The Image of the United States in the Arab Blogshpere: Readings from Al Arabiya.net
Keywords: US Image in Arab Media, Public Sphere, Blogsphere, Bloggers, Citizen Journalism, Arab Democratization process Abstract Several Studiesi argued that Internet technologies provided Arab citizens a new public space for multiple societies, each with its own characteristic, identity and goal, to act. Indeed Internet technologies changed the nature of public communication in the Arab World as Arabs started to participate in discussions about matters of common concern. Arab media, especially Arab independent new satellite channels, started extending their communication space from the real to the virtual world to explore realms which lie beyond existing social, political and physical constrains to edify citizens away from government local media breaking all traditional taboos, exposing the hypocrisy of Arab political systems. As a result, new forms of citizen journalism emerged where audience became news producers in a sense that they started interpreting news provided over the Internet and start shaping/ reshaping them according to their ideologies and repost them. It is not difficult to argue that new media in the Arab world started to operate on different terms than the state controlled media especially on sensitive and taboo issues like Islam and the West, Peace process, Pan Arabism, Nationalism, and the United States. The later, of course according to Altermanii, a topic is considered sensitive topic to discuss since officially most Arab countries are close allies to the US, some countries are US partners in its alleged war on terrorism in the region. In that sense, government media cannot be considered a proper tool to measure Arab World attitude towards the US, however with the proliferation new media proliferation, one can test the image of the United States in Arab ‘new media’ especially Arab blogs, news comments, and messageboard which are considered a free open forum for discussion. The study aims to assess the image of the United States as portrayed by Arab citizen blogs of messageboard over AlArabiya.net website, which is considered the most read newsportal in the Arab World. Further, the study seeks to identify different groups ‘networks’ available in this new public sphere and see how these ‘actors’ are identifying themselves ‘us’ against the United States ‘them’ as well as among each other.
Introduction: Internet Technology and the creation of new Public Sphere The Arab world is known as a home to some of the least democratic political structures where basic human rights are barely met, that is why Arabs saw in Internet technology a medium that is likely to have profound implication on the democratization in the region. Arabs saw in the Internet an opportunity to curb government pressures creating, what Howard Rheingold (1993) defines, a vision of ‘Athens without slaves,’iii an arena in which individuals participate in discussions about matters of common concern, in an atmosphere free of coercion or dependencies that would incline individuals toward acquiescence or silence. Internet technology did lead to a more horizontal and less vertical communication model among Arab society, enabling people to bypass the controlled regimes and traditional mass media, allowing the society to create a developmental agenda of their own.iv Theorists of the information society, such as Manuel Castells (2003) saw that one of the most important factors that constitutes Internet as a medium that fosters knowledge society is its ability to “thrive free expression in all its forms…It is open source, free posting, decentralized broadcasting, interaction, purpose-oriented communication, and shared creation that find their expression.”v Castells (2003) and Curran (2001) further explained that values embodied in Internet technology and its configuration as an interactive, participatory medium of communication and information- a “pull” technology, in contrast with the “push” technology of other form s of mass media- have dominated thinking about the Internet and its impact on the individual and society and ultimately obscured the social life of the technology and the sociological network of actors that shapes its development and implementation.vi James Curran (2001) viewed the Internet capacity being an agent for ideas representation as most important for Internet characteristic.vii He argued that those ideas clustering audience into organized diverse social groups to express their views. In that sense, the Arab world created an early version of a virtual ‘Knowledge-networked’ communitarian that cluster around different ideologies of development and freedom that were met by widespread of acceptance by the Arab society.viii Auter (2008) explained that the original values of Internet technologies among Arabs were built around the characteristics of the Internet as a medium that promotes free and
open access and the superiority of exchange and participation.ix Auter argued that Arabs used Internet technologies potentials to restructure existing communication system offering new possibilities for management and delivery of information and for interaction among individuals and groups. Arab media, especially new Arab independent satellite channels, started extending their communication ‘space’ from the real to the virtual world to explore realms which lie beyond existing social, political and physical constrains. This new realm promoted intra-cultural dialogue among different Arab political parties, civil societies, networks, groups and individuals to create or extend their physical presence into cyberspace arguing that the elimination of physical distance encouraged citizens to capitalize in active online participation.x Using this approach, problems in the Arab World were analyzed at different levels--from international to several local groups, and development is perceived to be need-oriented, endogenous, contributively, self-reliant, equitable, and promoting of local cultures.
