We’re fighting a war in Iraq. Why can’t we get a cable channel or three here in the U.S., broadcasting (with subtitles) what Iraqis are seeing on TV?
Wouldn’t that give us a little insight into what’s going on there — or at least what the people are told is going on?
I’d watch it. Wouldn’t you?
Pronounced "Patter-EE-koh"
E-mail: Just use my moniker Patterico, followed by the @ symbol, followed by gmail.com
Disclaimer: Simpsons avatar may resemble a younger Patterico...
The statements made on this web site reflect the personal opinions of the author. They are not made in any official capacity, and do not represent the opinions of the author's employer.
| M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | ||
| 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 |
| 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 |
| 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | |||
Powered by WordPress.
The cable MSO’s don’t have channel capacity. DirecTV and Dish might. I can’t see any ad revenue potential for this, can you? Iraqi sitcoms might draw better than a Green Zone C-Span drumming official denunciations of Muqtada al Sadr and a progress report on the power grid. If they scrolled full-screen BOLO’s for al Qaeda bad guys, though, I’d watch. Especially after a few drinks.
steve (e3149e) — 11/19/2006 @ 1:36 pmMaybe the government should fund it as a public service.
Patterico (de0616) — 11/19/2006 @ 2:00 pmSatellite systems carry al-jazeera. They’re starting an english service. But #1, they’re having trouble getting cable companies to carry it and #2, its not the same as whats broadcast in Iraq.
actus (10527e) — 11/19/2006 @ 2:04 pmI’m surprised Patterico has even remembered there is a war on. He’s long since given up commenting on unfolding events there, despite all the American and Iraqi deaths – and despite his advocacy of the war.
It’s astonishing that only now, more than three years on, is he interested in trying to see some Iraqi TV – to get a closer of view of the disaster his precipitate warmongering caused. He could have a learned a fair bit of Arabic in that time, but I’m pretty sure he assumed the campaign would be a cakewalk (see his entry on Saddam’s capture for a masterpiece of understatement: “this war will not be won in a day, a week or a month…”)
At any rate, Al Jazeera English is available over the web. Unless he can conceive of a business model to sustain the translation of a TV station’s contents into English, Patterico better starting learning his Arabic now. Since there’s little chance Bush will pull out before he leaves office, Patterico’s got some time to work with.
m.croche (85f703) — 11/19/2006 @ 2:37 pmPatterico, why do you think the government would want to broadcast how FUBAR the situation in Iraq actually is?
James B. Shearer (fc887e) — 11/19/2006 @ 4:10 pmHow does what the government wants have anything to do with his question?
Phil (88ab5b) — 11/19/2006 @ 4:59 pmphil, see comment 2.
James B. Shearer (fc887e) — 11/19/2006 @ 5:15 pmIraqi TV? Sounds good to me.
I saw a special recently on sitcoms, soap operas, and various other shows in Iraq, to include Iraq’s version of American Idol–Iraqi tv looks about the same, and in many ways more interesting, than tv in the US.
Lornkanaga (a4182d) — 11/19/2006 @ 5:24 pmHere are some somewhat candid videos of Iraqis.
http://aliveinbaghdad.org/
The weird thing is I caught that URL on CNN. These amateur videographers are pretty much cleaning CNN’s clock when it comes to reporting. I swear, nearly every report by CNN is the same – Wolf, Roberts, Cooper, Zhan etc asking “IRAQ: What went wrong?” with 2 year old explosion videos enlarged to 8’x10′ playing behind them. Then CNN interviews some joebob with a brilliant new 2 word war plan of “more troops”. Then the next day they report on another brilliant war plan of “fewer troops”.
And don’t get me started on all the Green Zone reports. What a load of 100% voodoo opinion crap.
Weeks ago NYT reported about some pretty funny TV they have over there – like a goof announcement that the Water & Sewage Agency has been renamed to the Sewage Acency. Why can’t someone put that on youtube or stream it? Geez.
Wesson (c20d28) — 11/19/2006 @ 5:41 pmon the next fatima bin cookin, the four wives of sheik hassan, with his continuing permission, will present regional lamb shishkebob recipes! now stay tuned for another exciting episode of “salim” in which our young hero accompanies his father and uncle on camelback to a remote camp where they will learn advanced techniques for killing jew-devils for the glory of the most holy allah! our sponsor, mad abdullah’s used cars and rv’s wishes to remind you that all vehicles sold this weekend have a mecca-and-back warranty, so git on down!
assistant devil's advocate (ec55c5) — 11/20/2006 @ 10:52 amTo Wesson – I needed a laugh and your comments provided it! I couldnt’ have said it better about CNN. I check in there occasionally to see if they’re still spinning and omitting and they never disappoint. Same for CBS, NBC, ABC, PBS and print media.
