the rebellion in Chad, the hurricanes in the U.S. and Chinese New Year (it's the year of the Rat!).