whatever rocks your boat. al Jazeera

This is meant to be a critic on reporting on alJ.

I am not much of a media freak, so this basically about the content of the your views page and the actual articles. Sometimes i watch a vid, a report, or a thematic one, but i don't have the media experience to compare them to anything.
Generally spoken the way alJ works with videos on inet, and with you tube, is sympathic. At least the subjects appear to be of more quality then the usual medias, and not rarely the report and way of journalism.

Thats why in alJ articles there is a lot of unexpected to be found. Reporters are almost always on spot, or none farther of then other journalists.
However...i do notice a trend also on alJ to disturb the news. well not really the news only mayb.. but its backgrounds. it goes like this:

alJ has a dedication to informing, and as such often they go into great detail repeating the background of a situation. A thing btw. you may notice many other newspapers articles do. They use something close to mantras. Wen something happens,
the official variety of the context and history is donned at us endless numbers of times.
Usually you can just skip such matters. No need to read something you read 10 times before. Sometimes its even usefull, like for example trying to memorise political players and partys names in otherways remote and little highlighted nations. Sometimes its plain boring. I think everyone knows by now Bush attacked saddam over faked allegations of wmd (the last thing they might not repeat just as often).

However apparently it is also an instrument of indoctrination.
It appears the storys are not only undercooled at times, they also change. although the story has been repeated a 100 times before, certain detail never emerges, outside specific articles, certain (unwanted by the west) detail even disappear from the callroll. So at most every article on many subjects you get a summing up of a history that gets less complete, less complex and less true over time.

I don't read european media all that much to check if they use the same mechanism. For one thing because their endless repeating of brainless slogans and oneliners to excuse her political and warry behaviour abound just bores me of the pages.

Maybe it's just that i care about alJ, that makes me notice.
However i sometimes think the indoctrination can become extreme, although i do dislike the dutch papers desinforming, i see less of a structure in destroying the detail from the general report. Ofcourse we are alredi more badly informed then muslims need be. I can see the ruling system would see slightly less need in dutch media.

Paradoxally i think alJ is a professional journalists attempt to bring a better reporting, altho commercial or publicationary interests apparently do stand in also their way.

It is strange that such a well meant attempt can only be made with a relatively high level of censory and arbitrage. Not very hopegiving in fact.

So thats with the articles. I think it is my responsability to let ppl know, that alJ is among the first to be subject to mediastrategy, and the creation of blank spaces in our memory, if so told, ordered , forced, or even payed?

Partly it is pragmatically ofcourse, however the pretence of giving the other news, "more of the news", also makes it a very powerfull instrument in this respect.
I fear almost the only reason alJ can exist is it complies.

So thats for the articles, and some of it i only noticed recently.. perhaps the policy has (like once before) changed, for a more paranoid line. Either through extern pressure or through intern complacity or just because we notice it less when it goes slowly.


Your Views:

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/B84B85E3-7E69-4D79-8121-746EBEA7B304.htm

Then on with you views part. I still like this a lot, even tho i am censored at times (and worse at points)The reason to like it are the contributions from everywhere, and a few tough people that just like me always keep an eye on whats going on in a more independend way. Often its not so much good but at least then you get a pretty clear picture of what the antagonists say.

I being an anti-repression person, am often on one of the sides in a debate.
It's still better then to always do the arguments on your own. Actually its quite a soap. Apparently iraki contributions tend to be censored recently, must be they don't at all agree to anything usian , i think.
It can't be they constantly invoke prophets and deity only, cus firstly it still happens (for different gods), and secondly alJ doesnt hesitate to publish as defiling , hatemongering, scournfull and cursing posts of zionists. (I must add superfluously, and sometimes their opponents.)

Zionism is a great thing when censoring me from alJ. I had posts censored over
the corridor through israel plan, wich annoyed me, because its such a good thoughts experiment. I am not sure my post about the "least efficient economy" ((US) and her economical "enemies" was published. And i am sure on at least one occasion a specific anti-governmental remark , that wouldn't flatter israel was left out.

Wich also happened yesterday. Yesterday i wrote concerning the arab plan to park a contingent "peace"soldiers in gaza, that it might be fairer to consider burdening also the jews with an army to feed.
Just that part , what lights out the hypocracy of targetted attacks, decimating hamas supporters etc. was left out. The world remains a view that palestineans need pacifying.

and that is ... al jazeera, thought you might want to know.