7 ms·

Not that it justifies the deletion, I wonder how a state sponsored propaganda outlet came to be regarded well among global audiences. It would be interesting to

Not that it justifies the deletion, I wonder how a state sponsored propaganda outlet came to be regarded well among global audiences. It would be interesting to read up on what they have done to garner that image.

helboi4 3y ago
Wow I have heard so much that Al Jazeera is pretty reliable, never did I realise until I read your comment that they are owned by Qatari monarchy. Qatar, the country everyone was practically calling us to boycott in the 2022 World Cup. Not suitable to hold the World Cup but suitable for us to get news from apparently. They do generally seem to have a high quality of journalism though so I am suprised at how they maintain at least a decent amount of integrity.
- tmpX7dMeXU 3y ago
  It is what it is. AJ’s bias really comes into play when talking about Qatar. Otherwise, their record speaks for itself.
  - helboi4 3y ago
    Makes sense and I can probably deal with that since I really do tend to find quality articles from them, and most global news is not about Qatar. However, does Qatar have any allies that they are also likely to be biased about? Or does the influence not extend that far?
    - sfjailbird 3y ago
      Yes. Articles on Turkey or India are likely to be positive. They are Qatar's most strategic regional allies.
      - actuator 3y ago
        That is wildly inaccurate. If anything among the Middle East countries India is aligned more with UAE, which till recently Qatar was more at odds with
        sfjailbird 3y ago
        India is Qatar's biggest export market after China.
- Takennickname 3y ago
  Your source that aljazeera is a propaganda outlet is no better or even worse than aljazeera itself
lucideer 3y ago
At the end of the day it's really just a matter of which state propaganda outlet you distrust the least, by which metric they seem to score pretty well. Beyond obvious biases one would expect to see, I also find them a little UK-influenced but otherwise I struggle to find a better state sponsored propaganda outlet.
tmpX7dMeXU 3y ago
I am assuming that this is American bias talking? Plenty of other cultures are more trusting of government than the US’s is. The main State-sponsored media outlet in my country is considered to be of a pretty high quality. It has some international recognition. I’d say a fair chunk of those that actually care about media outlet trustworthiness (and aren’t just sharing whatever articles come their way barring a few outlets that are in their person blocklist) are aware of the nuances of AJ’s authority and trustworthiness. The reality is that they have built this reputation by doing heaps and heaps of good reporting, not even in spite of being state-sponsored, but really because of it. There are certain topics that you shouldn’t listen to AJ regarding. Otherwise? They do a good job.
- actuator 3y ago
  Well, I did write state sponsored propaganda outlet, not state sponsored media outlet as I think the journalistic freedom an organisation like BBC gets is different. They can criticise policies of UK government, something Al Jazeera can't. I would argue that they just have more polish to their presentation rather than having more integrity, and the coverage in local language is quite different from the one in English
Neil44 3y ago
Are you referring to Meta or Al Jazeera?
shmde 3y ago
So funny to see *unbiased HN users take up pitchfork in support of a literally Monarchy(House of Thani) + State(Qatar) owned propaganda machine news outlet which constantly writes in favour of their Middle East Masters and silently prefers not to tell the truth in their reporting.
- _xivi 3y ago
  Any examples for incredibility and misleading reporting by them?
- Angostura 3y ago
  Here's their front page. https://www.aljazeera.com https://www.aljazeera.com Since you say they "constantly write in favour of Quatar, it shouldn't be hard for your find examples. Certainly there's very negative coverage of Quatar's many faults, but that's not the same as constantly pushing a positive agenda. In other areas the reporting seems sound. A starter for you https://www.aljazeera.com/search/quatar?sort=date https://www.aljazeera.com/search/quatar?sort=date
  - Angostura 3y ago
    That sentence should have read "Certainly there's very little negative coverage of Quatar's many faults..."
BiteCode_dev 3y ago
They are pretty much the equivalent to the BBC or CNN: a lot of it is alright, but they are still tools for their own gov propaganda. Because they are different govs, with different agendas, each of them see the propaganda of others as evil, but it's still all very much propaganda. Remember CNN diffused many bits on how WMD were in Irak to justify the war the UN voted against. The USA went to war anyway, and we learned there were no WMD. Al Jazeera does the same, but for their side. It is, nevertheless, quite qualitative content for many topics, and give you another points of on the world events than our own medias outlet.
- actuator 3y ago
  > They are pretty much the equivalent to the BBC I am sorry, but they aren't. This is just false equivalence, you can just go read BBC's coverage of UK politics and you will see criticism of their government
  - wood_spirit 3y ago
    Indeed, the conservative government has been trying to get rid of the bbc precisely because the bbc criticises it more than everyone else!
  - jacooper 3y ago
    Yeah thats not true. All you have to do is just compare bbc coverage on palestine and ukraine. The BBC is absolutely biased.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
_xivi 3y ago
If I had to guess, it's because they have actual reporters on the ground getting shot at and killed, unlike many other media outlets who count on heresay and statements. You realize that all media/press is backed by something, right? Do you prefer click-baity ridden press looking for ad revenue instead? Or media as a business where they avoid reporting anything controversial that would hurt their business/image/relationships/backers.
thiago_fm 3y ago
Al Jazeera is really reliable, much more than American media companies. People should first do research on this, before they start spreading those BS ideas. Since 9/11 Americans can't trust anything with an "arabic background", they are constantly bombarded by the media, so they can't ever discover that the middle east is much more than a place with oil or "weapons of mass destruction". Al Jazeera hires top journalists, they are well-funded. They are just very concerned when talking about Qatar, which in a geopolitical sense, doesn't matter, all other news are typically very unbiased. Only a few news outlets from Europe are similar in quality. Americans rarely want to see the truth anyways, so they stick with those republican/democrat-leaning media outlets, eating Mc Donalds, going bankrupt on a hospital emergency and believing in the American dream: you need to be asleep to believe on it.
- bigDinosaur 3y ago
  Allegedly Al Jazeera English is much more reasonable and balanced than Arabic Al Jazeera. Unfortunately that's a claim that basically relies on trust - i.e. an Arabic speaker with cultural knowledge willing to be unbiased in their analysis. I suspect it is true though, Qatar is not a pleasant country and certainly not a democracy.
- weatherlite 3y ago
  > They are just very concerned when talking about Qatar, Doesn't seem like the sign of a good news org if you can't say a word of criticism about the country you're headquartered at. Makes me wonder what else is rotten in there, how can we know the rules of the country aren't dictating a bunch of other stuff to the news? News should be as independent as possible.
  - smcl 3y ago
    I mean FOX News and Newsmax are "as independent as possible" in that regard but they're both utter trash, so it's obviously more nuanced than that. Discarding Al Jazeera entirely because they can't/won't go hard on Qatari matters (which you can read anywhere else if you really care) is a bit like throwing the baby out with the bathwater, to me.
Angostura 3y ago
> I wonder how a state sponsored propaganda outlet came to be regarded well among global audiences. Speaking personally, as an ex-journalist I found their English-language coverage generally to be pretty well-balanced and well reported - so that's probably why. And I came to them with a pretty sceptical eye. I've heard that their arabic language stories are rather different - but I don't have a way of checking that for myself.
kingwill101 3y ago
I always find it strange that Aljazeera gets so much hate. Their English coverage over the years IMO has been mostly unbiased and really stellar.
jacooper 3y ago
Its one of the highest rated news agencies in the world. Just because it doesn't adopt you worldview doesn't mean its a propaganda outlet.