Internet technologies transformed communication in the Middle East from a mouthpiece for their local government to a tool to edify citizens about their rights breaking all traditional taboos while exposing the hypocrisy of Arab political systems. New Media became alternative to political systems where the common man can actively participate in live discussions and debate issues that concern his daily life. News networks succeeded in using the Internet as an active public sphere that can put pressures on rigid Arab systems, making new realities from virtual politics. Fandy (2004) stated that new ‘news sites’ have the potential for ushering a true political change in the Arab World for its “ability to create a political parallel universe where it can steer viewers toward ideologically driven outlets that confirm their own views.xi The Arabic Online Public ‘networked’ Sphere The introduction of Internet in news media production extended the media space in the Arab world beyond the local realm. With the expansion of the number of media outlets online expanded the Arabic public space towards more inclusiveness with more actors being introduced in the public discussion and more taboo issues being tackled. The Arab Public Sphere can be seen, hence, through the lens of mediated space that associated the development of new media institutions.
This new sphere did not confine itself to the local or regional boundaries, mashing itself to the global public sphere, especially after 9/11, where the Arab world became a battle ground for the new war on terror. Global calls for modernizing the Arab world and intensifying democratic governance coincided regional political debates on political reform opening the door for different new political players to use new technologies new media public spaces to win Arab audience. Some Arab media researchersxii argue that what is present in the Arab world is not atypical public sphere since most of the emerged Arab media doesn't have a global reach and that few online media can be considered active actors by the virtue of global reach because they are both financially and editorially independent, the remaining national and government affiliated media does not reflect a genuine public sphere since these media are still under local Arab governments policies. Other researchers like Alterman and Ayishxiii refer to the existence of the Arab sphere in its mere physical presence. In other words, both authors believe that the existence of the public sphere in the Arab world lies in the existence presence of Arab media outlets regardless of their affiliations, finance or editorial policy as it did create a mass mediated arena(s).
Ayish (2008) defines a
‘genuine’ Arabic sphere as an ‘arena’ where local/ global, state/none state actors exist and are given free access to debate issues of concern to local citizens.xiv Ayish (2008) and Lynch (2006) discuss that the presence of Arab public sphere exist arguing that despite skepticism, there is an Arabic public sphere where discussions are centered on the analysis of genuine Arab socio-political issues.xv Ayish (2008) adds that these arguments are inducted from global discussions on development and democracy.xvi These arguments are, then, adopted mainly by Arab new media to be buffered and developed to issues to the Arab socio-political discourse. Lynch (2006) further explained that the Public Sphere in the Arab world is present through the genuine Arab citizens discussions.xvii Hafez (2007) saw that in only a few years, New forms of interactive media compensated for the weak and rigid political systems’ inability to establish and mobilize links with their societies. The increase of market competition between websites led to even more media liberalization and more citizen deliberation.xviii New forms of citizen journalism started to develop.xix Arab Citizens started using the interactive features provided to fill the void created by traditional media’s ignoring of important events and issues, a media that has
been disconnected from the public needs for many years.xx With the popularity of the Internet growing, more people are joining the hybrid world for news, information, asking questions, offering comments, stating their opinions, and engaging in political debates, or communicate with other readers, which are all features that make online media appealing to readers.xxi New ‘networks’ and ‘groups’ started interpreting news provided over the internet and shaping/ reshaping them according to their ideologies.xix It is not difficult, hence, to argue that online news media in the Arab world started to operate on different terms than the state controlled media especially on sensitive and taboo issues like Islam and the West, Peace process in the Middle East, Nationalism and Pan Arabism, and of course the United states. The later, according to Alterman (2000)xxii, is a topic that is considered to be a sensitive topic to discuss since officially most Arab countries, especially Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Jordan are close allies to the US, with some countries like Yemen are America’s partners in its alleged war on terror in the region. Official media, in that sense cannot criticize US role in the region not allowing a room to criticize US stands as it will lead to a deligitimization of the entire regime, hence it is through online news media and readers comments and feedback one can measure Arab attitude regarding the United States since online news media are considered as an open-forum for Arab discussion. Actor Voices and their modes in the Arab Blogsphere In his study entitled Who Says what on the Internet? Ammar Bakkar (2006)xxiii defined Actor Voices as the communication of individuals in cyberspace and how they represent ‘themselves’ as well as bodies and organizations they are affiliated or sympathize with and how they perceive the ‘other’ in their online dialogue. xxiv
With Internet Users mushrooming 9 folds in five years, Arab voices are important to be examined and analyzed since Arab have a large number of channels where they can express themselves, to discuss, group and regroup, ally and create networks, and listen to others and how they express themselves in these channels.
