Israeli sitcom by Arab citizen is breaking the misconceptions by challenging the divisions head-on

The life of an Arab citizen is anything but funny. Just ask my relatives who live in several Israeli cities. Non-Jews in a Jewish world caught on the edge of the wall that separates Palestinians from Israelis.

 

Yet, that’s exactly the premise of a sitcom that was a hit last year and is in its second season on Israeli TV called “Arab Labor.”

 

The sitcom is the brainchild of Palestinian writer Sayed Kashua and produced by Israeli Danny Paran. Even in our everyday language, you might note, Arab citizens of Israeli are still spoken of as if they are not a part of the larger Israeli society.

 

A sizable 20 percent of Israel’s population, the Christian and Muslim Palestinians rarely get any real or substantive airtime on Israeli television, outside of the news reports which, like most Western media, portray them purely in a negative light.

 

“Arab Labor” is a mild translation of the sitcom’s Hebrew name, Avoda Aravit, which is slang for “sloppy workmanship,” a derisive stereotype of the Arabs of Israel.

 

Yet under all this, Kashua may have achieved one of the most brilliant portrayals of the challenging life Arabs in Israel face every day. And using humor, he may have presented it in the only way most Israelis are willing to see it, one filled with racism, suspicion, distrust and stereotypes that must be brought out into the open if they are ever to be one-day healed. Because healing is something Arabs and Israelis need very badly.

 

Kashua’s remarkably captivating series focuses on the life of one Arab, Amjad Aliyan (Norman Issa), a journalist working for a Hebrew language Israeli magazine. Around him are his wife (Bushra played by Clara Khoury), daughter (Maya, played by Fatma Yihye), his parents, the rascal-like Ismael (Salim Dau) and cautious Umm Amjad (Salwa Nakra). Dau happens to be the head of the Arab Theater in Haifa.

 

What is really impressive is how the insignificant in life becomes the symbol of the very significance of the relationship between Arabs and Jews, Palestinians and Israelis.

 

Each episode of the sitcom focuses on one underlying challenge set in the broader theater of life. The first episode cuts right to the chase when Amjad is driving through the checkpoints – remember, he is a “citizen” of Israel – and he wonders how is it that the Israeli soldiers know how to single him out and pull him aside for constant inspection. He asks his daughter to please make sure not to speak Arabic and greet the soldiers in English. And of course, the daughter, in her best formal and religious Arabic, warmly and effusively greets the soldiers, who immediately check all their papers.

 

But his Israeli friend explains the reason for his daily harassment isn’t the way he looks, dresses or “smells,” but rather the car he drives.

 

Amjad drives a Subaru, his friends notes. And Subarus are only driven by the most extreme Israeli settlers who wear a yarmulke on their heads, or by Arabs.

 

So Amjad determines to buy a new car, through his father, who negotiates a purchase price and sale price and his double-sided commissions.

 

But in the process of lampooning something as subtle as the car you drive, other idiosyncrasies of Arab-Israeli life emerge. If you wear a seat belt in an Israeli licensed plated car through an Arab village in Israel, you must be an Israeli undercover agent with the Shin Bet.

 

Amjad engages in an argument about another subtle but serious topic. Why are there more accidents in the Arab communities in Israel than in the Jewish communities? Because of Arab culture of the fact that Arab villages and cities get so little funding their roads and infrastructure are dilapidated and eroded, causing more accidents.

 

Only a person who lives this life can see these details and expertly turn them into a humorous debate about everyday life.

 

In another episode, Amjad hears from his father about an Arab shepherd who has on goat who, when the Israeli soldiers pull him over for inspection, uses his snout to pull out the shepherd’s ID card from the shepherd’s pocket. When they try to recreate the scene for the magazine story and photograph, the goat is shy. So they stage it, of course. And once everyone is gone, the goat does precisely what he was acclaimed to do.

 

And in another episode, Amjad and his wife discuss placing their young but clever daughter in kindergarten, rather than leaving them to learn about life from the wily roguish grandfather.

 

So, they enroll her at an Arab school which happens to be religious. The daughter doesn’t want to go to the school but decides to go to excess in her religious transformation to shock her father into removing her. He then takes her to an Israeli school, called the Peace School.

 

That sounds innocent enough until they are told they have never had an Arab enroll at the Israeli school. And yes, while the name is “Peace” they never expected it to mean it might attract Arab children to mix with the Jewish children.

 

Unheard of, and shocking.

 

Episode after episode draws the viewer through the maze of conflicts that make of the reality of Arab-Jewish life in Israel.

 

The sitcom is broadcast in Hebrew with English sub-titles that are easy to read and understand. Words are often mistranslated to disguise the more obvious racism that sometimes exists in dialect and speech patterns and habits.

 

But the biggest tragedy is that most Arabs will not be able to see “Arab Labor,” because there are no cable or TV systems that are of any real reach that can present this sitcom to the public in the United States or the in the Arab World.

 

The first season features 10 hilarious episodes from start to finish. You can purchase the DVD online at www.AliveMind.net.  300 minutes on 2 disks, the DVD sells for an bargain price of only $34.98. Or, you can purchase it from its American distributor, “Cinema Purgatorio” at www.CinemaPurgatorio.com.

 

I urge you to get it. Not to laugh at the foibles of human tragedy, but rather to understand through the only medium that permits understanding in the emotion-charged Arab-Israeli conflict, humor.

 

(An award winning Palestinian American columnist, standup comedian and Chicago radio talk show host, Ray Hanania is the 2009 Winner of the MT Mehdi Courage in Journalism Award. He can be reached at www.RadioChicagoland.com.)

 

The way we communicate is changing fast

As President Barack Obama prepared to make a major address to the Arab and Muslim Worlds recently, I expanded my access to the Arab World media. For a long time, I would obtain access to Arab media through the internet, either accessing web pages or online live video broadcasting.

One of the only options for most Americans is to purchase a satellite dish and order the "Arab World or Middle East" package of programming. American Arabs already use Satellite TV to access major Arab World media to get news, movies and more in the Arabic language.

One of the most informative resources on news from the Middle East is AlJazeera English TV. It is broadcast on Satellite and it has effectively been banned from broadcast on mainstream cable systems like Comcast, for example. Comcast says the reason is that it could not reach an agreement with Aljazeera but everyone believes the real reason is politics.

