industryterm:satellite channels

  • Yemen How the Houthis Became “Shi‘a” | Middle East Research and Information Project

    http://www.merip.org/mero/mero012718

    by Anna Gordon , Sarah E. Parkinson | published January 27, 2018
    On December 4, 2017, Houthi rebels in Yemen killed ‘Ali ‘Abdallah Salih, their erstwhile ally and the country’s former president. It was a dramatic reversal: Parts of the national army loyal to Salih had fought alongside the Houthis for nearly three years in Yemen’s ongoing civil war. But shortly before his death Salih turned against the Houthis, making overtures to their opponents, the Yemeni administration-in-exile led by President ‘Abd Rabbu Mansour Hadi and its backers in the wealthy Gulf Arab monarchies, primarily Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. In remarks broadcast on Saudi-funded satellite channels on December 3, Salih accused the Houthis of intolerable “recklessness.” If the Saudis and Emiratis were to lift their blockade on Yemen, he continued, then “we will turn the page.” The next day, Salih was killed.

    The Houthis’ history with Salih is far more complex than this concluding episode would imply. Until Salih’s ouster from the presidency in late 2011, it was his regime that had confronted Houthi rebellions, in six rounds of combat beginning in 2004. But another legacy of the wars of the 2000s is particularly salient for its influence upon global understanding of the current, catastrophic Yemen conflict—the Salih regime’s invention of the claim that the Houthis are “Iranian-backed Shi‘a.”

    False Coding
    The first problem with calling the Houthis “Shi‘a” is that, technically, they are not Shi‘a, at least not in the way that most people understand contemporary Shi‘ism. Shi‘ism is distinguished from Sunnism, the other main branch of Islam, primarily by the Shi‘i belief that Muhammad’s rightful heirs as religio-political leaders, or Imams, of the Muslim community are the Prophet’s son-in-law ‘Ali and his progeny. Most Houthis are Zaydis, that is, members of a Shi‘i denomination that split off from the main body in the eighth century because of a dispute over recognition of the Fifth Imam. Zaydis do not believe, as most Shi‘a do, that the imamate must be handed down through a particular line of ‘Ali’s descendants. Today about 85 percent of Shi‘a worldwide, including the vast majority of Iranian and Iraqi Shi‘a, and the Shi‘a of Lebanon, follow what is called Twelver Shi‘ism: They believe that the Twelfth Imam was the last legitimate successor to Muhammad and ‘Ali, and that one day he will return from occultation, or hiding, to restore just rule and battle evil. Erasing the distinction between Zaydis and Twelvers—something akin to calling the Copts Roman Catholics—may not seem terribly consequential. But it has profound political consequences for the war in Yemen, given evolving alliance structures and the ambitions of regional powers, particularly the Saudis.

  • Hack, fake story expose real tensions between Qatar, Gulf
    https://apnews.com/f5da3293be18401a954d48249f75394e

    While Qatar quickly denied the comments attributed to ruling emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, Saudi-owned satellite channels repeatedly aired them throughout the day Wednesday. The incident revived suspicions that exploded into the open three years when several Gulf nations pulled their ambassadors from Qatar over similar worries about its politics.

    The alleged hack happened early on Wednesday morning and hours later, the website of the Qatar News Agency still was not accessible.

    The fake article quoted Sheikh Tamim as calling Iran an “Islamic power” and saying Qatar’s relations with Israel were “good” during a military ceremony.

    Online footage of Qatari state television’s nightly newscast from Tuesday showed clips of Sheikh Tamim at the ceremony with the anchor not mentioning the comments, though a scrolling ticker at the bottom of the screen had the alleged fake remarks. They included calling Hamas “the legitimate representative of the Palestinian people,” as well as saying Qatar had “strong relations” with Iran and the United States.

    “Iran represents a regional and Islamic power that cannot be ignored and it is unwise to face up against it,” the ticker read at one point. “It is a big power in the stabilization of the region.”

    The hackers also purportedly took over the news agency’s Twitter feed and posted alleged quotes from Qatar’s foreign minister accusing Arab nations of fomenting a plot against his country. A series of tweets said Qatar had ordered its ambassadors to withdraw from Bahrain, Egypt, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates over the plot. The tweets were later deleted.

  • The destructive legacy of Arab liberals | Joseph Massad http://electronicintifada.net/content/destructive-legacy-arab-liberals/14385

    Ironies abound. Terrified by the popular Arab schadenfreude expressed in massive demonstrations across the Arab world in solidarity with Iraq, demonstrations that did not sympathize with Kuwait and other oil-producing Gulf countries, the illiberal Saudis launched pan-Arab newspapers and satellite channels that bombarded the Arab world with pro-Saudi and pro-US liberal propaganda to reverse this Arab anti-imperial nationalist tide that also opposed the Arab regimes allied with US imperialism.

    Intellectuals from across the Arab world joined the effort, abandoning old leftist, communist, Nasserist and Islamist positions and adopted the much, much more profitable pro-US and pro-Israel liberal line politically, and the neoliberal economic order being globalized. By the dawn of the new century, the Saudis and the Americans issued new orders to their media and agents to spread an unprecedented sectarian campaign against Shiites inside and outside the Arab world.

    The campaign would be first articulated in 2004 by the new and neoliberal King Abdullah of Jordan, a self-styled “liberal” monarch who possesses absolute and unchecked power. The king expressed his and others’ fear of the rise of a “Shiite crescent” in the region.