Bakkar (2006) in his study examined the discourse associated with these conversations in order to understand the nature of communication in the Arab world. identifying ten actors in
the Arabic blogsphere: first are the Extremist, Liberal, Official, Religious, Young, Women, Elite, Civil e-societies, Arab Communities in the West and Business Organizations voices.xxv
Bakkar (2006) found out that some voices in Arab conversations are “higher” than others discussing that these voices are “larger in quantity, use stronger expressions in terms of judging other voices, opinions, and ideas, control the platform, and are organized based on ideology or cultural beliefs. Voices start “screaming” when they put efforts to exclude other voices. They scream so no other voices are heard.”xxvi This analysis echoes Castells (2006) discussion on networks where the network is alive only when the number of discussions within the network is available, and that the power of network is measured by the number of discussions between different members associated to that network and that the power of actor network within the sphere is not stable differs according the topic of discussion and news value to the networks in one hand and degree of member participation on the other.xxvii Further, Arab audience discussions can be further classified in three different modes of activities: activism, Political bridge- blogging, and public sphere engagement. First are Activists directly involving themselves in social movements beyond the virtual world sing messages and blogs to identify their stand, position themselves, spread information, coordinate action, and magnify the impact of contentious politics (ex boycotting American products). Second are the Political bridge bloggers who primarily address issues being voiced by minorities (voice of the voiceless) using messages to bridge information to the masses (ex Christian minorities pledge to the US showing how they are mistreated in some parts of the Arab World). Finally, public-sphere bloggers who tend to deeply engaged themselves with public arguments about domestic politics and the effect of global politics on daily life (ex effect of USAID on job market).
United States Image in Arab media and Blogshpere Throughout the last century, with the proliferation of global mass communication, there are mutual image misrepresentation between the US and the Arab World. During the
1990s, the US government, enjoyed more support among Arab governments than among Arab populations, however after George Bush ‘crusade raid’ in the region and the ‘holy war’ in Iraq, the anti US attitude came from both Arab governments and Arab citizens, posing a major challenge for the American administration facing low public support in the Middle East while, at the same time, an increasing number of popular Arab networks portrayed the ugly face of the American-led war in Iraq. It is not because the Arab world ‘believe in what their governments say, but rather because the US did not reach to the Arab World.’ Using New Media technologies facilitated stirring up anti-US sentiments, which was clear Doubtless 9/11 events intensified the mutual waves of bad attitudes between Arab and the US. Media did not do much effort to rebuild and change these images. Recent statistics showed a major decline in US image in the Arab world. US credibility and popularity range from under 10 percent in Syria and Egypt to less than 50 percent in Jordan and Gulf states. The United States currently faces serious challenges as a result of its deteriorating image in the Arab Middle East, especially after its armed interference in the Middle East region. Several studies conducting several polls of the US image in the Arab World showed an overwhelming majority of Arab opinion responds is critical of US foreign policy. Seib (2005), assessing US public Diplomacy viewed that ‘the most serious problem facing the United States abroad is its very poor public image in the Muslim world.’xxviii A 2004 poll of people from Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, UAE, Egypt and Lebanon concluded that over 60 percent of the respondents had negative views on the US policies in the region, when the poll was replicated in 2005 the percentage reached 85 percent. William Rugh (2004), former US Ambassador in the region and expert on Middle East politics, argued that Arabs immediate reaction to the 9/11 events ‘was sympathy for Americans as victims… even some saw justification in the US war against Taliban and Al Qaeda’xxix because it was what they saw in their traditional media, however with the proliferation of news media outlets like Al Jazeera and Al Arabiya, many discussions bashed traditional scenarios opening the door for a number of new interpretations.xxx
The US image in the Arab World can hence be seen through a lens of two-end range spectrum. The first gives a rather positive to neutral image presented in Arab government owned media; the other end shows a negative image of the United States. This image is presented by different new independent media, each one has its reasons buried in its agendas for its stand against the united States and reflected by Arab discussions and comments towards news dealing with the United States. Purpose of the Study Generally the study aims in assessing the image of the United States as portrayed by Arab citizen blogs of messageboard over Al Arabiya website. Further, the study seeks to identify different groups or networks available over the Internet and see how they are identifying themselves over the Internet ‘us’ against the United States ‘them’ as well as among each