Why else is Aljazeera not shown on any mainstream Cable TV systems? You can get every other country on cable TV, including Israel's Shalom TV, which is available on Comcast Cable and other systems. But not Aljazeera English. (Ironically, when I visit Israel, Aljazeera is one of the main options available to viewers on local cable. But then Israel has always had a freer debate on Middle East issues than the poor, oppressed and information deprived United States.)

I should note, I do produce online video reports for Aljazeera English's Listening Post segment and have helped them add journalists to their stable of video bloggers.

I didn't want the Satellite option because it was too expensive and it requires a lot of "parts." I have to put a satellite dish on my house. That's almost like putting a sign on my house that I am Arab. It's bad enough I have a natural sign on my face, in my name and my writing. I don't need another. Still, the hassles of satellite seem overwhelming, especially since I already connect to Comcast Cable in the Chicago suburbs.

Recently, though, I came across a new option that seems to work great. JumpTV and NeuLion Inc have partnered to produce streaming video from foreign countries using the Internet and an iPTV cable box. It's $29 a month. They offer a Middle East option that provides 35 Arabic channels. Most are in Arabic. Aljazeera English is the only 24/7 English language broadcast but there are other programs. I think it would benefit the Arab media to expand their broadcasts from Arabic language to English, but that is another challenge and another column. You can get information at www.Talfazat.com if you are interested.

I got one. It took less than 20 minutes to set up. It plugs in to the HD TV. I connected it to the Internet in my home. And tuned the TV to the Auxillary channel.

And since then, I think I understand the Middle east issues far better than I did when I relied on the New York Times, Chicago Tribune and CNN. I understand a little bit of Arabic (my mother being from Bethlehem and father from Jerusalem) but I am addicted to Aljazeera English TV. Watching on my big screen TV and being able to record programs is far more convenient than trying to watch it on my computer screen. (Ironically, I understood the Conan O'Brien pre-Tonight Show marketing campaign where he introduces the audience to the TV set. It's like an iPod and a computer except that it has better audio and video quality.)

I watched Obama deliver his speech to the Arab World and immediately got reaction from the Arab World. I didn't have to wait until the news was filtered by the political spin in the mainstream American media.

I also watched the elections take place in Lebanon and better understand the dynamics of that country's problems. While we in the United States focus almost exclusively on Iran and Hezbollah, the militia they helped found during the Israeli occupation of Lebanon years ago, news reports in Lebanon are nore sophisticated. Many Lebanese said their votes were inspired by Obama's speech the week before at Cairo University. Others said that Hezbollah is not that major force that it is made out to be in the Western media. Of the 128 seats vyed for in the elections, Hezbollah only fielded 11 candidates -- who all won by the way.

I don't know. I think when we Americans have ALL the facts and ALL the information from ALL the available sources, our decisions become more sound. More reasoned. And our conclusions become more accurate. Our actions become more effective.

I know it is a new way to do things. But maybe, just maybe, we should set aside the hatred that has built a wall to separate us from news and information from the Middle East and start listening, learning and using what we learn to make our nation even better. Well, it may or may not become better, but we sure will be smarter people.

I'm addicted to Talfazat programming and to Aljazeera English. I think you should be too.

This is not a paid Ad at all. Just an attempt to increase your knowledge about a region of the world that has so much influence on our daily lives that we have so little access to understand.

-- Ray Hanania
www.RadioChicagoland.com 

 

What Arabs hope for in Obama speech in Cairo

By just going to Cairo University to give a "speech to the Muslim World," Barack Obama is doing something that his predecessors never really understood.

The Arab World and the Muslim World do not hate Americans nor do they hate the West. They are angry about some policies. Some fanatics use that anger and exploit it to finance and empower their extremist goals.

But by speaking to the Arab and the Muslim World, Obama is sending a signal to the silent majority of Arabs and Muslims that he cares and that Americans care. And that by itself will help to undermine the extremists in the Arab and Muslim World who are behind much of the violence. Obama "gets it." But what he actually says will help the Arab and Muslim World decide if Obama "understands" the Arab and Muslim World.

Most Arabs and Muslims do not hate Jews and they don't hate Israel. But they ARE angry with Israeli policy. That Obama is trying hard to stand up not only to Israel and to its 395 supporters in the U.S. Congress - a daunting challenge for even a president -- is a signal that Obama does understand. He understands that peace is not just abotu stopping the violence. It is about achieving the justice. Peace is about BOTH SIDES in the Arab-Israeli conflict actually doing something significant to compromise. That means the Arabs compromise and that means Israel compromises too. And the compromise that Arabs and Muslims want from Israel is simple: Stop building settlements. Stop annexing Arab owned lands. Share Jerusalem.

Despite being rebuffed not only by Israel's rightwing Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu but also by "moderate leader" Ehud Barak, Obama plans to push ahead with "tough love." The fact is you can support Israel and Israel's interests and still demand that Israel stop building settlements and be ready to compromise.

That is exactly the message the Arabs World and the Muslim World want to hear from Obama. And he has spoken that tune already. not as forcefully and maybe too diplomatically in the face of Netanyahu's flexing of his muscle in Washington D.C. -- Netanyahu is behind the letter fromt he 395 Congressmen telling him to go soft on Israel.

Arabs and Muslims expect Obama to tell them that they must act to recognize Israel, work with israel and normalize relations with Israel. Control the fanatics and the extremists and crack down ont he violence and the violent prone fanatics who are behind the terrorism.

In exchange, Arabs and Muslims are expecting to also hear that he will pressure Israel to do what it has promised to do. Return Arab land confiscated in 1967. Share Jerusalem. Stop making excuses on the issue of illegal settlements and stop expanding them. Stop them and eventually remove them or trade them land for land, inch for inch.

Maybe it is a bit of Obama's upbringing that is making him more sensitive to the concerns of the Arab and Muslim World. But it is also the right thing to do. Showing concern for the Arab and Muslim World which has been victimized by the policies of the West for a century, mainly because of Oil will be more than enough for Arabs and Muslims to "stand down" in their anger, in their suspicions and their emotions or passion. Chill and give Obama a chance to do good.

Barack Obama is NOT George W. Bush, a president who lacked the ability to comprehend the depth of the Arab Israeli conflict. Although Obama has Rahm Emanuel at his side -- Emanuel is the son of one of Israel's toughest fighters and a member of the former terrorist organization the Irgun who also did some service in the Israel Defense Force -- Emanuel is not Dick Cheney pushing an agenda of vengeance against Iraq.

