Media Portrayal of the Situation in the Middle East?

PermaBanned

PermaBanned

PermaBanned

Soldato
Joined
7 Jul 2009
Posts
16,234
Location
Newcastle/Aberdeen
Surely i can't be the only one who can't understand the mainstream media's portrayal of the situation in the middle east at the minute? They spend half the year covering stories that really should not be classed as 'news' and when something interesting that effects a huge number of people comes along they ignore it for the most part, and provide pitiful coverage of it when they do show it.

The revolution in Tunisia is on the verge of toppling the state altogether. The neighbourhood self-defence committees and work committees have the potential to become the soviets of the revolution, making it possible that the country will soon become a Socialist one. Agree with this or not, you must admit that the implications of such an occurrence would reach all over the globe, and as such should be covered by the mainstream media. But what do we get? A few shots of crowds, or fire, or disappointed tourists, then quickly cut to a story about sports presenters or MPs, in such a way that makes you think if they meant for you to forget about it - i didn't expect Gil Scott-Heron's song to be taken this literally! :p

Perhaps they're afraid of the domino effect, once again. Rightly so, perhaps - the events in Tunisia have already awoken the masses in Algeria and Egypt, seizing the opportunity to overthrow oppressive and exploitative dictatorships that have been backed by the West for years. If we truly were free then surely we would be in solidarity with such causes, not portraying them in a negative light (in reality, it's the police who undertook the majority of the violence and looting), if at all.
 
I think you find if the outcome of Tunisia doesn't end with more veils or beards the CIA will continue this method right across North Africa :)

But what do you expect UK news is terrible, BBC more than most is utter tosh they are so biased on a number of issues. watch SKY 512 or 514 :)
 
Last edited:
I like playing Superewza Bingo when you post. Everyone can play!

Mainstream media - check!
Revolution - check!
Socialist - check!
Reference to music/person that was around before you were born - check!
Awoken the masses - check!
Overthrow - check!
Oppressive regime/dictatorship - check!
Free- check!
Solidarity - check!
Police - check!

BINGO!
 
No, it was aimed at the OP as you'll find that your post contains none of the words I listed.

e : ah, I see you've edited out your comment.
 
Last edited:
Nobody cares that the Arabs are revolting. Why don't you go and join their "revolution" and see if they care. :p
 
The OP seems to be advocating getting rid of oppressive regimes, and replacing them with socialists.

This poster marvels at the levels of his delusion.
 
The MSM needs to play it safe until they can figure out how things are going to turn out, especially in terms of Western relations with the new government. Once they are briefed of the official western position to the new Tunisia, then they will jump on the bandwagon.

Al Jazeera has already been providing brilliant coverage of the situation there, as well as the massive story about the Palestine Papers - which afaik has not been covered extensively here.
 
This is in relation to the public interest and the news sphere.

Basically an interest in a story is influenced by the proximity if the population to the events, if it involves the 'elite nations/persons, if where the event occurred has a historical link to us or if it's unexpected. The revolution in Tunisia was unexpected but it did not involve an elite nation/person nor was it close in proximity to us and there is not really a historical link between the UK and Tunisia. That's why, after the initial revolution, media interest quickly dwindled. The home audience is more influenced by the sexism row than a revolution in a poor African state.
 
Superewza said:
Surely i can't be the only one who can't understand the mainstream media's portrayal of the situation in the middle east at the minute?
Click to expand...

OriginalJonty pretty much has it spot on, not very many people care about it, hence it isn't considered important.

Superewza said:
If we truly were free then surely we would be in solidarity with such causes, not portraying them in a negative light (in reality, it's the police who undertook the majority of the violence and looting), if at all.
Click to expand...

Is this information from the same source that said the guy that threw the fire extinguisher was a police plant? :D
 
No surprise that the BBC are calling Egypt's protests "anti-government", when it starts happening over here in the next few years they will be labelled anarchists mark my word.. because our government is absolute perfection of course.
 
For many years, the western governments were highly in favour of Ben Ali's regime. Now it has collapsed and has been exposed for the sham that it was, they are a little bit embarrassed I'd imagine.

When I was there, it was highly obvious that the state was an autocracy. The general populace certainly didn't hold their president with high regard, but they didn't speak publicly about it. There were plain clothes policemen mingling amongst the public, so clearly to speak out against Ben Ali would have been dangerous.

From their choice of words and demeanour it was clear that they retained a healthy dose of cynicism about things. I can only guess that the economic hardship was the straw that broke the camel's back.
 
stop watching the bbc for starters....there a shambles of a news group.
at the very least put sky on for a bit more (but still bad) information that isnt 100%up its own arse.

like others had said Al-Jazeera is 3 buttons away for anyone with sky....there more likely to explain it in real terms then anyone else

theres reuters aswell, and although the are very buisness focussed nowadays you can still pick up some good bits of info thats for the most part just plain factual.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom