Tweet
DOUBLE STANDARDS IN WESTERN MEDIA
Soltan Ismaylov
Today's Zaman
July 29, 2011
Turkey
When news of Norway's enormous tragedy first reached the US, a CNN news
anchor invited a terrorism expert to speak about possible culprits.
Predictably, the guest pontificated about the al-Qaeda connection,
reminding of the "Muslim rage" against Norway for re-publishing
insulting cartoons about the Prophet Muhammad and of the nation's
participation in bombing Libya.
The fact that there have been major terrorist attacks by Islamic
radicals is no secret, and such suspicions are not necessarily
unreasonable. However, the jump to hasty conclusions and the hyper
readiness to engage in guilt-by-association is a sad illustration of
the effect ideological propaganda has on any society, even one as open
and diverse as that of the US. Even sadder is that such bias was on
full display not on Rupert Murdoch's infamous and borderline-racist
Fox News channel but on the self-proclaimed guardian of objective
reporting - CNN.
Rushed conclusions are not only irresponsible journalism, they are also
simply misleading and direct attention away from the real perpetrators
of massacres like the one in Norway. Muslim radicals should not be
excused, but neither should Christian terrorists and xenophobes like
Norway's Anders Breivik. As those Muslims promoting extremist views
have frequently and rightly been called to atone for their sins, then
those who espouse anti-Muslim and far-right ideals and whose writing
and statements are uncomfortably close to Breivik's line of thought
should perhaps think again about what exactly they are promoting.
The horrific scenes in Norway have proven what many around the world
have been stating for years - terrorism has no religion. This is a
problem of radicalism and there are no good terrorists. Muslims should
avoid the temptation to speak of Christian terrorism or Christian
fascism, even if the actions of the Norwegian domestic terrorist come
as close as one could to the very definition of fascism. Instead,
toning down ideological rhetoric on all sides would be an important
step forward.
Freedom of speech should not become an excuse for otherwise inexcusable
behavior. There are reasonable restrictions pertaining to public safety
accepted internationally - the classic example being not screaming
"fire" in a crowded theater. To deny that extremist rhetoric leads
to radical action is similar to denying that violence in the media
and entertainment has an affect on the psyche of those exposed to
it. From the shooting of Arizona congresswoman Giffords to domestic
terrorism in Norway, the harsh rhetoric of protecting the purity of
society has claimed real human victims. Unlike the numerous victims
of NATO's massive bombing campaigns in the pursuit of democracy that
appear as detached statistics and, in any case look so different. The
Norwegian victims and the Nordic identity of the terrorist should
provoke some soul-searching among those experts who built their
careers on promoting the "clash of civilizations."
More than a moral issue of long-overdue soul searching, the existing
double standards readily promoted by Western media are becoming a
security and safety issue. After all, public perceptions have been
shaped into suspicion of all persons of Middle Eastern descent,
but not of a blond European in a police uniform that could now be
questionable following the Oslo explosions.
Still, ideological rhetoric continues to be a convenient tool for
politicians. From the Muslim-bashing radicalism of the most vocal
opponents of the Islamic Center in Lower Manhattan to ridiculous
accusations against Turkey of disrespecting religious minorities,
distorted exaggerations and double standards remain the rule rather
than the exception in US and Western politics.
This convenience has become a trademark of increasingly lazy Western
journalism. CNN reporters, so fond of their electronic gadgets, spend
more time reading their viewers' tweets and Facebook debates than
engaging in actual journalistic investigations. Not surprisingly,
the Washington Post, while dedicating ample space on its pages to
promoting the radical ethno-religious views of Armenian separatists
in Nagorno-Karabakh, found no place to report a despicable act of
terrorism against an Azerbaijani teenager who died from an Armenian
explosive placed in a child's toy.
Looking outside ideologically defined stereotypes seems to go
beyond the basic requirements of professionalism for CNN and other
journalists; it is a practical issue, which when ignored can have
very costly consequences.
