You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
December 02, 2016, 02:22:07 PM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Hark!  The Herald!
Holiday Issue 2016

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: Al Jazzeera America  (Read 3278 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Avis habilis

Re: Al Jazzeera America
« Reply #50 on: August 23, 2013, 02:07:37 PM »
Yeah, that was pretty skeevy.

Offline Callie Del NoireTopic starter

Re: Al Jazzeera America
« Reply #51 on: August 23, 2013, 02:11:56 PM »
Yeah, that was pretty skeevy.

Yeah.. good old Chicago politics at it's worst.

Offline The Dark Raven

Re: Al Jazzeera America
« Reply #52 on: August 23, 2013, 02:12:35 PM »
The actual politician Jack Ryan*. He was married to the actress who played Seven-of-Nine; IIRC the sex clubbing scandal tanked an election campaign for him. Methinks you have a date with Teh Google...

(* What a character to have the "same name as," too. It's like a guy running for Parliament in the UK with the name "James Bond" and somehow managing to screw it up, honestly.)

Two more words: different Jack.

Not sure I want to click it with what it sounds like, but I did not know there was a real Jack Ryan...and that he is/was a politician to boot.  Scary.

Online Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: Al Jazzeera America
« Reply #53 on: August 23, 2013, 02:14:03 PM »
Avis' link is just to the Wikipedia entry on the end of the politician's campaign, due to the scandal.

Offline The Dark Raven

Re: Al Jazzeera America
« Reply #54 on: August 23, 2013, 02:16:27 PM »
Avis' link is just to the Wikipedia entry on the end of the politician's campaign, due to the scandal.

<3

Offline Avis habilis

Re: Al Jazzeera America
« Reply #55 on: August 23, 2013, 02:21:03 PM »
Not sure I want to click it with what it sounds like, but I did not know there was a real Jack Ryan...and that he is/was a politician to boot.  Scary.

Heh. Don't worry, I'm not about to Rick-roll you with a link to some congressman doing who knows what in a sex club. Eurgh.

Offline Callie Del NoireTopic starter

Re: Al Jazzeera America
« Reply #56 on: August 23, 2013, 02:22:57 PM »
Avis' link is just to the Wikipedia entry on the end of the politician's campaign, due to the scandal.

We don't usually send folks to 'booby traps' on the political sites. Sometimes we might link to articles with logical/factual fallicies.. but normally nothing with malicous intent.
<3
And if you check before hand.. you'll see the link address when you hover your icon it Daylilly..

Honest..we're 'tamed' rabid posters.. honest. :D

Online Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: Al Jazzeera America
« Reply #57 on: August 23, 2013, 02:25:11 PM »
Sometimes a browser won't display the link when you hover.  I've had that problem on a couple of other sites (and usually won't click on those links.)

Offline Callie Del NoireTopic starter

Re: Al Jazzeera America
« Reply #58 on: August 23, 2013, 02:27:53 PM »
Sometimes a browser won't display the link when you hover.  I've had that problem on a couple of other sites (and usually won't click on those links.)

Really? I typically check before I click.. guess firefox and chrome have spoiled me. :D

Offline Ephiral

  • The Firebrand Logica | Gender Ninja | Their Toy
  • Liege
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Feb 2013
  • Location: In between the lines, outside of the law, underneath the veil
  • Carpe diem per sol delenda.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Al Jazzeera America
« Reply #59 on: August 23, 2013, 02:35:59 PM »
I recommend going a step further - I use LinkPeelr for Chrome, but I'm guessing something comparable exists for other browsers. Does wonders for knowing where you're going.