Obama is unique. Maybe because of his African American heritage. Maybe because of his family understanding of the Islamic World. Or maybe, more importantly, because he is a genuine person who speaks from his heart and truly believes that America is the champion of justice, the leader of the free world and that principle and morality mean more than shortterm political hegemony.

I trust Barack Obama. I think that given the chance, he more than anyone can bring peace to the Middle East. And, maybe even use that regional peace to bring peace to the rest of the world.

-- Ray Hanania
www.RadioChicagoland.com

 

Media still can't navigate fundamental issues when it comes to "us people"

When Iranian American Journalist Roxana Saberi was charged with espionage, I was contacted by several media local and national and asked to comment.

"How does the Arab American community feel when one of their own is detained and imprisoned?" one reporter from a major regional newspaper asked me.

"We don't feel very good," I replied. And then I quickly added, "Don't you want me to comment on Roxane Saberi?"

The reporter seemed confused and I cut to the chase. Roxane Saberi is not Arab. She's Iranian. I don't even know if she is Muslim, although I know "we all look alike."

It's a major problem in the mainstream media that they have to do a little more work to distinguish between Arabs and Iranians, and Arabs and Muslims. They're all different, unless it doesn't matter, of course. It's almost as if some reporters do not think it matters. But it does.

But it doesn't just involve broad stroke stereotyping of Arabs and Muslims by the mainstream media. There are internal ethnic and religious rivalries that fuel the problem. For example, the biggest critic of the Iranian Government of President Ahmedinejad is not Israel. It is Saudi Arabia and right behind them most of the Arab World. The "Arabs" are Sunni Muslim (the largest sect of Muslims) and the Iranians are Shi'ite Muslim.

The Iranian animosity against Israel, for example, is different from the Arab World criticism of Israel.

It spills over into our respective communities in the United States, too, with many Arab journalists trying to organize as an ethnicity, and others organizing with Iranian journalists as a "regional" grouping. Tragically, the many factions don't come together. Although if there is a good side to the conflicts, it does create some "diversity."

So how do I feel about the Saberi conflict?

As a journalist, I oppose the imprisonment of any journalists. I was against the arrest, trial and imprisonment of Saberi by the government of Iran. But, I was also against the arrest and imprisonment of the Iraqi journalist who threw his shoes at President Bush during a press conference in Baghdad.

Many American and Western journalists argued Muntazer al-Zaidi, who worked for the independent Iraqi television station Al-Baghdadia, was guilty of violating his journalistic principles. Some argued his act was one of "violence" that "jeopardized" all journalists. In fact, I read that argument in the SPJ Magazine recently.

Yet, no one seems concerned that Saberi, the non-Arab Iranian journalist had in fact obtained an Iranian government classified document that detailed the American plans to invade Iraq. Saberi was not a fulltime journalist but was in fact a freelancer. Was she as spy as the Iranian government alleged? The Western media would have none of that accusation and there was a huge media campaign to protest her arrest and her detention.

To many Arab journalists, the two incidents between Saberi and al-Zaidi highlight the hypocrisy that exists in coverage of the Arab World and the Middle East, and Arabs versus Muslims. You might think that taking a classified Iranian government document would also have put all journalists in jeopardy. Was she "spying" as it was alleged? Or, was she merely ferreting out information for an exclusive story?

I'm not sure. We won't really know. Saberi's celebrity will trump any attempt to examine the details. She's an American Iranian with strong Western ties who one might argue supports the American political position against the Iranian government.

Al-Zaidi is an Arab journalist in a conflict in a very contested war in Iraq and his challenge wasn't against an unfavorable foreign blowhard who spouts anti-Semitism, but rather a critic of an American President whose foreign policies most likely violated the Fourth geneva Conventions on torture and war.

A lot of issues that outside of this small little space in the world of American Arab journalism, you can be sure, will get very little air time, debate time or earn a place on our table of free discussion.

-- Ray Hanania

www.RadioChicagoland.com

2009 M.T. Mehdi Courage in Journalism Award Deadline May 1, 2009

The 2009 M.T. Mehdi Courage in Journalism Award
Sponsored by the Mehdi Family, Arabisto.com and NAAJA

 

This award is established by the family of the late journalism pioneer Dr. Mohammad T. Mehdi.  Dr. M.T. Mehdi regularly challenged the common stereotypes and notions of Arabs in the American mass media and in the public sphere to help create a better understanding of the Arab American community; he raised the issue of Palestine and the human rights of Palestinians to national political awareness in spite of threats to himself and his family.  This was at a very difficult time in American history when Arabs were marginalized and the community was not strong. Standing up and speaking out on issues of justice, and on media professionalism, took courage. Each year, in consultation with the Mehdi Family, one candidate who demonstrates courage in journalism is selected to receive this award.

 

The Winner will receive a Plaque and a $750 Prize from the Mehdi Family.

 

Rules:

 

Journalists may nominate themselves or be nominated by another individual.

 

The nominee or the individual submitting the nomination, must submit an essay of up to 500 words describing why the nominee merits the Mehdi Courage in Journalism Award.

 

Include up to five (5) published articles, or media to support the nomination.  Radio and video submissions must be provided on CD and/or DVD. 

 

Make two (2) copies of completed submissions. (Two copies of the nomination form, two copies of the nomination letter, and two copies of all sample writings or broadcast media.)

 

 

Award Deadline:

 

Nominations must be postmarked by MAY 1, 2009.  Winner will be announced June 1, 2009.

 

Submit all nominations to:

 

Mehdi Courage in Journalism Award

Whetstone Productions

P.O. Box 1164

Maplewood, NJ 0704

 

 

Complete the entry form below and return to the above address

 

2009 Mehdi Courage in Journalism Award
Entry Form

 

 

Print all information below clearly:

 

Name of Nominee: __________________________________________________

 

Nomination submitted by: __________________________________________

 

 

CONTACT INFORMATION FOR PERSON MAKING NOMINATION:

Address: _____________________________________________________

 

City: ________________________________ State: _____ Zip: ________

 

Telephone: ___________________________________________________

 

Email: _______________________________________________________

 

If nomination is submitted by someone other than the nominee, please include contact information for the nominee here:

 

 

CONTACT INFORMATION FOR NOMINEE:

 

Address: _____________________________________________________

 

City: ________________________________ State: _____ Zip: ________

 

Telephone: ___________________________________________________

 

Email: _______________________________________________________

 

I authorize NAAJA, Arabisto.com and the Mehdi Family to use my materials in any manner necessary to promote the journalism awards, and to announce my name as a winner. I understand that my submission materials will not be returned. (In the event that the nomination if made by another individual, the winner will be asked to sign this form also to receive their award.)

