Explosion of English channels
A steady trickle of media people has been leaking out of Dubai over the past few months and into Doha, with Al Jazeera English scalping whatever meagre talent it can find. With the channel paying fat, "old-style" salaries to many employees (allegedly $120,000 tax free + accommodation for bulletin producers) the defection is not surprising.
Not to be bettered by its Qatari rival, Saudi-owned-but-Dubai-based MBC is also planning an English news channel, MBC5, as well as an English news programme on its (Arabic) MBC flagship channel.
Just as long as they all keep themselves in line. With today's alarming news that cretinous US presidency-usurper Bush wanted to bomb Al Jazeera only last year, TV hacks across the Gulf will be bunkering down in their newsrooms.
Not to be bettered by its Qatari rival, Saudi-owned-but-Dubai-based MBC is also planning an English news channel, MBC5, as well as an English news programme on its (Arabic) MBC flagship channel.
Just as long as they all keep themselves in line. With today's alarming news that cretinous US presidency-usurper Bush wanted to bomb Al Jazeera only last year, TV hacks across the Gulf will be bunkering down in their newsrooms.
Labels: media
47 Comments:
bush can eat my bush.
did u hear what he said during his visit to china. "if china opens the door just a crack, it can never be closed. guess what he was talking about?
no u pervert, DEMONACRACY.
what an illiterate foooool
i find an accusation of illiteracy from someone who uses the term "u" an entertaining proposition.
These allegations about Bush were originally published in the Mirror in the UK (www.mirror.co.uk), which is not the most highbrow of publications - however, the circumstances of the leaking of the memo appear authentic. Does anyone know if there is a copy of this memo on the internet? It would make fascinating reading, not to mention confirm all those rumours about the mental state of said President.
sorry, to post this here, but has flickr been banned again?
Jane
Oh no - it looks like it might have been.
Just after I signed up for it for the metroblogging thing. FFS.
maybe you should do another post on it SD. they just keep backtracking on their decisions.
Much as I loathe the proxy, I can see why they're blocking Flickr, given they have a blanket policy (if very unevenly and clumsily applied) against dating and networking sites.
Far more goes on at Flickr than simple photo sharing. I can't really describe here what someone showed me, as it is one of The Things That Shall Not Be Mentioned (and no, it's not pr0n, think along more regal lines) but after seeing it, I figured poor Flickr's days may be numbered again.
"allegedly $120,000 tax free + accommodation for bulletin producers" - where can I apply ? :)
cant sd ban just tags. i have just paid out for my pro subscription. such a pain. will the new telecom operator be as stupid and when the hell will this happen?
why are you scared sd? you never used to be scared of speaking your mind. has something happened to you?
Ever since I started blogging there have been several no-go topics, and one of them is any gossip about the private lives of the royal families.
So I'll speak my mind on most things, but there are certain things one just cannot touch upon here.
I can see why they're blocking Flickr, given they have a blanket policy (if very unevenly and clumsily applied) against dating and networking sites.
Are you ready for Shaadi?
with so many muslims in the west, you won't get away with anything
what are the other no go topics? is there a specific reason why flickr got banned? do you know what it is sd? code?
I have always wondered why it is that the general pay of an jounalist is considerably lower(espcially when you think of how much risk you have to take) than that of bankers and lawyers. It really isn`t fair.
to samuraisam, go decapitate ur head. i think everyone knows what u stands for and it's certainly NOT u.
bolcking Flickr sucks!
do you think letters to 7days et al. might convince etishat to change their minds?
Is it worth a go or a waste of time?
i am intrigued by all of this. i would reckon that this is a temporary ban until etisalat are able to ban the 'problem' photos.
What would be nice of etisalat is if they could provid a page of pages that are obviously not porn but have been banned - and the reason that they have been banned.
but obviously, that would require a non uae degree education for someone to think about.
So, the Mirror (!!) prints a story about a leaked memo saying that Bush wanted to bomb Al-Jazeera, it is reprinted all over the Middle East and swallowed as virtual fact by locals and expats alike before the ink has dried?
Little wonder that the Americans stand accused of not taking prevailing opinion in the Middle East seriously.
buhooo! actually i blame europeans on what america has become today. you morons let the american taste the delicious colonizing meal..now you are pissed at them because they beat you in your own game...what a bunch of wankers
Tim - from what I have read, UK officials aren't denying it but were trying to claim that Bush's remarks were "tongue in cheek" (but it's a pretty dumbfk thing to joke about).
