The guests of TV programs have become stars. We see them almost every day. If they do not show up in a program, they do in another one. Those who talk about politics also have something to say about sociology, while those discussing crimes also talk about arts. They do not change. The same ideas are repeated time and again in a never-ending unproductive way, as if we were watching a soap opera. Perhaps the only things they change when they move from a program to another one are their ties or suits. They are a mixture of journalists, MPs, clergymen and university professors and they are known by all those who watch TV programs. Viewers can now know what these guests will say before they actually speak, while their ideas and views are never changed in channels' agendas. Indeed, many of them have secretly formed a cohesive front that defends their interest and hold off any invasion of satellite speakers from outside this front. Those people support each other and make it easier for themselves to show up in front of the cameras. They may disagree on the screen, but they have common goals and interests. They have turned the act of speaking at TV programs into a profession through which they earn much more than they do through their original jobs. Some of them have even been able to persuade some TV channels to conclude some annual contracts with them. This way, they will be guests all year long and get a fixed salary usually much higher than the one got by those channels' hosts. Moreover, these professional speakers have given themselves – or have been given by the TV channels they work for – academic or scientific titles. Some of them are called "expert in air transport issues", while they are just delegates of a newspaper at the Ministry of Aviation. Others are "strategic experts", but they have just attended a weapon and ammunition exhibition. Others are "experts in security, terrorism and religious groups", while others call themselves "doctor" or have gone out of their way to look for a title. This issue overshadows the destructive chaos being lived by some Arab satellite TV channels, especially those that do not work according to professional or ethical criteria or rules. Indeed, all they are concerned with is to find something strange, exciting and shocking to attract as many viewers as possible and make them kill some time. The most serious problem is that these channels have dragged into their vortex many prominent writers and professors. These people have now become banal, as they have appeared so many times and talked so much about insignificant issues which often have very little or nothing to do with their real specializations. Indeed, these people defend ideas that serve the TV station's goals and now viewers no longer believe in most of what they watch. There are people who have an opinion when they are guests of a TV channel and then change it when they go to another channel, as if they were just defending the ideas that are most appreciated by those financing those very TV stations. There are some researchers, writers and strategic thinkers who belong to Al-Jazeera and some who stand with Al-Arabiya. As for me, I am sure that most of these people would be changed if interests changed.