Thank goodness for Fox – we get ALL the news and not just what they think we should see/hear. See my comments posted under the military media story regarding inundating the MSM with demands to report deliberately avoided news.
rightisright (2cbc9b) — 11/20/2006 @ 2:17 pmWhat is really amazing is not one of the MSM has seen that it would be cheaper to get one or two Iraqi television stations on-board to do their reporting there and retire the Green Zone Hotel Squads that are afraid to go anyplace but the Hotel bar. The entire Kurdish revival is being missed and it would be very cheap to get an agreement to give an Iraqi station exposure while the MSM source would instantly gain ‘cred’ by going further than *any other news station* to get the news.
Ditto the dead tree media. Tens of newspapers in Iraq and the same with magazines. And yet the clueless MSM just can’t bring itself to do something cheap, easy and that will give them stature.
ajacksonian (87eccd) — 11/20/2006 @ 3:23 pmI don’t know about the green zone hotel squads, but lots of media organizations there are using iraqi stringers and staff.
actus (10527e) — 11/20/2006 @ 4:24 pmThat’s weird. One of the Baghdad television comedians got killed yesterday. I wonder if he’s the one mentioned in the NYT article.
Wesson (c20d28) — 11/20/2006 @ 4:57 pmWell, I get something like 200 channels in beautiful, downtown Jim Thorpe, Pennsylvania — and about half the time there’s nothing on worth watching! Maybe this would be an improvement.
Dana (e7aa47) — 11/20/2006 @ 6:53 pmActus wrote:
Which is a huge part of the problem.
You have American reporters, the vast majority of whom do not speak the language, languishing in the hotels, and waiting for other people to bring them stories.
So, what do you get? Even if you still believe the fairy-tale notion that our reporters are unbiased and are careful to report only the truth, they are depending upon people who are not Americans, who do not share American notions, who do not subscribe to the Western concept of unbiased journalism, who have very different cultural understandings, and who are not exactly trained in journalism in the way American reporters are.
Journalism, in the Middle East, exists as a propaganda arm of the government, exists to push whatever the government or organization controlling a particular medium wishes presented. That’s what the “Iraqi stringers and staff” know, that is what is familiar to and expected by them. The idea that they would now adhere to American concepts of fair journalism is naïve in the extreme.
Dana (e7aa47) — 11/20/2006 @ 7:01 pmAre you sure they’re languishing?
How the hell do you know?
actus (10527e) — 11/20/2006 @ 7:25 pmActus: it seems to me that you can’t presume that Iraqis who grew up under a despotic regime understand how western media function, or what role the press plays in a free society.
Some of them probably do; but some of them almost certainly don’t — because until three years ago, except arguably for al Jazeera, they were never exposed to it.
aphrael (9e8ccd) — 11/20/2006 @ 8:01 pmPatterico: al Jazeera, which is not widely beloved by either American conservatives or the regimes of the region, whom it is generally hostile to, has recently undertaken broadcasting in English.
They’re probably the television organization with the most street cred in the region.
aphrael (9e8ccd) — 11/20/2006 @ 8:03 pmactus, buddy, despite your non-consequential challenge of Dana’s use of the word, “languishing,” Dana did nail it spot on.
Since many of the Western media rely on Iraqi stringers to provide them with “stories,” the information unfortunately cannot often be verified.
It’s a similar hazard to obtaining “the truth” which our intelligence gathering community faces as a result of having so few of our own Arab translators—our intelligence community is forced to ‘trust’ other translators who they just don’t know very well.
And what is sad, is that the media are more willing to trust a stringer’s story than they are the story given by our own military.
Also, Dana is also correct about the concept of “truth” among the Muslim Middle East being influenced much more by a subjective partisan agenda rather than objectivity.
I realize such a statement by Dana angers you, but Dana is simply offering a cultural truism about that part of the world.
Desert Rat (ee9fe2) — 11/20/2006 @ 8:03 pmI realize such a statement by Dana angers you, but Dana is simply offering a cultural truism about that part of the world. – Desert Rat
What cultural truism would that be? Iraqi stringers risk their lives and often are forced to hide what they do from friends and family, typically without even the glory of a byline in return. Do some have an agenda? Probably. Does that mean it’s better for reporters to reconstitute press statements from a military source with an opposing agenda? No.
.
steve (1fd41b) — 11/20/2006 @ 8:17 pmThey might consider at least presenting the military source’s side.
Patterico (de0616) — 11/20/2006 @ 8:26 pmIts not that hard to learn. Specially when someone else is giving the orders. Iraqis who grew up under a despotic regime were capable of having elections. They’re capable of reporting too.