 

 

Sign your name: _____________________________________________

 

 

www.NAAJA-US.com      www.Arabisto.com      www.AnisaMehdi.com

When it comes to partisan political censorship, New Media is not much different from traditional media

Although the Internet has given minorities traditionally excluded from the mainstream media an outlet to speak to the public and promote their news, events and opinions, the Internet has its land mines.

When it comes to partisan censorship, apparently, the New Media is not much different than the mainstream media ... although with the New Media, the writers censored have a greater ability to keep their audiences.

A newspaper can simply lock you out. It happens all the time in the traditional news media. Diversity limited and what there is serves as a front for traditional Ivory Tower guilt. If they pick just the ones they can deal with, and exclude the rest, they'll feel better in their newsrooms.

Well, the Internet can also exclude you too, except that you can still manage your own media networks to reach your audiences.

Facebook is notorious for censorship. Supposedly the Internets best networking site, when it comes to some issues, they have no probelms shiutting you down. In fact, hacking of controversial sites appears to have had some support from Facebook's team.

One sensitive area is the Middle East where passions run high, rhetoric is rampant, facts are AWOL and attacks prevail. Yet, even moderate voices are targeted in blanket censorship vigilance.

Another site that censors is UStream.TV, a site that supposedly is open to anyone to broadcast their own Live Internet Video Feeds. If your topic tends to lean too heavily to one side in the Middle East conflict, your show is shut down and you are locked out.

It's happened and efforts to find out why never result in answers. People who censor don't like to be accountable.

Twitter.com is also another site where people complain that comments too critical of Middle East policy and even Barack Obama are "mysteriously" deleted.

There's no mystery. It's intentional. It's censorship.

No one likes to talk about censorship unless those censored represent popular mainstream causes. If you have to represent a view that is not considered "mainstream popular" you are SOL.

It's the way of the world of journalisma nd it doesn't matter whether you are in a Third World dictatorship or oppression Middle East country. Doesn't matter if you are in a harshly repressive country like China. And, it doesn't matter if you are in the United States.

Censorship is a fundamental part of all forms of journalism. Apparently just as one man's terrorist is another man's patriot. One man's censorship is another man's civil rights border.

You won't find this discussion in American journalism schools.

-- Ray Hanania
www.RadioChicagoland.com

CIIJ study exposes serious challenges facing ethnic media in America

The Center for Integration and Improvement of Journalism in San Francisco, one of the few cities that seems to attract groups interested in the health and well-being of the ethnic American media, released a fascinating report on the challenges facing the ethnic American media.

The report has many important conclusions based on interviews with some 125 ethnic journalists, 90 percent American based and 20 percent from the "global" ethnic media which I don't think belongs in the study or category at all.

Some of the most common observations of the participants:

- Many of the ethnic media are "mon and pop" operatuibs with poorly trained news and business staffs

- Standards and practices vary and are influenced by cultural traditions

- advertising contracts and investment capital can be difficult to attract

- Government agencies and other important news sources can be indifferent to ethnic news journalists and their communities

-- the journalism "establishment" -- schools, professional association etc -- has yet to take the ethnic media journalists seriously.

The study was funded by the Tribune McCormick Foundation, a group created by one of the mainstream media most responsible for the problems faced by ethnic journalists, the Chicago Tribune, an empire built on the White elitism that believes in the old 19th Century view of minorities: "we need to help these poor inadequate people live at least decent lives. They won't be as good as us, but it is our God-given responsibility to civilize them." I call view it in the same way of the old days in Chicago politics where Whites dominated the onlyr eal minority that matter, Blacks, for many generations. We called it plantation politics. Involvement was based on co-opting, not collaboration. The White Democrat political Machine co-opted Blacks by selectively embracing those who collaborated and worked through them to oppress Black society. The Tribune Foundation, for all its good intentions, however, doesn't recognize the real need. Ethnic groups that do not have 501 c 3 operations can't get their support, a nice buffer to insure the alien hordes don't overrun the walls of the Ivory Tower in Journalism.

But, we should use "The Man" to break through and pretend we care about their superficial agendas in order to break out. This study is one insufficient step in recognizing the real presence in American media, the ethnic media.

I argue in my last post here that the economic troubles and industry collapse of the mainstream media is in part driven by this very topic. The mainstream emdia has failed to embrace the ethnic media or a true and fair and inclusive definition of "diversity." The mainstream media dsoesn't recognize diversity in its fullest sense because the Mainstream media is much like the armies of Oliver Cromwell, the Lord Protector of England and the White (non-minority) World in the 17th Century, who believed that they could civlize the uncivilized and place them in the servitude of the masters or "The Man." In truth, the failure of the mainstream media to address the reality of the ethnic press an dtreat them like equals instead of subjuigatable peoples contribute to the media's current economic collapse.

But if the mainstream media is collapsing, so to is it bringing pressure of the ethnic media.

One problem with the study is a reflection of the problem of mainstream America, too. For example, including the Global media as a part of the "ethnic" media is a major fault. Al-Jazeera Satellite television, for example, is not any part of the Ethnic American media. Although certainly most American Arabs blow off the mainstream media, which is filled with bias, lies, half-truths and incomplete journalism, and prefer to watch al-Jazeera where they can get a better, more complete look at issues that are important to them.

Americans don't think al-Jazeera is a terrorist network simply because they know anything. The image of a terrorist network comes fromt he anti-ethnic extremists who dominate the mainstream media who define and depict it as a terrorist network. And the mainstream American public is used to getting its news intravenously, like much of its education about the rest of the world, from the mainstream media's bias.

The study addresses the most often articulated concern about the ethnic media, that they are not professioal journalists because they embrace "activism" and are actually advocates for causes rather than pure bloods of the professional (Cromwell) journalism industry (The Man).