*Soltan Ismaylov is based in Azerbaijan.
Soltan Ismaylov
Today's Zaman
July 29, 2011
Turkey
When news of Norway's enormous tragedy first reached the US, a CNN news
anchor invited a terrorism expert to speak about possible culprits.
Predictably, the guest pontificated about the al-Qaeda connection,
reminding of the "Muslim rage" against Norway for re-publishing
insulting cartoons about the Prophet Muhammad and of the nation's
participation in bombing Libya.
The fact that there have been major terrorist attacks by Islamic
radicals is no secret, and such suspicions are not necessarily
unreasonable. However, the jump to hasty conclusions and the hyper
readiness to engage in guilt-by-association is a sad illustration of
the effect ideological propaganda has on any society, even one as open
and diverse as that of the US. Even sadder is that such bias was on
full display not on Rupert Murdoch's infamous and borderline-racist
Fox News channel but on the self-proclaimed guardian of objective
reporting - CNN.
Rushed conclusions are not only irresponsible journalism, they are also
simply misleading and direct attention away from the real perpetrators
of massacres like the one in Norway. Muslim radicals should not be
excused, but neither should Christian terrorists and xenophobes like
Norway's Anders Breivik. As those Muslims promoting extremist views
have frequently and rightly been called to atone for their sins, then
those who espouse anti-Muslim and far-right ideals and whose writing
and statements are uncomfortably close to Breivik's line of thought
should perhaps think again about what exactly they are promoting.
The horrific scenes in Norway have proven what many around the world
have been stating for years - terrorism has no religion. This is a
problem of radicalism and there are no good terrorists. Muslims should
avoid the temptation to speak of Christian terrorism or Christian
fascism, even if the actions of the Norwegian domestic terrorist come
as close as one could to the very definition of fascism. Instead,
toning down ideological rhetoric on all sides would be an important
step forward.
Freedom of speech should not become an excuse for otherwise inexcusable
behavior. There are reasonable restrictions pertaining to public safety
accepted internationally - the classic example being not screaming
"fire" in a crowded theater. To deny that extremist rhetoric leads
to radical action is similar to denying that violence in the media
and entertainment has an affect on the psyche of those exposed to
it. From the shooting of Arizona congresswoman Giffords to domestic
terrorism in Norway, the harsh rhetoric of protecting the purity of
society has claimed real human victims. Unlike the numerous victims
of NATO's massive bombing campaigns in the pursuit of democracy that
appear as detached statistics and, in any case look so different. The
Norwegian victims and the Nordic identity of the terrorist should
provoke some soul-searching among those experts who built their
careers on promoting the "clash of civilizations."
More than a moral issue of long-overdue soul searching, the existing
double standards readily promoted by Western media are becoming a
security and safety issue. After all, public perceptions have been
shaped into suspicion of all persons of Middle Eastern descent,
but not of a blond European in a police uniform that could now be
questionable following the Oslo explosions.
Still, ideological rhetoric continues to be a convenient tool for
politicians. From the Muslim-bashing radicalism of the most vocal
opponents of the Islamic Center in Lower Manhattan to ridiculous
accusations against Turkey of disrespecting religious minorities,
distorted exaggerations and double standards remain the rule rather
than the exception in US and Western politics.
This convenience has become a trademark of increasingly lazy Western
journalism. CNN reporters, so fond of their electronic gadgets, spend
more time reading their viewers' tweets and Facebook debates than
engaging in actual journalistic investigations. Not surprisingly,
the Washington Post, while dedicating ample space on its pages to
promoting the radical ethno-religious views of Armenian separatists
in Nagorno-Karabakh, found no place to report a despicable act of
terrorism against an Azerbaijani teenager who died from an Armenian
explosive placed in a child's toy.
Looking outside ideologically defined stereotypes seems to go
beyond the basic requirements of professionalism for CNN and other
journalists; it is a practical issue, which when ignored can have
very costly consequences.
*Soltan Ismaylov is based in Azerbaijan.