I’ve heard of them going outside the green zone. Some even getting killed. Thats not so languished.
You don’t think our military’s point of view is reflected in our media?
actus (10527e) — 11/20/2006 @ 8:41 pmYou don’t think our military’s point of view is reflected in our media?
In the specific story I’m talking about, no, it hasn’t been.
Patterico (de0616) — 11/20/2006 @ 9:01 pmActus: I don’t think anyone is saying they are incapable. It’s just that ingrained habits die hard, and what you learn over a lifetime of habits isn’t easily changed just because someone else is giving orders.
People can do it … but I don’t think it can safely be presumed that everyone is doing it. It requires deliberate effort to change that sort of thing.
aphrael (9e8ccd) — 11/20/2006 @ 9:17 pmBut do they have a lifetime of propaganda, or do they have a lifetime of wanting to be free?
actus (10527e) — 11/20/2006 @ 9:31 pmSteve,
Hey, friend, it appears you misunderstood my point.
I wasn’t challenging the dangerous trials and tribulations of Iraqi stringers—of course it’s dangerous work—that is precisely why Dana stated that the Western journalists languish back at the hotels as often as they can.
My point was merely re-affirming Dana’s assertion that the concept of “truth” by the Muslim Middle East is culturally accepted to be far more subjective than the “truth” defined in the West.
That’s not just limited to ‘journalism’ per se, rather it is a paradigm which applies to the culture in general.
But, as for your point that the stringers don’t get the ‘glory’ of a by-line—you’re helping make Dana’s point, which is that the Western media are heavily relying on stringers for their stories.
But Steve, I never stated that the Western media ought to rely solely on the military’s press releases—you’re knocking down a straw man argument by refuting that.
But we are saying that the Western media ought not rely solely on the stringers.
The Western media constantly give the benefit of the doubt to stringers or the Al-Jazeera point of view, over the contradictions of our military accounts & the accounts of the new Iraqi government.
aphrael continues to bring up an important point to actus, which is that the Iraqis have lived under a despot for decades. Thus, the concept of “truth”—especially within the context of the press, or the military, or the government—is whatever the despot has ‘said’ that the ‘truth’ is.
Desert Rat (ee9fe2) — 11/20/2006 @ 9:56 pmSaddam’s Iraq qualifies as “Orwellian” in that regard.
And it is also “Orwellian” of commenters to deny that.
Can you tell me abit more about your experience with their ‘culture in general’? Because I’d like to be as knowledgeable as you are. So I’d like to know what sources to read about the concept of truth in the muslim middle east.
actus (10527e) — 11/20/2006 @ 10:07 pmI’m not so sure that anyone in the Middle East can rely on anyone else’s reportage.
paul from fl (967602) — 11/21/2006 @ 7:40 amThe local stringers have been in a trackless environment in regards to “The Truth” for years as Desert Rat noted.
Taking into account the religous paradigm of lying to any non-muslim to defeat them also places a major obstacle in using Iraqi stringers doesn’t it?
Finally, in the cultures of the area, shifting alliances are a matter of fact. I am not sure that I personally could trust any local to keep his word on an alliance,friendship or partnership.
Where does that leave the Hotel media?
Out on the street.
Late to the party, but if you still are reading this, LinkTV on DirectTV has Mosaic. You can go to the Mosaic page from there and they stream the shows. The page starts with a registration link or I would have linked directly. That’s new.
They broadcast news programs from around the Middle East. It’s very interesting. They have shows from Syria, Iran, Qatar, Lebanon, Israel, Iraq, the PLO and now have some Al Jazeera segments.
It’s very interesting to watch how the different countries broadcast the same event.
Veeshir (5f9b87) — 11/24/2006 @ 7:23 amThe comment of Iraq being Fubar has been the general reaction in the two wars I served in.
The most telling statement I heard was by a Vietnamese lady after I commented about the ARVN efforts.
She said to me, “You Americans cannot realize what will happen if you leave without defeating the enemy (VC and NVA). Being half French she would have been a prime victim.
When I stop and reflect on the deaths of Vietnamese people after the bug out she was very accurate. One third of all Reeducation camp internees died by starvation, fever, torture and just plain old fashioned murder.
In 1951 I was drafted and sent to South Korea. Today I can look back and feel great satisfaction there is a free Korean nation as opposed to North Korea.
The Kims, father and son have killed more of their countrymen than all the wars I was in
President after President have iterated the American dream of freedom for all people. From Wilson through FDR and Truman to Kennedy and Johnson the four freedoms have been the goal of the administrations Democrat or Republican. I see no reason to change.
Today we have a volunteer military. Ask them what they think.
Al Bee (9f37aa) — 11/24/2006 @ 8:03 am