Offline Neysha

Re: Al Jazzeera America
« Reply #60 on: August 24, 2013, 05:37:43 PM »
Al Jazeera coming to the US can't be that bad, especially if it's replacing Current TV, which is just wasting space on my channel guide. I'm pretty sure only two people watch Current TV at anytime in the United States, typically those people being the cameraman and the sound guy. I mean from what I've seen of Al Jazeera English Language coverage, it's probably less biased and less left wing reactionary blather then most of Current TV's lineup so it's probably a dramatic improvement when it comes to bias. Added onto that it's a non-US owned or based organization and that means the news will hopefully have a more international flavor since regardless of bias, the current big news media networks naturally have a bias towards focusing on domestic/national issues or international issues as they relate to the United States. Which is fair enough. I'm not going to fault BBC for being British oriented or Russia Today for being utter tripe because it's Russian. :p

But I digress...

The main thing is the English language service and Arabic language service are fairly divergent in their presentation, with the latter being more inflammatory and virulent when it comes to the West and America specifically. The English language service replaces inflammatory words with more neutral ones and they took advantage of downsizing by other media companies in hiring a bunch of BBC World and CNBC journalists to populate their English language programming. I sincerely doubt we'll see Al Jazeera be some trusted and honest source of news in comparison to other Western news companies however. It's largely owned and dominated by Qatari oil barons, so they're no different then the other corporate dominated news media organizations except that they live on the other side of the world geographically and in other respects as well. A large amount of their POV will be one of the Qatari and Gulf State elites, which could be good or bad.

Their coverage of the Arab Spring, especially in Egypt, was quite laudable but it was also in the interest of the Qatari's to see that regime, and others like it fall apart. But it's also clear to see how the bread is buttered now, for example how the transition picture on their Syrian Civil War coverage is a little girl holding a FSA flag and surrounded by a bunch of triumphant protesters and rebels, while one mostly obscured regime flag is hid in the corner. Golly, I wonder who the Qataris/Al Jazeera are backing in that Civil War. But it's similar with their implicit backing of the Muslim Brotherhood and organizations similar to it, which is analogous to Western media support of Israel and whatnot, so its basically pots calling kettles black.

The main thing is AJE backers generally don't give much of a shit about the Americas and Sub-Saharan Africa and East Asia etc in general, so the reporting could be quite clear, neutral and orthodox which might be nice for a change.

I view Al-Jazeera as I imagine many of you view Fox News. They certainly have freedom of speech and can be out there but I have no intention of watching them or encouraging them. I view it as terrorist propaganda just like many view Fox News as right wing propaganda to keep the analogy going.

Perhaps a more fair (not really) assessment would be that while Fox News may not be racist, it's number one with racists. Likewise while Al Jazeera isn't terrorist propaganda, it's the number one media organization for them. :p

Offline Ephiral

  • The Firebrand Logica | Gender Ninja | Their Toy
  • Liege
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Feb 2013
  • Location: In between the lines, outside of the law, underneath the veil
  • Carpe diem per sol delenda.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Al Jazzeera America
« Reply #61 on: August 25, 2013, 01:27:13 AM »
The main thing is the English language service and Arabic language service are fairly divergent in their presentation, with the latter being more inflammatory and virulent when it comes to the West and America specifically. The English language service replaces inflammatory words with more neutral ones and they took advantage of downsizing by other media companies in hiring a bunch of BBC World and CNBC journalists to populate their English language programming. I sincerely doubt we'll see Al Jazeera be some trusted and honest source of news in comparison to other Western news companies however. It's largely owned and dominated by Qatari oil barons, so they're no different then the other corporate dominated news media organizations except that they live on the other side of the world geographically and in other respects as well. A large amount of their POV will be one of the Qatari and Gulf State elites, which could be good or bad.
So. The worst that one can say about them is that they tell the news from the point of view of their owners. This has been true of every news organization since the first pamphlets were printed. If this is all the problem one can cite, they still come out looking better than a huge number of news orgs - including most American ones. (Their bias problem is more severe than some newsrooms I can name, true - but not many. Mostly it seems to come in the form of direction on where to focus coverage, not in what actually gets reported.)