This is ridiculous, of course, The fact is that the mainstream media is often itself the worst violator of the principles of professional journalism and frequently turn into advocates of causes. It's just that they complain when the ethnic media advocates because the issues the ethnic media advocates are usually in contradicition to those adopted by the mainstream media.

The ethnic media is experiencing a growth int he face of the mainstream media's continued collapse. One reason is that the ethnic media does a better job of tapping the excluded minorities, their own communities, for support. It is challenging, of course. But the revenue is there. Minority communities rarely engage the mainstream media as fully as they might or at the same rate as the mainstream society. Ethnic businesses, like their ethnic communities, are ignored in mainstream media coverage, depicted only as tragedies and causes of tragedies rather than as members of society. But they are discovering the power of ethnic media and the ability to use it to connect their products and services more efficiently with the people most interested in buying from them, their own ethnic audience.

If the mainstream media would start to take the ethnic communities more seriously, they might discover an untapped (from their perspective) revenue stream that could helpt hem survive the economichardships we face today.

But taking their dollars without trying to understand their issues, the way the ethnic media understands, comprehends and conveys those concerns, is a waste of time. They've been trying to do that for years and it has not worked. When the mainstream media starts to respect ethnic communities, ethnic communities might open their wallets to the mainstream media. That recognition of the ethnic media by the mainstream media also will serve to strengthen the ethnic media. And strengthening the ethnic media doesn't mean the ethnic media will replace the mainstream media as a source, but rather will bring more ethnic communities into the acceptance o the mainstream media.

Ray Hanania

www.RadioChicagoland.com

 

Battle between traditional and "new" media has a definite diversity factor in it

There is no question that the mainstream news media -- print newspapers, mainly -- is falling on hard times. Recently, the Rocky Mountain News Newspaper closed its doors writing its own front page obituary. A few weeks back, the broadsheet Chicago Tribune that once looked down its long elitist nose at the tabloid Chicago Sun-Times, converted its street sale papers to a -- gasp! -- tabloid that looks exactly like the Chicago Sun-Times.

And last week, mostly mainstream traditional journalists from the print and some broadcast media, plus a handful of online bloggers and members of the growing "New Media," gathered at a conference to discuss the future of journalism. Some reported the meeting turned into a browbeating session where ivory tower mainstream media tried to lengthen the nose they used to look down upon the "New Media."

Of course, the problems of the mainstream media are of their own making. One cause focused on at the journalism conference is the assertion that the New Media is canibalizing from the mainstream media -- stealing content.

Wow. I remember years ago when the mainstream media consisted of two classes, the big city dailies and the smaller community press. The bigshot newspapers used to brag that they owned the media and they frequently stole news fromt he smaller community newspapers. One Tribune reporter told me in the early 1980s that "The news isn't reported unless it is reported in the Chicago Tribune," explaining how he explained the theft of a scoop from the Daily Southtown where I was working.

That was before, of course, the big newspapers gobbled up all the small community newspapers, gutted them, and stole their content and advertising revenues.

Now, the New Media is stealing from the mainstream media? The truth is the New Media is helping to keep the media alive.

Many of the New Media are in fact former members of the mainstream media, print, radio and TV who blog. Steve Rhodes and I discussed all this during my non-mainstream radio show this morning's radio show.

ANOTHER FACTOR ignored at the conference is the FACT that the mainstream news or traditional news media has defined "diversity" in its narrowest form, focusing only on the traditional minorities (Blacks, Hispanics and Asians) while excluding most other minorities and ethnic groups, including and especially American Arabs who are a growing population in many markets.

In fact, my morning radio show, "Radio Chicagoland" (http://www.radiochicagoland.com/), shows that there is support from the excluded minority communities like the American Arab community. Most of my ads come from businesses shunned by the mainstream news media. Had the mainstream news media embraced rather than exclude non-traditional minority groups like American Arabs, they might be able to tap that advertising revenue pool. Instead, many non-traditional minority groups boycott the Sun-Times and the Tribune because of the exclusion.

There is also a growing army of two kinds of "New Media," those who are former mainstream journalists (like myself and Steve Rhodes) and those who are "Citizen Journalists" who don't have the professional journalism training but oftentimes have a better determination to get the truth and to fill in the gaps left empty by politics and bias in the mainstream news media.

The New Media is filling the gap in the one area where the gap has always been large, in suburban community news coverage. A group of New Media consisting of Citizen Journalists and former mainstream journalists are working to launch the "Chicagoland News Network" at www.ChicagolandNewsNetwork.com. Watch for its launch.

Things are changing, but not fast enough. It's too bad, especially for the slowly vanishing mainstream daily newspaper. The ink-based print papers are being replaced by pixelized computer screens.

-- Ray Hanania
http://www.radiochicagoland.com/

How does Free World justify death of Fairness Doctrine?

About 30 years ago, a local TV station in Chicago aired a series of reports condemning Arab Americans and their support of some Middle East policies. The editorials and commentaries were one-sided and there was no balanced debate. It was just unfair. The topic was never addressed fully and its slant drove audiences to reach conclusions based on incomplete knowledge, the foundation fo stereotypes and the fuel of racism and hate.

I was able to work with several Arab American community leaders and, with the backing of the Fairness Doctrine, forced the station to allow one of our members to speak in response.

Back then, hearing more than one side of an issue was important.

I entered journalism much to the chagrin of my parents and heritage. Journalism was such a manipulative profession with so little respect, they argued. But I believed journalism was the road that could help right the world's wrongs. I could have been a doctor but I felt healing the health of a society sickened with hate and stereotypes and a lack of education was just as important as healing the human ailments.

Ironically, diversity is more welcome in the medical profession than in journalism, which I will intentionally refrain from calling a "profession."

We like to pretend that we live in a society that protects the rights of individuals. But the reality is we only offer limited protection, a protection based on convenience of thought and popularity.

So I guess I am not surprised that the country's leaders have so quickly crushed any effort to revive the "Fairness Doctrine" which was cuttled  a score before to settle a political score with those who unpopular views were kept contained.

I can't get equal time to advocate for an issue on the same platform or in the same forum where issues are often tilted to imbalance. I can advocate by fighting on my own through the new media, but i wonder how long it will be before the Internet is also contained to prevent unpopular views from rising to the same playing field of free and open discourse.