other (different networks). Al Arabiya.net: History and Development As previously mentioned, new ‘independent’ media can be seen as an alternative to fable political parties becoming tool for creating a new political will for Arab society. Kai Hafez stated that satellite channels in that sense can be considered one of the biggest political parties where their programs reflect their ideologies and their use of interactivity as a tool to for communicating with their ‘followers,’ a place where audience are mobilized and new forms of political participation are taking place. In that sense Al Arabiya is considered one of the most popular political parties in the Arab world. James Zogby statistics about satellite viewership in the past three years showed that Al Arabiya is becoming one of the most popular news channels in the Arab world gaining more viewers than Al Jazeera, but still trailing it in the overall viewership.xxxi In his analysis to Al Arabiya, Zogby (2007) and Aiyish (2006) showed that it is because Al Jazeera are not developing their production line, they are losing their audience in the Middle East to Al Arabiya who is attracting audience with a new line of programs that challenge audience reason. Furthermore Al Arabiya news portal over the Internet (www.alarabiya.net) is the ‘most viewed news sites’ by Arab audience and chosen as the best Arabic news channel at the fourth Arab media festival held in Beirut.xxxii
The portal was launched in 2004 in Dubai UAE, it was crowned the best website of an Arabic news channel (Ameinfo, 2006). The site features articles on regional and international politics, business & economy, sports, and variety, and material published in the site is updated several times per hour. The ranking of the stories depends on their importance and their freshness. The site utilizes the latest in Web technology makes uses of extensive multimedia features in presenting audio-visual stories, reader choice of stories, interactive votes, and links to the most viewed articles, printed, saved and sent via email, and the commentary section, which allows readers to comment on published articles. Studying the coverage of the War in Iraq on the Al Arabiya Website, Yeslam Al-Saggaf (2006) found that readers’ comments on articles do not appear on Al Arabiya.net site immediately; they are first studied by Al Arabiya staff for language and content misuse and then released for public viewing. However, Al-Saggaf (2006) argues that despite this form of content regulation, the number of reader comments is high which proves high audience involvement. Those comments exceed responding to the original text to opening discussions on the issue discussed and how different audience perceive different approached to discussed stories. Methodology In his study on newspaper analysis, John E Richardson (2003) gave a number of analytical tools to study news and textual analysis interpretations. Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), as proposed by Richardson (2003), can hence be a solution since it offers ‘different interpretations’ of the meaning of texts beyond its textual means; arguing that the textual meaning can be constructed through an interaction between ‘producertext-consumer’ rather than simply being ‘read off’ the page which is crucial for this study analyzing new media content where text is produced by both journalists and consumers.xxxiii According to Van Dijk (2001) CDA can be described as a “shared perspective on doing linguistic, semiotic or discourse analysis” where news ‘language’ ought to be analyzed in relation to the social context in which it is being used and the social consequences of its
use; and, more specifically, the relationship(s) between discourse and its social conditions, ideologies and power-relations needs to be examined.xxxiv Richardson (2003) quoted Titscher statement that CDA seeks to have an effect on social practice and social relationships (Titscher et al, 2000), particularly on relationships of (dis)empowerment, dominance, prejudice and/or discrimination.xxxv Hence one can see the image of the United States can be interpreted not only through the use of language within the news, but also through the discourse of discussion dialogue between different respondents to the original text in one hand and to each other on the other. Wodak (1996, 2000) stated that in seeking to accomplish these goals, CDA investigates, and aims at illustrating, “a relationship between the text and its social conditions, ideologies and power- relations.”xxxvi In that sense, Public Opinion about the United States can be shaped through the inter-relationship between Society and culture are dialectically related to discourse: society and culture are shaped by discourse, and at the same time constitute discourse. Every single instance of language use reproduces or transforms society and culture, including power relationsxxxvii In that sense, for the purpose of the undergoing study, using CDA can help in identifying different social networks presented in the Arab messageboards in contrast to the US. Or what can be drawn from the work of Teun A. Van Dijk (2001) how social groups (us vs. them) are presented in discourse and how ideological discourse is constructed socio-politically as a means to confirm group dominance. The research is not concerned with language or language use per se, but with identifying different social actors in Arab blogosphere presented in Arab messageboard discussion. Through textual analysis, one can identify different societies present over the Internet, how they are networked, how they identify themselves