Perhaps a more fair (not really) assessment would be that while Fox News may not be racist, it's number one with racists. Likewise while Al Jazeera isn't terrorist propaganda, it's the number one media organization for them. :p
I still don't think this holds. Again, you're comparing an organization that gave a show to a man who actively funded terrorists to one that... reports news from the middle east. Somehow, the former tends to get ignored or downplayed when people are slinging accusations of terrorism around. Probably because those accusations tend to come from his coworkers.

Online TheGlyphstone

Re: Al Jazzeera America
« Reply #62 on: August 25, 2013, 11:34:45 AM »
I'm not sure what it says about me that I can't tell for certain which network is which in that comparison, since you didn't specify Islamic terrorists.

Offline Ephiral

  • The Firebrand Logica | Gender Ninja | Their Toy
  • Liege
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Feb 2013
  • Location: In between the lines, outside of the law, underneath the veil
  • Carpe diem per sol delenda.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Al Jazzeera America
« Reply #63 on: August 25, 2013, 11:55:52 AM »
I'm not sure what it says about me that I can't tell for certain which network is which in that comparison, since you didn't specify Islamic terrorists.
Fox News gave Oliver North his own show. North, by his own admission, smuggled military ordnance to a state sponsor of terrorism which was under an embargo, and then gave the profits to terrorists in Nicaragua. But the network run by brown people gets accused of supporting terrorists. Funny, that.

Online TheGlyphstone

Re: Al Jazzeera America
« Reply #64 on: August 25, 2013, 12:04:28 PM »
I knew my irony sensor was worth listening to.

Offline Neysha

Re: Al Jazzeera America
« Reply #65 on: August 25, 2013, 07:45:16 PM »
So. The worst that one can say about them is that they tell the news from the point of view of their owners. This has been true of every news organization since the first pamphlets were printed. If this is all the problem one can cite, they still come out looking better than a huge number of news orgs - including most American ones. (Their bias problem is more severe than some newsrooms I can name, true - but not many. Mostly it seems to come in the form of direction on where to focus coverage, not in what actually gets reported.)

I'm sure far worse can be cited in regards to Al Jazeera and in fact it has been mentioned and cited in this thread already but unlike some, I feel no particular desire to throw out lists of criticisms and controversies like some Media Research Center or Media Matters 'watchdog' and sifting through the dirty laundry of those I take ideological issue with while pretending my own undies don't stink. :p So I don't see why my post was taken as citing the 'worst' examples of Al Jazeera when in fact my intention was to simply provide my own POV of the organization in general, which I still think is fairly spot on.

Quote
I still don't think this holds. Again, you're comparing an organization that gave a show to a man who actively funded terrorists to one that... reports news from the middle east. Somehow, the former tends to get ignored or downplayed when people are slinging accusations of terrorism around. Probably because those accusations tend to come from his coworkers.

Hence the parenthetical quote, the dismissive smiley at the end, and the fact I was responding to Retribution in a lighthearted tone.

Quote
Fox News gave Oliver North his own show. North, by his own admission, smuggled military ordnance to a state sponsor of terrorism which was under an embargo, and then gave the profits to terrorists in Nicaragua. But the network run by brown people gets accused of supporting terrorists. Funny, that.

Considering the Qatari government and elites who support Al Jazeera also sponsor terrorist organizations like Al Nusra (sorry allegedly, no one has taken the nation of Qatar to court yet :p ) and has done similar to other Libyan, Syrian, North African and Palestinian groups etc all in the past few years (allegedly), I'm not sure why bringing Oliver North somehow invalidates or exonerates the 'brown people' in question. And the Contras in Nicaragua were freedom fighters, just like Hezbollah was/is. Anyways, Oliver North has already faced his trial and served his sentence. We must stop persecuting and oppressing the freedom fighters and terrorists if we are to ever reconcile our differences in a peaceful and progressive manner, especially if the person in question has already faced their trial and served their sentence.
« Last Edit: August 25, 2013, 07:51:16 PM by Neysha »

