Obama on Al Arabiya: more discussion (updated).

"Obama could have talked to Al Hurra, the U.S. taxpayer-sponsored Middle East TV Network that was founded on Valentine's Day 2004. A sit-down on Al Hurra would have been a boon to that fledgling network, but it's not the station with a tag line that reads, 'Your leading source for news in the Middle East.' He was wise not to choose Al Jazeera, though it is still the most popular satellite television news channel in the Middle East. Al Jazeerah's ratings jumped even higher during its around-the-clock coverage of the Gaza conflict. Nevertheless, Al Jazeera would have been a political hot potato and this president seeks to remain Mr. Cool. ... Al Arabiya stepped in to fill a void between Al Hurra, which still has a marginal audience in most parts of the Middle East, and Al Jazeera. That void could be called by a number of identifiers: neutral, central, moderate. There is no U.S. media network to compare here, and as a station owned in part by the Saudi government, being neutral and objective may be a tall order." Nancy Snow, Huffington Post, 28 January 2009.
     "Not only was it his first TV interview from the White House since his inauguration on January 20, but his administration had picked a Dubai-based Arabic-language news channel and not CNN, Fox, BBC – insert big western media outlet here." Menassat, 28 January 2009.
     "Yousef Munayyer, American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee: 'If the goal was to reach the Arab and Muslim world, one would think that he would speak to them through Al Jazeera, which has a much greater and more diverse market share than Al Arabiya, which has the majority of its viewership in the Arabian Gulf nations.' ... Chester Crocker, Georgetown University: 'This is public diplomacy. It is mood music. Muslim audiences — as the president said in the interview — will ultimately watch U.S. actions and decisions, not just U.S. interviews.' ... Bradley Blakeman, Republican strategist: 'The president was pandering and weak.'" Politico, 29 January 2009.
     "Al Arabiya - Female announcer indicates pride that Obama chose their channel to give his first interview. Opinions about the interview were mixed. Shot of the inauguration with additional comment that US power has changed. ... We are told that Arabs were usually last in the rounds of dialog. Anchor reiterates that Obama has done something unprecedented." From review of Arab television stations by Aimee Kligman, Examiner.com, 28 January 2009.
     "President Obama deserves congratulations for his interview on Al Arabiya, a network that has shown responsibility and professionalism, lately in stark contrast lately to Al Jazeera. As someone who has dealt with all the major Arabic language stations, I suggest that his next interview should be on Radio Sawa, the U.S.-taxpayer-funded radio network that is aimed mainly at young people, with a mix of music and public affairs. It's the largest single Arabic-language net in the Mideast and has a big audience in some critical markets, including the West Bank, where it's broadcast on five separate FM stations. Next, he should do a call-in show, "Roundtable With You," on Persian News Network, a U.S.-funded satellite stream in Farsi that reaches more than 28 percent of Iranians each week. PNN is the best way directly to reach the Iranian people. ... After that, perhaps Al Jazeera and Alhurra." James K. Glassman, The Washington Note, 28 January 2009. Mr. Glassman, previously chairman of the Broadcasting Board of Governors and recently departed as undersecretary of State for public diplomacy, does not mention that Persian News Network is a service of the Voice of America.
     "With all due respect, if Team Obama was really dumb enough to play one Arab media outlet off another so blatantly, then they've failed to learn one lesson of the previous administration. George Bush also favored Arabiya over Jazeera, granting it an interview in 2004, and that earned Arabiya the reputation of Western tool. (In fairness, top Bush cabinet officials often spoke to Jazeera.) In this sense, I believe history is repeating itself: Obama's people went with Al Arabiya because it was not likely to subject the President to the tough interrogation he would've gotten on Al Jazeera. ... Unfortunately, Al Arabiya's Washington bureau chief did not even raise the subject of Hamas with President Obama!" Aaron Barnhart, TV Barn blog, Kansas City Star, 29 January 2009.
     Update: "It is regrettable, however, that Obama did not deliver his first interview to an Arab audience on al-Hurra, the U.S. government-funded Arabic-language satellite channel. Al-Hurra's comparative advantage in the Arab television market should be that it is the 'must-see' station to learn about U.S. politics, policy, society, and culture; this status can only be achieved if the president, the White House, and the administration writ large acts in partnership with this mission. U.S. taxpayers deserve full cooperation between various arms of government in contributing to al-Hurra's success. Even though the Bush administration did not adequately support al-Hurra in this effort, the station still registered significant gains in viewership over the past two years, as evidenced by both independent observers and results from television ratings firms. It would be sad if the al-Arabiya interview signals similar disinterest in al-Hurra's success on the part of the new administration." Robert Satloff, host of Dakhil Washington, a public affairs talk show on Alhurra, Washington Institute for Near East Policy, 29 January 2009.
     "The U.S.-funded Al Hurra was not an option because it is not permitted to broadcast in the U.S. and has a negligible audience share in the Middle East, according to a study by Shibley Telhami at the University of Maryland. Essentially Obama had to decide between the two leading Arabic satellite news providers: the Dubai-based Al Arabiya, part of the Saudi-owned MBC group, and Al Jazeera, the pioneering Doha-based network funded by Qatar’s Sheikh Hamad Khalifa al-Thani. ... 'From the perspective of the American government, Al Jazeera is considered sympathetic to extremist groups and extremist elements in the Muslim and the Arab world and Obama was not going to give credibility to a satellite station that promotes extremism and sides with the negative forces that the U.S. is trying to address,' Salmeh Nematt, international editor of the Daily Beast and former Washington bureau chief for al-Hayat, said to AlArabiya.net. 'This is why he chose Al Arabiya, a prominent satellite channel that is professional.'" Courtney C. Radsch, Al Arabiya, 29 January 2009.
     "Should Obama have gone to Jazeera instead? Perhaps not, for both domestic reasons (the criticism he would expose himself to, even if unwarranted) and because there are genuine US complaints about Jazeera. But at some later point, he should go to Jazeera - especially if it is to pitch a major conflict resolution initiative in the region. At the end of the day, despite its bias, Arabiya is the number two pan-Arab stations. (In many countries, like the rest of the world, Arabs actually watch their national TV stations most.) Obama’s next move should be to disband al-Hurra. It’s a useless waste of money." The Arabist blog, 28 January 2009.
     See previous posts:
Why Al Arabiya and not Alhurra? (28 January)
Why Al Arabiya and not Al Jazeera? (28 January)
Obama selects Al Arabiya for first television interview. (27 January) Posted: 30 Jan 2009 Permalink Print