4 ms·

Will Americans trust Al Jazeera America? It depends how they browse the web

15 points by ckelly 13y ago

greenyoda 13y ago
I'm not sure I can consider Al Jazeera to be objective, considering that its parent company is owned by a member of the Qatari royal family[1]. The royal family is essentially the government of Qatar, which is "ruled as an absolute and hereditary emirate"[2]. Would you consider a media company run by the U.S. government to be objective? Or one run by the Russian government? If not, then why would you consider Al Jazeera to be objective? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamad_bin_Thamer_Al_Thani https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamad_bin_Thamer_Al_Thani [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qatar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qatar
- racbart 13y ago
  With this reasoning, one should never consider BBC as objective as it's owned by the British government. Yet it has been perceived for years by many as one of the most objective and thorough TV station worldwide.
- thiagoharry 13y ago
  Would you consider any news source objective? Private news sources aren't owned by people with its own interests? More important than a mystical objectivity is the access to diversity of opinions in media.
AsymetricCom 13y ago
I've been reading Al Jazeera for several years now, since they had a big break out with a story that was mentioned in MSM, I forget what exactly. Anyway, in comparison to American MSM, their journalistic merit won't be hard to gain in the eyes of critically-minded Americans who are sick of being fed predigested talk bites and transparent pep rallys for Wall Street. The presentation may be a bit biased if you're careful and know what to look for, but it's nothing in comparison to anything on TV here.
milsorgen 13y ago
While I didn't expect a high level of trust I was surprised by how low the number is. I would like to see numbers for other news outlets, however, before I lose all faith in my fellow man. That's not to say I view AJ (or any other news outlet) as objective or trustworthy but I feel these numbers reflect American perceptions built upon a foundation of ignorance.
- cdash 13y ago
  Well of course, it's the terrorist network in the minds of many americans and I am not kidding when I say that.
hga 13y ago
"Do you perceive Al Jazeera America as an objective news source." Wrong question. (ADDED thanks to milsorgen's comment: particularly wrong when there aren't controls for their MSM competition.) Now, I haven't seen any of it yet, but I've heard from multiple sources they do stuff the MSM doesn't do, aside from Fox and the OPED page of The Wall Street Journal. E.g. gather a not completely biased set of talking heads and let them talk. The don't have to be "objective", they can have an obvious Muslim/Arab slant, they need to be interesting ... and with only Fox for opposition it's entirely possible they can pull it off. Especially since their powers that be aren't part of the US MSM's monoculture.
- rob05c 13y ago
  I concur. When I read Al Jazeera or China Daily, I don't do it because I trust them, or by any means think they're objective. I read them to get an idea of how other parts of the world perceive events. You could say I read them because they're not objective.
iterationx 13y ago
Russia Today is the best source of news if you don't want pandering to the entrenched power structure. Look at today's headlines: ‘Monsanto Protection Act’ quietly extended by Congress,EU lawmakers nominate Snowden for Sakharov human rights prize,Syria researcher cited by McCain, Kerry fired for fabricating credentials,CIA starts arming Syrian rebels overtly

15 points by ckelly 13y ago

I'm not sure I can consider Al Jazeera to be objective, considering that its parent company is owned by a member of the Qatari royal family[1]. The royal family is essentially the government of Qatar, which is "ruled as an absolute and hereditary emirate"[2]. Would you consider a media company run by the U.S. government to be objective? Or one run by the Russian government? If not, then why would you consider Al Jazeera to be objective? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamad_bin_Thamer_Al_Thani https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamad_bin_Thamer_Al_Thani [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qatar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qatar

racbart 13y ago
With this reasoning, one should never consider BBC as objective as it's owned by the British government. Yet it has been perceived for years by many as one of the most objective and thorough TV station worldwide.
thiagoharry 13y ago
Would you consider any news source objective? Private news sources aren't owned by people with its own interests? More important than a mystical objectivity is the access to diversity of opinions in media.

AsymetricCom 13y ago

I've been reading Al Jazeera for several years now, since they had a big break out with a story that was mentioned in MSM, I forget what exactly. Anyway, in comparison to American MSM, their journalistic merit won't be hard to gain in the eyes of critically-minded Americans who are sick of being fed predigested talk bites and transparent pep rallys for Wall Street. The presentation may be a bit biased if you're careful and know what to look for, but it's nothing in comparison to anything on TV here.

milsorgen 13y ago

While I didn't expect a high level of trust I was surprised by how low the number is. I would like to see numbers for other news outlets, however, before I lose all faith in my fellow man. That's not to say I view AJ (or any other news outlet) as objective or trustworthy but I feel these numbers reflect American perceptions built upon a foundation of ignorance.

cdash 13y ago
Well of course, it's the terrorist network in the minds of many americans and I am not kidding when I say that.

hga 13y ago

"Do you perceive Al Jazeera America as an objective news source." Wrong question. (ADDED thanks to milsorgen's comment: particularly wrong when there aren't controls for their MSM competition.) Now, I haven't seen any of it yet, but I've heard from multiple sources they do stuff the MSM doesn't do, aside from Fox and the OPED page of The Wall Street Journal. E.g. gather a not completely biased set of talking heads and let them talk. The don't have to be "objective", they can have an obvious Muslim/Arab slant, they need to be interesting ... and with only Fox for opposition it's entirely possible they can pull it off. Especially since their powers that be aren't part of the US MSM's monoculture.

rob05c 13y ago
I concur. When I read Al Jazeera or China Daily, I don't do it because I trust them, or by any means think they're objective. I read them to get an idea of how other parts of the world perceive events. You could say I read them because they're not objective.

iterationx 13y ago

Russia Today is the best source of news if you don't want pandering to the entrenched power structure. Look at today's headlines: ‘Monsanto Protection Act’ quietly extended by Congress,EU lawmakers nominate Snowden for Sakharov human rights prize,Syria researcher cited by McCain, Kerry fired for fabricating credentials,CIA starts arming Syrian rebels overtly