Offline Ephiral

  • The Firebrand Logica | Gender Ninja | Their Toy
  • Liege
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Feb 2013
  • Location: In between the lines, outside of the law, underneath the veil
  • Carpe diem per sol delenda.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Al Jazzeera America
« Reply #66 on: August 25, 2013, 07:54:01 PM »
I'm sure far worse can be cited in regards to Al Jazeera and in fact it has been mentioned and cited in this thread already but unlike some, I feel no particular desire to throw out lists of criticisms and controversies like some Media Research Center or Media Matters 'watchdog' and sifting through the dirty laundry of those I take ideological issue with while pretending my own undies don't stink. :p So I don't see why my post was taken as citing the 'worst' examples of Al Jazeera when in fact my intention was to simply provide my own POV of the organization in general, which I still think is fairly spot on.
That's the thing. There's been no real substantiation of this POV.

Considering the Qatari government and elites who support Al Jazeera also sponsor terrorist organizations like Al Nusra (sorry allegedly, no one has taken the nation of Qatar to court yet :p ) and has done similar to other Libyan, Syrian, North African and Palestinian groups etc all in the past few years (allegedly), I'm not sure why bringing Oliver North somehow invalidates or exonerates the 'brown people' in question. And the Contras in Nicaragua were freedom fighters, just like Hezbollah was/is.

Is Al Jazeera the Qatari government? No? Good, then we can stop holding AJ responsible for its actions. Which leaves the "supports terrorism" charges levied against English-speaking Al-Jazeera networks with... zero evidence. As for "freedom fighter" vs "terrorist": An organization with an institutional policy of committing atrocities against civilian populations is a terrorist organization. Period. That's what terrorism is. You don't get to kidnap, torture, rape, and execute non-combatants and get called a "freedom fighter" just because you're on "our" side.

Offline Neysha

Re: Al Jazzeera America
« Reply #67 on: August 25, 2013, 07:59:03 PM »
That's the thing. There's been no real substantiation of this POV.

What POV?

Quote
Is Al Jazeera the Qatari government? No? Good, then we can stop holding AJ responsible for its actions. Which leaves the "supports terrorism" charges levied against English-speaking Al-Jazeera networks with... zero evidence.

I'm not holding Al Jazeera English as responsible. But if the charges are true, then the sponsors of Al Jazeera apparently align with the political and business elite of Qatar and other nations who also sponsor terrorism. Obfuscating the issue with arbitrary diversions and divisions just sounds dishonest, and grossly immoral if the allegations are true. After all, we're talking about the 'brown people' that support AJ, not the physical network itself. I'm sure I agree with you in that the cameras and desks and ex-BBC World journalists whatnot aren't sponsors of terrorism.

Quote
As for "freedom fighter" vs "terrorist": An organization with an institutional policy of committing atrocities against civilian populations is a terrorist organization. Period. That's what terrorism is. You don't get to kidnap, torture, rape, and execute non-combatants and get called a "freedom fighter" just because you're on "our" side.

The Sandinistas never kidnapped, tortured, raped or executed non-combatants? I'm asking this honestly, I have no idea. Maybe they were incredibly 'clean' in their prosecution of a vicious Civil War.
« Last Edit: August 25, 2013, 08:00:58 PM by Neysha »

Offline Ephiral

  • The Firebrand Logica | Gender Ninja | Their Toy
  • Liege
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Feb 2013
  • Location: In between the lines, outside of the law, underneath the veil
  • Carpe diem per sol delenda.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Al Jazzeera America
« Reply #68 on: August 25, 2013, 08:06:32 PM »
What POV?
That Al-Jazeera is "the number one news network for [terrorists]."

