An Arab media forum on the coverage of war in the Arab world exposed a schism in the region's media, reports Mohamed Darwish Dubai hosted the Third Arab Media Forum last week under the title "Media and War". Its sessions not only revealed the "chasm" between Arab and Western media coverage of the Arab region, but also exposed a rift within the Arab media. Held on 7-8 October, the forum was attended by Arab and Western media scions and officials. A remarkable development was the public -- and sometimes disgraceful -- manifestation of conflicts dividing the Arab media into two camps. Establishment and informal media representatives from the region debated the level of integrity of the Arab media's coverage of vital issues prior to and during the war on Iraq. United Arab Emirates (UAE) Information and Cultural Minister Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed's speech at the forum's plenary session flung open the gates of regional self-criticism. He alleged that prior to the war in Iraq the Arab media "failed to uncover the real nature of the ruling Iraqi regime". Abdullah also criticised the Arab media for "being removed from reality and in turn misleading the public by feeding it unrealistic conceptions of the possible outcomes of the apparently imminent conflict". The UAE minister further commented on the positions of Arab governments and the Arab League prior to the war, saying that they "worked to ignore reality in dealing with the rapid developments, making up for it with supple and deluding statements which made their way into the Arab media without much scrutiny, analysis or criticism". He continued that "we all know that [the Iraqi] regime was based on terrorism and oppression, and that it launched several wars against its neighbours, occupying them and attempting to erase them from the political dictionary. "Nonetheless, all the Arab media forgot or pretended to forget these facts, and failed to convey them to its audience. It even went as far as portraying that regime as if it were in the right, depicting the conflict simplistically as one between the West and an Arab regime willing to confront and challenge it in the name of Arab honour and sovereignty." Abdullah also mocked what he called "the trend overtaking our Arab satellite broadcasts based on the principle 'this is what the audience wants ... this is what they want to hear' and to hell with objectivity, balance, precision and a critical eye". Raising his voice in his concluding statements, he called on the media to "correct their discourse and direction" and speak the truth without resorting to rhetoric. Abdullah's address, which received praise from the media covering the forum, foreshadowed quarrels that erupted between several prominent Arab media personnel. The quarrel between London-based Al-Quds Al-'Arabi Editor-in-Chief Abdel-Bari 'Atwan and Ahmed Al-Rab'ie, a Kuwaiti writer and politician, during their panel entitled "Arab media coverage of the Iraqi war", proved embarrassing and provoked disdain from the attendees. 'Atwan opened by straying from the topic, speaking instead about Kuwaiti silence over the mass graves in Iraq before the 1990 invasion. When 'Atwan went on to describe Kuwait's $30 billion gift to Saddam Hussein during the Iraq-Iran war in 1988, Al-Rab'ie interrupted him. In response 'Atwan quipped, "Don't be in such a hurry, the day is still young." A flurry of interjections from audience members supporting 'Atwan or Al-Rab'ie immediately erupted. When order returned, two camps had emerged in the audience and on the panel itself. 'Atwan positioned himself against the Arab media's focus on the mass graves in Iraq when "many Arab countries have similar mass graves resulting from massacres carried out against their own people". He stated that Arab governments always try to "delude the media and people alike" leaving satellite channels as the only venue of free expression in which Arab investigative journalism can gain "credibility and respect". He said that the satellite media's increased access to Western officials is proof of its growing strength. Youssef Ibrahim, a panelist from the Wall Street Journal, agreed. "In a short period of time [Arab satellite media] became a platform and an effective means to respond to Western media, and hence the Arab citizen now has a channel to the top leadership in the United States," he said. The discord between 'Atwan and Al-Rab'ie -- each representing divergent trends in Arab media circles -- was manifest in their views of the regimes in Kuwait and Iraq as well as their opinions of Arab satellite channels. Al-Rab'ie claimed that these channels "attempt to manipulate the general sense of frustration of the Arabs, to increase viewership while neglecting the truth". As an example of emotive "fabrications" employed in this manner Al-Rab'ie cited the Iraqi farmer who allegedly downed an Apache helicopter. "This made headline news in all Arab countries, but the farmer owned up later that it was untrue," he said. However, Al-Rab'ie agreed with 'Atwan that there is a substantive difference between official pro-establishment media and independent satellite media. He claimed the former "fears the ruler". If comparing Arab and Western media coverage of the region, especially the war on Iraq and the Intifada, took second place to Arab introspection, it nevertheless remained a point of reference. British journalist Martin Wilcott said that both "the Arab and Western media looks at the other with a degree of disappointment and mutual distrust." Wilcott stated that the Western media wants the Arab media to direct the region towards democratic reform while the latter sees the former as biased. He argued that the "middle ground" for both sides -- never mind that the idea of Arab media constituting a unified "front" can be dismissed in light of events at the forum -- is cooperation in conveying clear and realistic images of developments in the region. Georgetown University Professor Hashem Sharabi believed that "the West has a deformed view of the Arab world and this phenomenon has become more prevalent than at any other time in the past, especially in light of the new outlook on the world which is being promoted and imposed by the US administration across the globe." But these and other regional truisms stirred little in the way of debate in Dubai. Likely, the most significant impression which participants and attendees of the third forum took with them is that the Arab-Western media dialogue was curiously calm, while the Arab-Arab dialogue was uncomfortably heated. With the grand political questions still seeking answers, six months even after the fall of Baghdad, this is hardly surprising.