and how they are portraying the other. Further one can see how different groups view each other in relation to the ‘other.’xxxviii For both Van Dijk (2001) and Richardson (2003) social practices can be induced from both the Journalist practices and reader feedback (i.e. a two way relationship). Similarly, there is “a dialectical relationship between the consumption of journalistic texts and social practices: readers decode the meanings of texts using knowledge and beliefs of the world, and these texts go on to shape (through either transformation or reproduction) these same readers’ knowledge and beliefs.”xxxix
This can portray a vision of power structure of different group over the Internet. Deduce available over the Internet ‘us’ through their use of language. Analyzing language used (through their use of words, examples, structural rational and logical reasoning) one then can identify their different ‘social networks context’. Both Castells (2003) and Richardson (2003) believe that power within network can be seen through network ‘voice’ or the network ability to gather audience who share common beliefs and who can be motivated to produce textual messages that carry similar ideological messages to keep the discussion alive.xl In order to reach such conclusion, This study will be based on N. Fairclough’s approach in analyzing CDA in terms of: The analysis of relationships between concrete language use and the wider social cultural structures. […] He attributes three dimens ions to every discursive event. It is simultaneously text, discursive practice - which also includes the production and interpretation of texts - and social practice. The analysis is conducted according to these three dimensions. (Titscher et al, 2000: 149-50)xli
According to Wodak (2008) Fairclough’s model of CDA, provides a more accessible method of doing CDA than alternative theoretical approaches arguing that to fully understand what discourse is and how it works, analysis needs to draw out the form and function of the text, the way that this text relates to the way it’s produced and consumed and the relation of this to the wider society in which it takes place. Richardson (2003) stresses on Wodak point of view adding that through Fairclough circular process where social practices influence texts, via shaping the context and mode in which they are produced, and in turn texts help influence society via shaping the viewpoints of those who read or otherwise consume them.
The Process of Selecting Stories to Observe For the purpose of the study and to guarantee maximum audience involvement regarding US image in Arab blogshpere, the research chose to study stories published over Al Arabiya.net for the month of March 2007. Al Arabiya published 112 news items during that month, for the discourse analysis, five stories were chosen to represent both Al
Arabiya news trends as well as Citizen message direction. The following criteria were taken into consideration while selecting the sample. This month was selected for its significance as it commemorate 4 years after the US ‘invasion’ to Iraq, six years from G Bush declaration for the creation of ‘Great Middle East’ and enforcing democratization in the Middle East region which star ted by launching ‘War on Terror’ Further, the annual Arab summit took place during March 2007 in Riyadh where it was expected to unify Arab world stand in issues concerning, the US war in Iraq, facilitating discussion between different Iraqi sects, facilitating dialogue between Palestinian authority Fatah and Palestinian elected government Hamas which can lead to a unified Palestinian stand in their Peace negotiations with Israel. The summit was to discuss the Presidential problems in Lebanon and Syrian stand in Lebanon. Other items on the Summit agenda include Iranian influence, UAE dispute with Iran and the issue of Darfur. Further, the execution of Iraqi ex Vice President Taha Yassin Ramadan brought different discussions on the fairness of the trial, as well as sectarian issues in Iraq. US congress discussions about planning a timetable to withdraw US troops from Iraq and US president decision to veto the congress decision brought discussions about freedom and democracy within the US political system and ‘real’ reasons behind US interference in Iraq. For these reasons the three news items that were selected for analysis were representing these topics. The selection process took into consideration having topics that are directly related to the US Arab relations. The subject areas include US-Iraq situation, US as a mediator in the Arab Israeli Peace Process, US Palestinian relations, US and the democratization process in the Middle East, Arab relation with the US, and US internal affairs. In the sense, the stories can be seen as one that covers US Arab relation, another covered Arab US relation and the third dealt with Arab attitude towards US internal relations.
The selection process, also considered that the stories were to represent the month of March. In other words one story was selected from the beginning of the month, the second two stories were selected representing the middle of the month and the final two stories were selected to represent the end of the month. Further the selection process took into consideration the direction of news: one story had a positive attitude towards the US, another story had a neural attitude towards the US, and the final news item had a negative attitude towards the US. As for message number selected, two stories had a high message turnout, another two stories had a moderate response turnout and one story had low response turnout.