I'm not holding Al Jazeera English as responsible. But if the charges are true, then the sponsors of Al Jazeera apparently align with the political and business elite of Qatar and other nations who also sponsor terrorism. Obfuscating the issue with arbitrary diversions and divisions just sounds dishonest, and grossly immoral if the allegations are true. After all, we're talking about the 'brown people' that support AJ, not the physical network itself. I'm sure I agree with you in that the cameras and desks and whatnot aren't supporters of terrorism.
No. The allegations of "terrorist propaganda" and "number one with terrorists" were leveled at Al-Jazeera. You cannot substantiate those claims by pointing to the actions of people outside Al-Jazeera.

The Sandinistas never kidnapped, tortured, raped or executed non-combatants? I'm asking this honestly, I have no idea. Maybe they were incredibly 'clean' in their prosecution of a vicious Civil War.
Completely and totally irrelevant. I am not supporting the Sandinistas, or in fact saying anything about them. I am saying that the Contras not only did these things, but did so as part of a well-documented policy of terror-as-war. This renders them terrorists. It's entirely possible that the Sandinistas were just as bad, or even worse. That in no way absolves the Contras; it just makes the fight between a terrorist government and a terrorist rebellion.

Offline Neysha

Re: Al Jazzeera America
« Reply #69 on: August 25, 2013, 08:30:19 PM »
No. The allegations of "terrorist propaganda" and "number one with terrorists" were leveled at Al-Jazeera. You cannot substantiate those claims by pointing to the actions of people outside Al-Jazeera.

I never made those claims if you paid attention and when challenged, clarified what I felt was obvious.

Furthermore you didn't quote that part of my post, you quoted this post:

Quote from: Neysha
Considering the Qatari government and elites who support Al Jazeera also sponsor terrorist organizations like Al Nusra (sorry allegedly, no one has taken the nation of Qatar to court yet :p ) and has done similar to other Libyan, Syrian, North African and Palestinian groups etc all in the past few years (allegedly), I'm not sure why bringing Oliver North somehow invalidates or exonerates the 'brown people' in question. And the Contras in Nicaragua were freedom fighters, just like Hezbollah was/is.

In which there is no mention of the allegations or substantiations I allegedly made.

Quote
Completely and totally irrelevant. I am not supporting the Sandinistas, or in fact saying anything about them. I am saying that the Contras not only did these things, but did so as part of a well-documented policy of terror-as-war. This renders them terrorists. It's entirely possible that the Sandinistas were just as bad, or even worse. That in no way absolves the Contras; it just makes the fight between a terrorist government and a terrorist rebellion.

Is there a major war you can cite that wasn't between terrorist governments/states or groups in recent history? If not, I'm going to take your differentiation and definition of terrorism as either too generalized to be useful, or too watered down and thus meaningless.
« Last Edit: August 25, 2013, 08:36:30 PM by Neysha »

Offline Kythia

  • Noooo-one Fights like Kythia no-one bites like Kythia
  • Dame
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Oct 2012
  • Gender: Female
  • No one chain smokes Marlboro lights like Kythia
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 1
Re: Al Jazzeera America
« Reply #70 on: August 25, 2013, 08:30:58 PM »
No. The allegations of "terrorist propaganda" and "number one with terrorists" were leveled at Al-Jazeera. You cannot substantiate those claims by pointing to the actions of people outside Al-Jazeera.

Not from Neysha they weren't, in fairness.  Her quote was:

Quote
Perhaps a more fair (not really) assessment would be that while Fox News may not be racist, it's number one with racists. Likewise while Al Jazeera isn't terrorist propaganda, it's the number one media organization for them. :p

So terrorist propaganda doesn't apply, and "number one with terrorists" was explicitly about people outside Al-Jazeera.

Offline Neysha

Re: Al Jazzeera America
« Reply #71 on: August 25, 2013, 08:34:11 PM »
Not from Neysha they weren't, in fairness.  Her quote was:

So terrorist propaganda doesn't apply, and "number one with terrorists" was explicitly about people outside Al-Jazeera.