The idea that the fairness of a "Fairness Doctrine" would be unfair sounds too tragic. But for those who believe that the center of the power grid rests with the audience rather than the with the messengers or their manipulators, the crush of opposition to reviving the Fairness Doctrine is disturbing. There are those who believe that true freedom rests in the ability to allow the public to listen to all views, incluidng those that are disturbingly unpopular, and come to their own conclusions and beliefs, rather than to allow gatekeepers to decide what the audience can hear or see.

I happen to believe that the public is smart enough to make up its own mind. Let them hear and see everything because they are intelligent enough to come to judicious decisions. I dislike our society today where the messengers in a politically manipualtive media and our public leadership decides what is or isn't worthy of the public attention.

-- Ray Hanania

www.RadioChicagoland.com

 

President Obama names new communications team -- no Arabs involved

It's hard to fight anti-Arab and anti-Muslim bias in the mainstream news media, let alone in mainstream society, if no one wants to help.

Being Arab is a double-edged scimitar. Everyone knows you are a problem from all the media coverage given to the Middle East, terrorism, narrow and usually racist stereotypes, but few Americans turn to you to ask for help. So the problems never get resolved. They only are exacerbated by the continuing ignorance and lack of education.

President Barack Obama apparently is no different. This week, he announced a slew of communications appointments to strengthen his outreach to the minority and "new media" community. Most of the appointments were rewards for battles fought during the election. None of them are American Arab or Middle Eastern in heritage.

Click here to read the list.

Well. At least they included us in the press release for distribution.

There are African Americans, Hispanics, Asians. All kinds of folks and backgrounds. I couldn't find one American Arab in the list. That's too bad. There are more than 90 American Arab publications in the United States, according to monitoring we do at the National Arab American Journalists Association (www.NAAJA-US.com). It has been growing since many papers shutdown immediately after the racist backlash that began after Sept. 11, 2001 when crime took on a chiseled-in-rock face.

I think it contradicts the President's claimed message that he made when he appeared on al-Arabiyya Satellite television in the Middle East. The station is one of several Arab and English language news broadcasts that reach not only Arabs in the Middle East but Arabs in America. So we saw and heard his effort to "reach out" to the Middle East and tell them how much he cares. Cares, but not enough to give American Arabs appointments or roles in his government yet. not enough to respect veteran American Arab journalist Helen Thomas at a recent news conference when she asked a very pointed question and he dodged it somewhat embarrassingly for Thomas.

Thomas rightly pushed Obama during his first press conference, after he pulled the wool over al-Arabiyya's eyes and the Arab World, was about the hypocrisy regarding nuclear weapons in the Middle East. Everyone, including Obama, denounces countries like Iran that are working towards nuclear weapons, but mumble and avoid discussing the 200-plus nuclear weapons Israel has which are outside of International scrutiny and monitoring.

She asked Obama about the "so-called" terrorists in Pakistan, making the point that the claim of terrorism is often thrown own recklessly for political reasons rather than reality. And he avoided any reference to her question that raised reporter's eyebrows "Do you know of any countries in the region that have nuclear weapons?"

She may be 80 years old but she is not stupid.

Obama responded with a lot of blah, blah, blah that began "With respect to nuclear weapons, I don't want to speculate ... " But he avoided noting that Israel has nuclear bombs. And when she tried to follow up, he just ignored her, looked at his card which listed "approved" journalists to select at the press conference and moved on back to the mainstream fantasy world understanding of the Middle East.

But that's unusual for Thomas. During the Bush regime, Thomas was often snubbed and openly insulted by the late Tony Snow, who many said carried hateful views of American Arabs and Muslims. When Thomas asked about the the Israel-Lebanon ‘Summer War,’ Snow ignored her questions that focused on hypocrisy in the Bush policies, and once thanked her for her “Hezbollah view.” He then accused her of "hectoring," which I think was more of a slam against the mainstream media that sat there and kissed Bush's ass during many press conference involving the important and ignored Middle East issues than it was of Thomas, who is a true journalist in the spirit of the Watergate Era that drove many like myself into this unfulfilling profession that continues to fail to live up to its great promises of fairness, objectivity and "just the news."

Maybe the Arab World will wise up. Or more likely, maybe it won't.

Noble mission of Bridges TV, first Muslim cable network, collapses under weight of its founders tragedy

When Bridges TV first launched in 2004, there was great hope that it would do two things: First, open the door to Arab and Muslims to portray themselves accurately through engaging and professional journalism. And, more importantly, address the stereotypes that weigh down objective reporting in the mainstream American media which includes not only the news media but the entertainment media of Hollywood and TV and the communications media which includes organizational PR.

But over the years, Bridges TV became a kind of challenge to itself. Instead of promoting a positive image of the Arabs and Muslims, the Cable TV station fell into the community habit of playing to the divisions in the community, siding with those who fit into its religious perspective and pushing out those who did not fit.

In other words, Bridges TV became just like the mainstream media it hoped to change, discriminating against Arabs and Muslims who were too secular, weighing down the issues facing secular Muslims and secular Arabs, pushing out those whose views challenged the rising religious zealotry and political extremism that continues to plague the community. And audiences started to see this as programming tended toward political spheres and away from the Cable TV's stated mission, which was (with their emphasis):

"Bridges TV aims to foster a greater understanding among many cultures and diverse populations. Through our high-quality, informative, 24-7 programming in English; we seek to become a unifying force that can help people understand our diverse world through education and entertainment."

On Friday Feb. 13, 2009, their web site was brought down. Not by computer Internet hackers, but by the conflict that apparently not only consumed the cable TV's mission, but by internal conflicts involving the personal life of the owner and the individual who championed its creation, Muzzammil Hassan.

Muzzammil Hassan, 44, was charged with Second Degree Murder in the grusome the beheading of his wife, Aasiya Hassan, 37, at the Cable TV studios of Bridges TV in a suburb of Buffalo New York on Friday night. (Read story?) Orchard Park is just south of Buffalo New York which also dominated the headlines on Friday when a Continental plane carrying 49 people crashed just outside of the city's airport (Read story?) on its way from Newark Liberty Airport.

Hassan was such a nice person. I spoke with him often about the challenges he faces. He understood that he was fighting two battles. The first against stereotypes in the mainstream American news media and public that oppress Arabs and Muslims. The second in our own community which is divided by an internal war of political extremism versus moderation, rivalries nurtured by years of a community that has been pushed down to the furthest depths of victimization, and rising religious activism which often dictates what is and is not acceptable these days in the Arab and Muslims community.