Discussion: Arab World ‘Network(s)’ and the US(s) Reading across Message board messages from Al Arabiya, it was clear that there were multiple groups (networks) available, each with their own identity, belief, set of reason and rational. Groups’ identities were vividly clear from their use of language, vocabulary and examples. Each group attacked the US for a certain reason(s) providing their reason for attacking US policies as well as finding solutions to ‘degrade’ the US according to their own ideologies and shared valued. Religious networks and the US Using Fairclough approach, it was clear that the largest group clustered over Al Arabiya message board comments came from ‘Islamists.’ Within Islamist, on can classify them to radical extremists, moderate Islamists and Shiite minority Islamists. Radical extremists see the Internet as their main avenue to reach audience since they are denied to use traditional forms of media in almost all Arab countries. For them, the Internet it their main tool to transmit their messages to attract more audience and communicate among each others. Generally, radical extremists are loud in their use of language, using vocabulary that turns discussion into vivid voices. Some of their language include ‘our voice will be heard,’ ‘the word of God will dominate the world,’ ‘Islam is the solution’. Radical
extremist voices attempt to scream all the time. Using ‘high tone,’ structural sentences that express angry, determined, highly conservative radical political-oriented. It was clear that Radical extremists exclude replying to other comments that address their policies, focusing on their loud voice and messages that are repeated by several followers in several occasions that focuses on one message ‘Our vision of Islam is the answer,’ so that other voices would be lost among the spree of Radical extremists. For radical extremists, the United States is their natural enemy, believing that they are US are involved in a conspiracy theory along with weak Arab governments and civil societies that they planted in Arab world in order to destroy Islam. For radical extremists using violence against their enemies (the US, Arab collaborative governments, others who don’t support their point of view) is a legitimate right so their ideals would dominate. In doing so they are misinterpreting verses from the Quran using them as an example to invite more people to join their ‘holy Jihad’ against ‘Crusaders,’ and ‘Traitors.’ For Extremists they see ‘holy jihad as an order that is needed to be fulfilled by all Muslims against Us occupation. They usually use the term ‘crusaders’ while addressing the US, the same term used by George Bush when he described his ‘holy mission’ against terrorists. For extremists, the US army is the main threat to the Arab world terrorizing the region by controlling and manipulating Arab governments to keep Arabs submissive to their rule. It was obvious also that the war on Iraq in 2003 and US failure in the region made the Extremist voices stronger; with more people on the web listening to their alternative stories, giving judgments from atypical Islamic law point of view. For example, extremists saw the execution of Taha Yassin Ramadan as the death of a ’soldier of God’ who was executed by mercenaries an traitors to religion who accept their lands to be under Zionist crusaders. With US congress discussions to withdraw US troops from Iraq, extremists saw that as a ‘success that came from God to his true believer s who are fighting to establish and spread the word of God against the enemies and their collaborators.’
This further explains radical extremists vision to other Arab voices or networks seeing Arab governments as tool played by the US to keep Israel in power in the region and that most rulers are toys in the hands of the US carrying out its mission, and it is up to ‘true believers to drop these governments. That was apparent in their messages during the Arab Summit, seeing governments as actors in a ‘poor Hollywood production’ to fool Arab nation and that Arab leaders need to ‘apply the word and teachings of God while ruling’ seeing the concept of Arab Unity as Islamic Unity through applying their interpretation of God’s rules. It is also worth noting that radical Islamists see Arab liberalists as one other main enemies since Liberalists believe in values that are considered ‘un Islamic’ and that they import ideas from the west that can destroy the core of religion. This notion was clear in their messages responding to liberal ideas of applying democracy in the Middle East In short Radical Islamist see themselves as ‘God fighters’ i n the holy ‘jihad’ war against ‘Crusaders’ whose aim is to defy Islam in its own territories . For radical Islamists, other voices that does not carry their ideologies are ‘others’ as well classifying them as ‘traitors’ or ‘ignorant’ and the they need to be ‘enlightened by the right path’ sometimes by force. Radical Islamist voices are “higher” than others. They are higher because they a re larger in quantity, use stronger expressions in terms of judging other voices, opinions, and ideas, control the platform, and are organized based on ideology or cultural beliefs. Voices start “screaming” when they put efforts to exclude other voices. They scream so no other voices are heard. On the other hand, Moderate Islamists are considered the second most active group in ‘networking.’ They to see the However, Moderate voices are not as strong or as loud as radical Islamists, they might use verses from the Quran and examples from the history to further explain their point of view; however their vocabulary and tone is not as violent as radicalists. Violent language and cursing ‘opponents,’ are not used while explaining their stand or in their call for ‘people to join their cause,’ but rather they see themselves as an opposition party with religious solutions. Moderates see Islam as a solution to most of problems in the Arab World and that if Muslims correct themselves they can defy the ‘other’