helboi4 3y ago

Wow I have heard so much that Al Jazeera is pretty reliable, never did I realise until I read your comment that they are owned by Qatari monarchy. Qatar, the country everyone was practically calling us to boycott in the 2022 World Cup. Not suitable to hold the World Cup but suitable for us to get news from apparently. They do generally seem to have a high quality of journalism though so I am suprised at how they maintain at least a decent amount of integrity.

tmpX7dMeXU 3y ago
It is what it is. AJ’s bias really comes into play when talking about Qatar. Otherwise, their record speaks for itself.
- helboi4 3y ago
  Makes sense and I can probably deal with that since I really do tend to find quality articles from them, and most global news is not about Qatar. However, does Qatar have any allies that they are also likely to be biased about? Or does the influence not extend that far?
  - sfjailbird 3y ago
    Yes. Articles on Turkey or India are likely to be positive. They are Qatar's most strategic regional allies.
    - actuator 3y ago
      That is wildly inaccurate. If anything among the Middle East countries India is aligned more with UAE, which till recently Qatar was more at odds with
      - sfjailbird 3y ago
        India is Qatar's biggest export market after China.
Takennickname 3y ago
Your source that aljazeera is a propaganda outlet is no better or even worse than aljazeera itself

lucideer 3y ago

At the end of the day it's really just a matter of which state propaganda outlet you distrust the least, by which metric they seem to score pretty well. Beyond obvious biases one would expect to see, I also find them a little UK-influenced but otherwise I struggle to find a better state sponsored propaganda outlet.

tmpX7dMeXU 3y ago

I am assuming that this is American bias talking? Plenty of other cultures are more trusting of government than the US’s is. The main State-sponsored media outlet in my country is considered to be of a pretty high quality. It has some international recognition. I’d say a fair chunk of those that actually care about media outlet trustworthiness (and aren’t just sharing whatever articles come their way barring a few outlets that are in their person blocklist) are aware of the nuances of AJ’s authority and trustworthiness. The reality is that they have built this reputation by doing heaps and heaps of good reporting, not even in spite of being state-sponsored, but really because of it. There are certain topics that you shouldn’t listen to AJ regarding. Otherwise? They do a good job.

actuator 3y ago
Well, I did write state sponsored propaganda outlet, not state sponsored media outlet as I think the journalistic freedom an organisation like BBC gets is different. They can criticise policies of UK government, something Al Jazeera can't. I would argue that they just have more polish to their presentation rather than having more integrity, and the coverage in local language is quite different from the one in English

Neil44 3y ago

Are you referring to Meta or Al Jazeera?

shmde 3y ago

So funny to see *unbiased HN users take up pitchfork in support of a literally Monarchy(House of Thani) + State(Qatar) owned propaganda machine news outlet which constantly writes in favour of their Middle East Masters and silently prefers not to tell the truth in their reporting.