    It is in this regional context that Syrian liberals joined the fray. Upon the long-awaited death of President Hafez al-Assad in 2000, they launched what they called a “Damascus Spring” from intellectual salons and from the halls of the US embassy in Damascus, whose cultural attaché was a main sponsor of their “Spring.”

    While they would soon be suppressed by the authoritarian regime of Bashar al-Assad, Syrian liberals would re-emerge in 2011 claiming to speak for “revolutionary” forces that have, with the full participation of the repressive Assad regime, caused the death of hundreds of thousands and destroyed the country.

    The US ambassador would also aid in their efforts by making appointments and assigning roles within the Syrian exile opposition. Not unlike their Iraqi counterparts, the Syrian liberals — secularists and Islamists alike — called for imperial intervention in the name of democracy and to end the Syrian dictatorship. They got what they wished for in the form of the draconian Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS — also known as ISIL or just “Islamic State”).

    Not to be outdone, Lebanese liberals and former Lebanese leftists, communists and Arab nationalists would also have their own “Spring” following the assassination of the corrupt and corrupting neoliberal billionaire, Lebanese Prime Minister Rafiq al-Hariri in 2005. They would help launch a local sectarian anti-Shiite campaign in the country and would call for more imperial intervention to save them from their powerful Syrian, but not their more dangerous Israeli, neighbor. They would also relaunch anti-Palestinian campaigns by cheering the Lebanese army’s destruction of the Palestinian refugee camp of Nahr al-Bared in 2007. While their country was under heavy Israeli bombardment in 2006, many of these liberals cheered on the Israelis privately and publicly and prayed for the destruction of Hizballah fighters to restore a “liberal” Lebanese order that they longed for.

  • Egypt channels to suspend programming for pro-military protests -

    Ahram Online
    http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent/5/32/77340/Arts--Culture/Film/Egypt-channels-to-suspend-programming-for-promilit.aspx

    A number of satellite channels, including CBC, Dream, Al-Hayah, Al-Mehwer, Al-Kaqera Wel Nas, OnTV, Tahrir TV and MBC Masr, have announced that their entertainment programming on Friday will be cancelled to cover expected mass pro-army demonstrations.

    The channels will suspend their regular Ramadan programming, which features soap operas, religious programmes, sit-coms and a large number of commercials, to broadcast the minute-by-minute events of the day.

  • Syrian Newspapers Emerge to Fill Out War Reporting

    By NEIL MacFARQUHAR
    The New York Times
    Published: April 1, 2013

    “ANTAKYA, Turkey — Absi Smesem became the editor in chief of a new weekly Syrian newspaper hoping to leave behind what he disparaged as the “Facebook phase” of the uprising. The tall tales and outright misinformation that tainted so much reporting from Syria convinced him that more objective coverage was essential to bolster the effort to overthrow President Bashar al-Assad. Too often, he said, he could not believe what passed for news on popular satellite channels, like the Qatari-owned Al Jazeera and the Saudi-runAl Arabiya, both staunch opposition supporters. The two channels relied heavily on unfiltered reports from local activists hired as correspondents, or, failing that, grabbed whatever they , Binnish, in northern Syria, was under siege by the Syrian Army, he said, one activist-cum-correspondent used the local expression “Dabahoona dbah,” which in Arabic literally means “We are being slaughtered” — but which the people of northern Syria use to mean “We cannot breathe.” Within minutes, a breaking-news headline scrolled across the television screen saying Syrian government forces were committing a massacre in Binnish. “There are no objective sources of information on either side, neither with the regime nor the rebels,” said Mr. Smesem, 46, a veteran reporter with graying hair and an easy laugh.” (…)

    Hala Droubi contributed reporting from Antakya, and Sebnem Arsu from Gaziantep, Turkey.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/02/world/middleeast/syrian-newspapers-emerge-to-fill-out-war-reporting.html?pagewanted=1&_r=0

    #Facebook #Sham_newspaper #Al_Ahd #Free_Syria #Brigades

    • Les médias, comme ceux qui les suivent, auront été mis à rude épreuve pendant la « révolution » puis la « guerre » en Syrie. Dans le suivi médiatique des événements, la palette est large qui va de la rareté de l’information à la désinformation en passant par le « wishful thinking » ou la distorsion. Un bilan de la manière dont les événements en Syrie ont été rapportés des deux côtés reste à faire. En attendant, il aura fallu apprendre à aimer puis à se distancier des actions de l’Armée libre syrienne, se gausser des mails échangés entre la famille Assad et un grand magasin londonien puis se demander si tous étaient authentiques, prendre pour argent comptant des articles qui ne reflétaient que les positions nationales de tel ou tel pays, se demander s’il fallait dire « révolutionnaires » ou « groupes armés, « combattants de l’intérieur » ou « conspiration de l’extérieur », « rebelles » ou « insurgés », « déserteurs » ou « combattants de la liberté ». Fallait-il, faute de temps ou de moyens, reprendre aveuglement les très nombreuses informations que Rami Abdulrahman - responsable de « l’Observatoire syrien des Droits de l’homme »- transmettaient à la presse occidentale depuis son domicile de Coventry ? A-t-on eu raison de ne porter qu’une attention discrète au rapport de la Ligue arabe dont les observateurs, dépêchés en Syrie fin 2011 début 2012, avaient déjà noté des distorsions entre réalité du terrain et image véhiculée dans les médias internationaux ?