|
StrangerThan -> RE: The Arab Spring (8/27/2011 10:23:23 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: DomKen
quote:
ORIGINAL: StrangerThan
I used the term arab free press because you did. It's notable that they shared their 4th forum last year. Al Jazeera did indeed exist before then, but in their early years were owned by Qatar, and went through many controversies, claims of bias, and claims of manipulation by Qatar. The "emergent" arab free press is comprised of several news organizations, along with noted websites and such. It has primarily gained traction, world wide attention, and accolades via coverage of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Al Jazeera is still owned by the Qatar government. There were claims of bias because some didn't believe that the Qatar government would set up a real BBC type indepedent channel. Time has proven those people wrong.
quote:
So the very media you give all the credit and glory to, gained its audience and trust, when bright one?
between 1996 and 2001. 9/11 and the aftermath was what really got Al Jazeera into the same category as CNN international and BBC world.
quote:
And if you will re-read the initial post, I said some credit. I'm willing to agree on grounds that Bush is not responsible for the Arab Spring. I can also, however, see how it could have easily have been delayed by a decade without the actions that took place.
The simple fact is nothing Bush did made these event spossible nor did anything he did made them occur sooner. Quite simply as I've now explained twice Bush's actions probably delayed these events.
And still there is only one person who can be said to be directly or indirectly responsible and that is Bouazizi.
Then we will just agree to disagree. Or you can not agree to disagree. Bouazizi was a catalyst for sure. I'm not denying that role to him. I just see it on a greater scale where many pieces of the puzzle had to be in place before the right mix of volatility, unrest, hope, anger, and yes coverage had to be in place before his self immolation would have simply disappeared like so many other deaths had.
The middle east was stagnant in many ways. In some places it remains so. In others, not so much. The fact that you've explained it, doesn't make it right. It makes it your perspective. I despised Bush. I have no problems admitting that. At the same time looking back, what is happening now, are events he described. Not only did he describe them, but undertook in his artless way, an attempt to make it happen. How much of that plays into the reality of it actually taking place is something we can debate forever. A fact no one can argue is that within a decade of uttering that vision, half a dozen of the staunchest regimes in the middle east have folded. Although you said it in a different way, in that 9/11 and the aftermath are what got Al Jazeera on the world stage, what we're really talking about is 9/11 and the subsequent invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq.
Also in looking back, one notable bit was the derision from leftists of that vision along with reasons why "it ain't happenin". I'm sure those same people are still positing what will and will not be, along with what was and was not. The fact that they weren't right in the first place, isn't going to help make them right in the second.
Given the timeline, the ouster of Hussien and the Taliban, this series of events will be mentioned in the same paragraphs. You think Bush deserves no credit. I'm not sure credit is the right word, but in looking at the state of the world 10 years ago, I'm not sure it could have happened this quickly without him. Even if his role in history will be, the one man who brought attention and credibility to the press.
Shrug.
|
|
|
|