_xivi 3y ago
Any examples for incredibility and misleading reporting by them?
Angostura 3y ago
Here's their front page. https://www.aljazeera.com https://www.aljazeera.com Since you say they "constantly write in favour of Quatar, it shouldn't be hard for your find examples. Certainly there's very negative coverage of Quatar's many faults, but that's not the same as constantly pushing a positive agenda. In other areas the reporting seems sound. A starter for you https://www.aljazeera.com/search/quatar?sort=date https://www.aljazeera.com/search/quatar?sort=date
- Angostura 3y ago
  That sentence should have read "Certainly there's very little negative coverage of Quatar's many faults..."

BiteCode_dev 3y ago

They are pretty much the equivalent to the BBC or CNN: a lot of it is alright, but they are still tools for their own gov propaganda. Because they are different govs, with different agendas, each of them see the propaganda of others as evil, but it's still all very much propaganda. Remember CNN diffused many bits on how WMD were in Irak to justify the war the UN voted against. The USA went to war anyway, and we learned there were no WMD. Al Jazeera does the same, but for their side. It is, nevertheless, quite qualitative content for many topics, and give you another points of on the world events than our own medias outlet.

actuator 3y ago
> They are pretty much the equivalent to the BBC I am sorry, but they aren't. This is just false equivalence, you can just go read BBC's coverage of UK politics and you will see criticism of their government
- wood_spirit 3y ago
  Indeed, the conservative government has been trying to get rid of the bbc precisely because the bbc criticises it more than everyone else!
- jacooper 3y ago
  Yeah thats not true. All you have to do is just compare bbc coverage on palestine and ukraine. The BBC is absolutely biased.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

_xivi 3y ago

If I had to guess, it's because they have actual reporters on the ground getting shot at and killed, unlike many other media outlets who count on heresay and statements. You realize that all media/press is backed by something, right? Do you prefer click-baity ridden press looking for ad revenue instead? Or media as a business where they avoid reporting anything controversial that would hurt their business/image/relationships/backers.

thiago_fm 3y ago

Al Jazeera is really reliable, much more than American media companies. People should first do research on this, before they start spreading those BS ideas. Since 9/11 Americans can't trust anything with an "arabic background", they are constantly bombarded by the media, so they can't ever discover that the middle east is much more than a place with oil or "weapons of mass destruction". Al Jazeera hires top journalists, they are well-funded. They are just very concerned when talking about Qatar, which in a geopolitical sense, doesn't matter, all other news are typically very unbiased. Only a few news outlets from Europe are similar in quality. Americans rarely want to see the truth anyways, so they stick with those republican/democrat-leaning media outlets, eating Mc Donalds, going bankrupt on a hospital emergency and believing in the American dream: you need to be asleep to believe on it.

bigDinosaur 3y ago
Allegedly Al Jazeera English is much more reasonable and balanced than Arabic Al Jazeera. Unfortunately that's a claim that basically relies on trust - i.e. an Arabic speaker with cultural knowledge willing to be unbiased in their analysis. I suspect it is true though, Qatar is not a pleasant country and certainly not a democracy.
weatherlite 3y ago
> They are just very concerned when talking about Qatar, Doesn't seem like the sign of a good news org if you can't say a word of criticism about the country you're headquartered at. Makes me wonder what else is rotten in there, how can we know the rules of the country aren't dictating a bunch of other stuff to the news? News should be as independent as possible.
- smcl 3y ago
  I mean FOX News and Newsmax are "as independent as possible" in that regard but they're both utter trash, so it's obviously more nuanced than that. Discarding Al Jazeera entirely because they can't/won't go hard on Qatari matters (which you can read anywhere else if you really care) is a bit like throwing the baby out with the bathwater, to me.

Angostura 3y ago

> I wonder how a state sponsored propaganda outlet came to be regarded well among global audiences. Speaking personally, as an ex-journalist I found their English-language coverage generally to be pretty well-balanced and well reported - so that's probably why. And I came to them with a pretty sceptical eye. I've heard that their arabic language stories are rather different - but I don't have a way of checking that for myself.

kingwill101 3y ago

I always find it strange that Aljazeera gets so much hate. Their English coverage over the years IMO has been mostly unbiased and really stellar.

jacooper 3y ago

Its one of the highest rated news agencies in the world. Just because it doesn't adopt you worldview doesn't mean its a propaganda outlet.