No one can navigate through those turbulent community waters -- a common denominator across the board in the Arab and Muslim community from New York to Chicago to Los Angeles -- while also having to face up to the persistent challenges of righting the notions of America towards Arabs and Muslims which is drawn with stereotypes of hatred, suspicion, fear, lack of education, ignorance and politics is impossible.

You can't but help to acknowledge the irony that Muzzammil Hassan's tragedy involves one of the most heinous stereotypes that is constantly used to demean Arabs and Muslims. We don't know all the circumstances outside of the charges filed and the victim's remains. We do know that the stereotype runs even deeper, as his wife, who was listed on the now removed Bridges TV web site as "General Manager," was filing for a divorce.

Over the next few days and weeks, we will see the chatter in the mainstream media shift as it always does when it involves Arabs and Muslims from the facts of the issue and crime to the more prevalent stereotypes fueling the racism and ignorance in this country.

Mr. Hassan is innocent until proven guilty. But the circumstance of the events in this tragedy will reach far beyond logic and the damage this will inflict on Arabs and Muslims in America will not yet be fully felt immediately.

Tragically, it will set back and derail the forward movement of Arab American journalism. And it will separate even more the American public from the understanding of the Arab and Muslim community in this country, serving only to reinforce the extremists in the internal battle with the besieged and abandoned moderates that are the majority but who also have come to accept that the challenge of righting the keel is insurmountable and futile.

This is one of the most disturbing setbacks I think I have seen in years in the battle to change the anti-Arab and anti-Muslim stereotypes in this country. Instead of achieving the noble goals stated in the Bridges TV Mission, this event has served to make that road far longer and more difficult.

-- Ray Hanania
http://www.radiochicagoland.com/

Top 10 complaints I hear from other Arab American journalists

Here's a list of the top 10 complaints I hear from other Arab American journalists either working int he mainstream meadi, or who work in the Arab American ethnic media, followed by some of the thoughts I share ind iscussing the topics with them:

10 -- Arab American journalists do not work together.

It's true. There is an old saying in Arab Culture, the best way to motivate an Arab to do something is to inject them with envy. What that means is that oftentimes people do not do anything until they see someone else do it, and then theydo the exact same thing. Not motivated tobuild, but to tear down the efforts of the other. They don't work together. They work against each other.

That is a common problem of all ethnicities, I imagine. It has to do with the problem of "victimization." People who view themselves as victims start to live the role and life of a "victim." It's easier to fight within your own community than overcome the challenges that oppress you from outside.

9 -- They are pressured from withint heir own community and are often criticized for not being activists, and criticized when they write fairly and objectively about Middle East issues.

Arab American immigrants come from a region of the world that has no real history of free speech. The Middle East is dominated by tyrants -- most appointed by the "Free World" and the "Western  World" -- so they have no sense of the true essence of professional journalism which is more about seeking truth and accuracy than advocating a partisan viewpoint.

The Arab American community expects Arab AMerican journalists to be like the journalists int he Middle East, most of whom are driven by government censorship, stereotypes that encourage the bashing of Israel while punishing those who challenge their own Arab government corruption and hypocrisies.

And the mainstream media plays into this, always reaching out to the activists -- usually the more extreme their views the more popular as it makes for a better story -- when soliciting Op-Eds. The Chicago Tribune, for example, is guilty of this, prefering to showcase the minority voices rather than mainstream Arab AMerican voices.

8-- Editors and colleagues often confuse Arab Americans with American Muslims, and approach secular issues from a religious standpoint, seeking out non-Arab Muslims to address Arab World and Middle East issues.

There are 7 million Muslims in the United States and only 22 percent are actually Arab. There are 4.5 million Arabs in the United States and the majority are Christian Arabs, maybe 60 percent -- we don't know exactly because the U.S. Census has discouraged a proper identification of Arabs in American (you suppress minorities by not identifying them or weighing their presence in society).

7 -- There is no system to encourage Arab Americans to pursue journalism as a career.

Journalism Foundations like the Chicago Tribune's does much to help minority journalists but offers nothing to Arab American journalists, for example. The Society of Professional Journalists openned its doors to Arab American journalists, but I am sure that is a decision they regret because everything that Arab American journalists seem to address are branded as being "political" rather than placed in the same context of other ethnic groups.

So-called International journalism groups in the US exclude Arab Americans and tend to turn towards "Muslims" (many who are not from the Middle east) to fill the void in order to avoid dealing with the touchy issues of the Arab World and Middle East conflict.

6 -- They frown on approaching their editors when factual errors about the Arab community or the Middle East are published. They fear their complaints or insight will be taken the wrong way.

5 -- They feel their Arab heritage disqualifies them from being fairly considered in journalism contests.

This is hard to assess because no one wastes any time addressing the Arab American journalism community at all.

4 -- The mainstream American news media refuses to hire Arab Americans and that the term "diversity" is limited to "Blacks, Hispanics and Asians."

UNITY is a good example of this hypocrisy. When we're not even acknowledged as a minority group by the very journalism organization that is supposedly the standard of minority journalism, how can Arab American journalists fight the bias in the board rooms of the nation's newspapers, radio and TV stations.

3 -- People they cover will bring up their Arab heritage in a racist manner to criticize them for their writings. Instead of addressing the issues, subjects of their writing will complain about their heritage to Arabs and raise questions about their Middle East views.

This is a form of racism that all journalists face, especially those journalists whose ethnic, religious and racial identies are "obvious."

But Arab American journalists, because they face much tougher challenges inA merican society, are easier victims of this racism than those minority journalists with stronger support networks.

2 -- Their Arab heritage often comes up in job related interviews and they are afraid to identify themselves as Arabs.

It is often never stated, but Arab AMericans walk away from journalism interviews believing that it is true.

1 -- Arab American journalist face discrimination on every level, but mainly in their own professional lives. When editors and colleagues at their mainstream media  jobs discover that they express views on Middle East issues (often outside of their coverage responsibilities and beats), they are intimidated into silence.

So many Arab American journalists write to me saying that as soon as their journalism colleagues discovered that they had opinions as Arab Americans and were more than just journalists of Arab heritage, they came under attack.