The reason I made the quotes was because not too long prior I had seen an amusing O'Reilly segment where O'Reilly was bitching about a Simpsons scene where a Fox News Helicopter had the slogan "Not Racist, But Number One With Racists" on the side and after an accident, the helicopter spun out and the pilot screamed. "You're unbalancing the helicopter. That's not fair!" before he crashed and burned.



I thought it would be an amusing reversal.

I WAS WRONG.
« Last Edit: August 25, 2013, 08:35:45 PM by Neysha »

Offline Ephiral

  • The Firebrand Logica | Gender Ninja | Their Toy
  • Liege
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Feb 2013
  • Location: In between the lines, outside of the law, underneath the veil
  • Carpe diem per sol delenda.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: Al Jazzeera America
« Reply #72 on: August 25, 2013, 10:09:07 PM »
...Oh, its you. Kythia, I meant "number one for them", I apologize. Taken from
Likewise while Al Jazeera isn't terrorist propaganda, it's the number one media organization for them. :p

That's a... strong allegation, to put it mildly. But on that note, this is going to go nowhere productive fast, I'm out.

Offline Neysha

Re: Al Jazzeera America
« Reply #73 on: August 25, 2013, 10:44:23 PM »
I'd just like to say... over the past couple days, I've been watching AJE about fifty thousand times more often then I have watched Current TV. My initial suspicions are pretty much correct. It's way better and feels less biased then Current TV and the production values are infinitely better, and the personalities and presentation far more professional.

Overall, if you're a typical ignorant American like myself, you might get the gut feeling that AJE has a liberal POV at least as far as Americans are concerned (who are more right wing then most Western countries on average) but I'd contrast it sharply with Current TV and especially a lot of MSNBC in that while it may feel (or be depending on your ideology) like it has a firm liberal POV, it is far less vociferous and antagonistic then say... your typical MSNBC news analysis show (Tamron Hall, Martin Bashir or Rachel Maddow etc). In fact, it'd be about as liberal as one might consider Shepherd Smith's 'Hard News Hour' on Fox News to be conservative. *pause* Nothing of what I said makes sense... oh well... moving along.

There's a documentary show, Fault Lines, and other shows which do cover interesting stories. One covered the Baltimore Crime scene... which isn't very original and was pretty... by the numbers as documentaries go but another documentary illuminated something I previously had heard nothing about, which was how allegedly Nepali UN Peacekeepers brought a serious cholera epidemic to Haiti. Which definitely goes in line with other stories they covered that others overlooked oftentimes. (such as the after effects of the Deepwater Horizon Disaster or the Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant which went under-reported, of course that is countered by the fact that further coverage of those stories could be construed as furthering the interests of Qatari Oil Barons... but hey, that just means they're as honest as everyone else in news media)

The regular news shows (hard news so to speak) is very reminiscent of BBC news programming which makes sense, considering so many BBC World journalists work for AJE and so... I find few faults with it in general though if you're of a Conservative POV, you might be somewhat irked by the mild 'liberal' POV. This won't be improved by the guest list. So far I've seen interviews with Dr. Cornel West, and Wesley Clark and other 'liberal' or 'progressive' guests. We'll see if that gets diversified. I'm relieved by the lack of 'political analysts' 'pollsters' and other useless 'experts' babbling in news bites as well. I've also seen far more elaborate coverage on the occurrences in Afghanistan and Iraq which has largely been missed in US networks. I'm assuming this is due to the balance of time being focused on actual news reporting as opposed to more 'human interest' stories and 'news opinion' or 'talk show' type of news broadcasts.