However those that have access to the full transcripts, which hopefully will get printed soon, say there is no mistaking the serious tone.
Does it actually surprise you that he would say something like this? Because it doesn't surprise me at all. Look at Bush's current mindset, and US policy generally, it is easily this blind and this arrogant and this stupid to suggest such a plan.
And quite apart from Bush, there are plenty of Arab governments who would be happy to blitz Al Jaz.
didn't they 'mistakenly' bomb one al jazeera station in afghanistan?
'Little wonder that the Americans stand accused of not taking prevailing opinion in the Middle East seriously.'
The Mirrors credibility issues aside, all parties involved in this issue are taking the allegations seriously enough, suggesting that there could be as much smoke as there is fire on this issue.
Granted these remarks may or may not be true, but Bush is defintely capable of making these remarks.
the frightening thing is that the 'world's most powerful man' could also be the world's dumbest man. I've yet to see a Western leader so devoid of intelligence. How did 150 million Americans vote for this imbecile .. a question that will haunt them for a long time !
Does it actually surprise you that he would say something like this?
As anything more than a remark which nobody could take seriously, yes.
Look at Bush's current mindset, and US policy generally, it is easily this blind and this arrogant and this stupid to suggest such a plan.
On the contrary, I don't see US foreign policy to be arrogant or stupid, hence I am rather surprised. I mean, how exactly would he bomb a Qatar based press office? Simply fly a B-52 over it and hope nobody asked any questions? Consider the practicalities of this, and the fact that the US has been extremely wary of bombing a press office since it did so in Belgrade in 1999, and the entire thing sounds preposterous, as are most things associated with Bush which don't come from anything which could reasonably called hard evidence.
These comments are up there with the "God told me to invade Iraq! quotes which everybody also took seriously, and did not deny. Those of us who consider Bush to be something other than an imbecilic chimp tend to shake our heads in wonder at what point some people will actually question the authenticity of "proof" of Bush's supposed stupidity.
The Mirrors credibility issues aside, all parties involved in this issue are taking the allegations seriously enough, suggesting that there could be as much smoke as there is fire on this issue.
As far as I can see, the White House has dismissed it as preposterous and Downing Street is standing by its official policy of not commenting on leaks.
The only people taking it seriously seem to be opposition politicians and the anti-war press.
Tim, this story is now the lead in the Guardian (www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1648590,00.html) so I think we can assume that there was a memo about this.
I think it's different from "God told me to invade Iraq" which is a post-facto rationalisation, rather than an intention to bomb downtown Doha, which he had to be talked out of by Blair!
The fact that the Brit Govt is taking legal action on this indicates that they are quite worried! Surely the full transcript of the memo must be on the internet *somewhere* by now?!
Tim, you don't need to shake your head at nothing.
"So, the Mirror (!!) prints a story about a leaked memo saying that Bush wanted to bomb Al-Jazeera, it is reprinted all over the Middle East and swallowed as virtual fact by locals and expats alike before the ink has dried?"
I assure you there are enough Bush-haters around here to swallow ANYTHING said about him, as long as it's bad. When the "God told me to invade Iraq" story was published in City Times (of all papers!!) with a HUGE picture of Bush next to the statement in quotes and HUGE type, about 80% of the people in my office were running around horrified, waving the newspaper and crying out, "Have you seen this? Have you seen this? Have you seen this?"
SD has done some admirable work on this blog in raising some excellent issues, but when it comes to Bush, she's rather like those people in my office. The "in" word for it these days is "agenda".
Face it, she's human like the rest of us.
I make no secret of the fact that I despise Bush, but this blog has no specific anti-Bush agenda, it's not about American politics but about life in the UAE.
I linked to this story because it was:
1. Relevant to the subject (Al Jazeera)
2. Shocking
3. Current (ie breaking news)
I would have linked to it just the same if it had been Hosni Mubarak or the King of Jordan in the memo, instead of Bush.
SD- when you got blocked did they contact you to say there were things you weren't allowed to blog about?
SD: you're upfront about not liking Bush, which is good. And I accept those 3 points. And hey, it's your own blog, you're allowed to have as much fun in it as you like (others do).
I wanted to make this other comment, but failed.
Regarding this:
"did u hear what he said during his visit to china. "if china opens the door just a crack, it can never be closed." (Speaking about Bush).
One cannot miss the derisive tone. I did see Bush on TV making this statement. Here's my view:
Not only is it spot on, it's likely to become historic.
