News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Demand Al Jazeera in the US.

Re:Demand Al Jazeera in the US by nhebb on Tuesday March 22, 2011 @10:05AM (#2354367)
I didn't get the sense that Al Jazeera was an unbiased news source after reading David Marash's interview in the Columbia Journalism Review [1]. All news sources have bias, but the way that Al Jazeera is being upheld as a beacon of truth and light is a little disingenuous. I admit my own bias against them for acting as the mouthpiece of bin Laden by airing his tapes. I know there are those that feel this is a journalistic responsibility, but, then again, I don't think the New York Times should have published the Unabomber's letter either.

[1]http://www.cjr.org/the_water_cooler/dave_marash_why_i_quit.p...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Demand Al Jazeera in the US by retube on Tuesday March 22, 2011 @10:17AM (#2354421)
> acting as the mouthpiece of bin Laden by airing his tapes

Why is airing his tapes acting as his mouthpiece? Every others station on planet earth aired them to. It's the sodding news, and given that Bin Laden is world enemy number 1 why on earth wouldn't they air his tapes?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Demand Al Jazeera in the US by yummyfajitas on Tuesday March 22, 2011 @11:34AM (#2354835)
The common argument is that by airing the viewpoints of terrorists after successful attacks, you give extremists an incentive to perform terrorist attacks. I.e., if you pay for something (with money or airtime), you get more of it. Thus, journalists have a responsibility not to do so.

I haven't thought this through enough to form an opinion, just thought the argument is worth stating.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Demand Al Jazeera in the US by baltcode on Tuesday March 22, 2011 @11:39AM (#2354866)
The point isn't that AJE is free of all biases, but that it sometimes presents news and opinions that are otherwise not present, and are at most only as biased as what's already available on MSM.
[ Parent | on HN ]