They were pressured and intimidated to: remove their photographs from Arab web blogs; remove their names; remove past posts that might have been "too critical of Israel"; lost jobs; denied promotions; felt that it was better for them not to push to cover the Middle East related issues (the way colleagues who are Jewish seek to cover Israeli topics, or Hispanic who seek to cover Hispanic topics or Black who seek to cover African American topics.)

They are not allowed to be Arab or to allow their "Arab heritage" to encroach on their journalism.

That sucks.

-- Ray Hanania
www.RadioChicagoland.com

 

Canadian journalist and public wonder, too, why al-Jazeera English is blacklisted from their country like in US

al-Jazeera English is one of the most dependable and objective broadcast media covering the Middle East crisis. Unlike mainstream American media which relies on writers reporting from Israel and with Israeli military assignments, al-Jazeera's reporters report from both sides.

What an amazing concept in professional journalism. Report from "both sides." But that, of course, assumes that you respect the two sides in a conflict and not prefer one.

CLICK HERE TO READ a column by Joan Baxter writing in the Chronicle Herald in Canada, on this very topic. Baxter is a Nova Scotian journalist and award-winning author. Her latest book is "Dust From Our Eyes – An Unblinkered Look at Africa." Okay, the Canadians use unusual words, sometimes. But some journalists see through the charade.

Banned in the United States -- no, the media is not biased or one-sided -- and banned from Canada, too, al-Jazeera is available mainly through a very select few satellite networks, mainly Arab, and through the Internet, where I watch it all the time and see the major loopholes in the mainstream media's coverage.

-- Ray Hanania
www.RadioChicagoland.com

 

Most dependable media resource on the Middle East conflict -- al-Jazeera English

And why am I not surprised that in this conflict in the Middle East which dominates the headlines in this country, the only real object journalism resource on the conflict offering a balance unseen in the mainstream American media is the "Great Media Satan" (according to many "pundits" in this country" al-Jazeera.

Even the Israeli press is more objective than the U.S. media. Wow. It's not just our print media institutions that are collapsing under the weight of a deteriorating system and the tightening noose of robber baron corporate controls (who shuttered a dozen community papers in Chicago this week in order to salvage the parent papers that proffer corporate driven muck).

Here's a review of al-Jazeera English from Rima Abdelkader, one of the fast rising Arab American journalists in this country. Visit www.Arabisto.com, the fast-rising Arab American blogger site, too.

-- Ray Hanania
www.NAAJA-US.com

 

Reasons for poor and unprofessional coverage of the Israel-Hamas war

Facts are facts. Interpreting them is where the dispute usually lies -- with the emphasis on the word "lies". But in the Israel-Hamas war in the Gaza Strip the facts are as much the victims of the carnage, and mainstream American journalists and columnists are acting less as professional journalists and more like embedded scribes for a foreign country.

The heart of the issue involving the war in Gaza is about rocket fire. Well, anyone who has taken a moment to do the research -- to check a government's claims -- might find that the facts do not back up those claims. I checked major Israeli sources and was surprised to see how much of a contract existed between the facts of who fired rockets and when, and the reporting that dominates the mainstream American media, not just in the one-sided, biased op-ed writing that passes for "analysis," but also the reporting.

Here's a link to the study I helped complete that details precisely how many rockets were fired and when. It's an eye-opener to anyone who is concerned not about the carnage int he Middle East, because that was has been going on for more than 60 years and BOTH sides share blame. It is an eye opener for those who had any faith in the mainstream American news media. They are mindless robots, paranoid that if they dare challenge the popular and dominant narrative shoved down their throats, they will lose their jobs. And who wants tolose their jobs in this economy?

CLICK HERE to read the link, if you are not a mindless robot.

And of course, even I have to worry that if I dare to write to challenging about the failings of journalism and address the Middle East issues too fairly and objectively, this blog may get tossed off the list. You see, journalists love the big news story -- as long as there is a band wagon of people to cheer them on. They HATE the kind of breaking news that challenges the comfort of some issues like the Israel-Palestine conflict. Woodward and Bernstein can bring down a president without fear that the world will hate them, but God forbid that you might raise an issue that challenges the distorted narrative that is the dominant view in this country about what is happening in the Middle East.

Pathetic journalism, not professional journalism.

But there are factors on why the coverage of the Gaza War is so lopsided and inaccurate. Here is a solid list, maybe a list of shame for journalists in this country who claim to care about the Middle East conflicta nd who spend so much time writing about it, but who seem to care little for the reality or the facts.

- For one, no foreign correspondents are allowed in the Gaza Strip. Maybe you have noticed that ALL of the broadcast reporting and much of the print reporting is coming from journalists based in Israel with the Israeli media.

- The few Arab journalists working in the Gaza Strip have been targeted by the military and just this week another Palestinian journalist was killed: Ala Murtaja, a radio talk show host who was killed when his home was bombed in the Gaza Strip. Maybe you want to read that story?

- The mainstream American media has very few Arab American professional journalists, which gives the wrong impression that the bigotry and one-sidedness of the mainstream media has to do with one's religion. It does not. But it does have to do with the fact that only one side of the conflict is getting covered in a professional manner while th eother side is being tokenized. (That has been one mission of NAAJA, to encourage Arab Americans to put down the engineering and medical dreams and become working journalists.)

- The mainstream American media has been silent on the issue of the censorship and banning of Arab media sources in thsi country. Comcast Cable and other cable outlets REFUSE to broadcast al-Jazeera English, which offers an alternative perpsective on Middle East events, challenging the distortions offered every day and passed off as news in our media. It's reporting is more professional, more accurate and more balanced that anything you might find in this country. Here's a story by an Israeli in the Israeli media praising al-Jazeera English, a readily available resource of balanced news on the gaza War.

- That reminds me, the Israeli media and the Arab media do a far better job of covering the conflict and of allowing a more open and fair debate on the conflict. In comparison, the corporate-owned robber barons who are squeezing the life out of the American news media, don't want journalism when it comes to the Middle East. They want profits. They want to pander to a willing constituency. They don't want to fight the noble journalistic fight for truth and justice the way Woodward and Bernstein fought to get the truth out about Nixon.

Well, Nixon was Nixon. But, the Middle East is the Middle East. We can't have professional journalism there.

-- Ray Hanania
www.TheMediaOasis.com