Not because of anything America is about to do, but rather because of something too many governments and political systems have ignored too many times to their own peril: people power. When that power is coupled with new-found concepts of personal freedom and human dignity, the results are beyond anything we can have imagined.
And the fact is, China has already opened the door a crack. There's no closing it now.
No. I have never been contacted in any official government way about this blog.
If they did contact me, I would publish their letter on this blog, or any other approaches they made to me, and most likely comply with what it ordered (as I'd have little choice or face prosecution/deportation).
Mr Newman,
As SD says, this is about life in the UAE, let's not get into defending Bush's madness. You're in a tribe of one there, mate
Who wants to read about the private lives of UAE royals, any way? Is it really of that much interest?
El Condo - SD: you're upfront about not liking Bush, which is good.
I'm probably far too upfront about many of the things I don't like, which isn't good!
;)
As SD says, this is about life in the UAE, let's not get into defending Bush's madness. You're in a tribe of one there, mate
If I was using this blog as a platform to defend "Bush's madness" (whatever that is), then I might be able to see where you are coming from.
But as things stand, I'll assume you're new to this blog and have therefore not realised that I comment on life in the UAE rather more than I comment on anything else.
Tim,
Well apologies, but I'm certainly not new to this.....I'm now based back in the UK and Bush's plans for Al Jazeera certainly seme to have been taken very seriously by all the UK media. Now I'm getting on to Bush and off the subject of the UAE...... :-(
Just some speculation....
When the authorities here want to shut down something that's causing them embarrassment, they rarely do it "officially". It's more likely to be an "offer that cannot be refused" although it will be offered in a rather indirect, quite oblique way.
These guys are smooth, baby...
Tim, All UK newspapers have been threatened with being prosecuted under the Official Secrets Act if they dare print any more from the memo, the two guys who leaked it are looking at 15 years for doing so.
The memo exists. That is a fact. Bush did say it. That is a fact, what is open to interpretation is how serious he was.
Now, a friend of mine (works for the Mirror) has seen the document and assures me that the transcript shows it was indeed a 'heated exchange'.
As for how it would be done, well it would be difficult, and at that early stage it is unlikely Bush would have thought about the logistics (especially as he didn't seem to have thought about the logistics of the entire war), but remember they've managed to 'accidentally' bomb Al Jazeera offices in Kabul and Baghdad (they were even given the co-ordinates of the Baghdad bureau to avoid such an incident)
I have to agree Tim Newman for perhaps the first and last time ever, but think about it. How stupid is the idea of bombing Doha, the city of one of the coalitions alies? How could they get away with launching an attack on Qatar because of one newstation.
With that said, we all know how stupid Bush is and he could of perhaps executed the attack under his 'Shoot 1st, ask questions 2nd' policy and used some spin aftewards about Bin Laden and WMD's afterwards.
He's such a fucking caveman thinking twat but i am not sure what that makes the people who voted him in TWICE are.
Local hero, I agree with your general point, but in fact Bush was *not* elected twice - the first time, the Supreme Court stopped the Florida recount, which Gore was going to win, and the second time, the electronic "voting" machines in Ohio gave that state to Bush, even though exit polls gave it to Kerry (you can confirm this by doing detailed precinct searches, comparing the 2000 Gore win with the 2004 Bush "win" - an implausibly high 70/80% of "new" voters "voted" for Bush even though the state as a whole split almost 50/50).
Local hero, I agree with your general point, but in fact Bush was *not* elected twice...
Now we're into the moonbat stuff. What was I saying about not taking Middle East opinions seriously?
If we're going to believe that Bush cheated his way to 2 elections, he's going to bomb a radio station in Qatar whilst basing his army from there, and that stories of leaked memos reported in anti-war papers constitute facts about what Bush said, then I'm afraid I must concede defeat and retire from the discussion.
Have we recalled that not so long ago the
Mirror was hoaxed.
And Al Jazeera has been labeled a CIA front.
Can we assume that Tim Newman and John B. Chilton are very clever pseudonyms?
Guys, guys.....it looks bad, but let's face it: Bush cheated his way into two successive terms. The American public was fooled, but we ain't that stupid. (And they believe they have a democracy!)
If you're gonna win, do it like Saddam did: 99% of the vote with 100% voter turnout. Now that's what I call a democratically elected president. (I wonder what became of the 1% that allegedly didn't vote for him. Or maybe they were just dimpled chads.)
Technically Bush only cheated his way to his first term.
His re-election to his second term can be attributed to approximately 150 million Americans. smart bunch of people eh?
el condo is an idiot!
Post a Comment
<< Home