The main drawback so far is the production values. It's better then Current TV but woefully behind every other Cable Network. Sometimes I get black screens between shows, scrambled signals, and beyond technical difficulties is the presentation by the journalists. A lot of the videos they show (for example a clip of some Fox News Sunday interview) goes uncited as to who is speaking, the video is blurry and the citation of Fox News Sunday is... weird looking and not just with them but when they play other clips as well. Also to a degree that is noticeable and somewhat distracting, I've seen journalists fidgeting with their earpieces or hair when reporting, awkward pauses during news reports, very hard and obvious edits in recorded interviews, extremely awkward pauses in live interviews, some throat clearing, weird banter and occasionally stilted discussions, banter and most of all news reading. Also one of the main news anchors... no joke... had one of his hands underneath the desk during large portions of the newscast. I noticed it anyways and well... the world wonders. :p

EDIT: They shows a side view of the desk... he rests his hand on his knee a lot apparently... or at least he did for that shot. ;)

And the commercials on AJE about how awesome AJE is, are shitty examples of self promotion. Sorry... :p

But hopefully they'll work through all of that.

All in all, AJE seems pretty decent, albeit still a rough product. For National news, the US Cable News Networks might be best and especially things like sports, human interest stories, and a fair bit of financial/business news. For international news though, I choose BBC Middle East... I mean Al Jazeera English. ;)

...Oh, its you. Kythia, I meant "number one for them", I apologize. Taken from
That's a... strong allegation, to put it mildly. But on that note, this is going to go nowhere productive fast, I'm out.

This was in the same post in which I stated of AJE:

Quote from: Neysha
from what I've seen of Al Jazeera English Language coverage, it's probably less biased and less left wing reactionary blather then most of Current TV's lineup so it's probably a dramatic improvement when it comes to bias. Added onto that it's a non-US owned or based organization and that means the news will hopefully have a more international flavor since regardless of bias, the current big news media networks naturally have a bias towards focusing on domestic/national issues or international issues as they relate to the United States.

Quote from: Neysha
A large amount of their POV will be one of the Qatari and Gulf State elites, which could be good or bad.

Quote from: Neysha
Their coverage of the Arab Spring, especially in Egypt, was quite laudable

Quote from: Neysha
it's similar with their implicit backing of the Muslim Brotherhood and organizations similar to it, which is analogous to Western media support of Israel and whatnot, so its basically pots calling kettles black.

Quote from: Neysha
The main thing is AJE backers generally don't give much of a shit about the Americas and Sub-Saharan Africa and East Asia etc in general, so the reporting could be quite clear, neutral and orthodox which might be nice for a change.

And yet you ignore all of that... and focus on what was obviously an irreverent comment that even if taken literally, would require a stretch to be considered stating AJE is a front of terrorists or whatever your accusing me of. It's almost as if... you were looking for a... discussion. ;)

But I digress...

It was going nowhere, because you refuse to listen. You can't even put up the full quote.

Quote from: Neysha
Perhaps a more fair (not really) assessment would be that while Fox News may not be racist, it's number one with racists. Likewise while Al Jazeera isn't terrorist propaganda, it's the number one media organization for them. :p

Even with the single quote you focused on I tried to explain away with my first response which was also ignored.

Quote from: Neysha
Hence the parenthetical quote, the dismissive smiley at the end, and the fact I was responding to Retribution in a lighthearted tone.

And my second time explaining it. (also ignored)

Quote from: Neysha
The reason I made the quotes was because not too long prior I had seen an amusing O'Reilly segment where O'Reilly was bitching about a Simpsons scene where a Fox News Helicopter had the slogan "Not Racist, But Number One With Racists" on the side and after an accident, the helicopter spun out and the pilot screamed. "You're unbalancing the helicopter. That's not fair!" before he crashed and burned.



I thought it would be an amusing reversal.

I WAS WRONG.

« Last Edit: August 25, 2013, 10:50:37 PM by Neysha »

Offline ThePrince

Re: Al Jazzeera America
« Reply #74 on: August 26, 2013, 09:54:38 AM »
The only news I listen today is either about the Rebublican party imploding or internet space war politics. So I doubt I'll be picking up Al Jazzeera. But there decent enough folks.

I dont have cable, but I used to watch streams of there programing. If they get into covering US politics, I'll be highly interested.