In terms of how they see the US, Moderate Islamists share negative feelings towards the US, however they don’t see their dispute with the US as ‘Islam verses Christianity’ but rather the see the US as colonizers who are coming with ‘foreign’ ideologies that are destroying ‘Islamic culture’ and it is through ‘retuning to the core of Islamic culture, Arab world will escape. This is important as they see themselves as Arabs not Islamists. For example, the execution of former Iraqi vice President was seen as an attempt by the US forces to stop resistance. Further, several messages called Iraqis to unite against the US and support the Iraqi government to force the US out of Iraq. Similarly the Arab summit was seen by Moderate Islamists as a tool to unify Arab world through religion and that if the Arab world wants to get rid of the US occupation Arabs need to return back to the word of God. With calls for democratization to be enforced in the Arab World, Moderate Islamists saw democratization is not the solution for unification, but rather it is the lack of a personal figure who can unify Arabs. One of the examples Moderate Islamists used in response to that issue is that the Arab world is in need for another Salahuddin who can unite Arabs (Muslims and Christians) and revive Arab culture. This shows that Moderate Islamists too see other networks over the Internet as ‘opponents,’ however they use the messageboard to communicate with them to defy their claims giving alternative point of view from an Islamic perspective. Finally, Minority Shiite Muslims are to an extent neutral towards the United States, however analyzing their messages over Al Arabiya website cannot show that they are Pro the United States. Although Shiite Muslim voices appeared with US ‘liberalization of Iraq’ and establishing a new liberal government in Iraq, Shiites don’t see themselves indebt to the US, or feel that they should support them; on the contrary they see themselves as majority in Iraq as well as in many other Arab countries and they need to be united to be heard. Shiites do see US as occupiers as well as the ‘imposed ‘Iraqi ’ government and they need to be ‘dealt with ’. With the execution of Taha Yassin Ramadan, Iraqi Shiites saw it ‘as
an end to a ‘tyrant’ an ‘end to another symbol to oppression,’ ‘another step for re gaining the long waited right’ They see the United states as ‘occupiers that should be resisted’ seeing ‘Iraq for Iraqi people,’ and that ‘others’ (US and Sunni Muslims) are ‘oppressors’ and that they (Shiites) need to get their rights from them. Further it was clear that they comment only on issues that are local to their concern (within Iraq) no comments indicating their presence were available in other stories, the only comment that came from them where during the Arab summit where one Shiite reply saw ‘the problems in the Arab World come from Sunni Muslims.’ It was clear that Shiite Muslims are concerned with their problems inside Iraq seeing online networking as a tool to voice their point of view as well as calling other Shiites to join. That was clear as some of the replies that came from Shiite Muslims included links to emails and other Shiite websites for further ‘networking’ and ‘deliberation’ as indicated in s ome of messages. Finally, it is worth mentioning that Arab Christians in their comments to Al Arabiya messageboard they were pro the US to take action in the Arab World, asking the US to replicate their military interference in Egypt, Syria and other unidentified areas. Christian commentators see themselves as minorities who are stripped from their rights and need external help. Some of messages from Iraq, for example explains Iraqi sufferings during Saddam Hussein era and that they are looking for and opportunity for seeking asylum because they are still ‘oppressed.’ The idea of oppression was largely dealt with in the story that dealt with Nubians call for autonomy in Egypt, where the idea of oppression was clearly stated and their call for external help can be seen even with reading between the lines. However, it is worth mentioning, the presence of Christians who oppose the generalization idea of ‘oppression,’ other refuse for US interference as it will lead to further problems declaring that ‘we cannot call for foreign (US) interference in our national problems and if there are issues, they should be dealt with internally.’ Nationalist Networks and the US The second largest messages that appeared on messageboards came from Nationalist idealists who believe in reviving the notion and feelings of pan-Arabism and Arab nationalist and maybe socialist ideals. Nationalists see that common geography,
common language and common history are the base for Arab unity. In relation to the United States, Nationalists see the US as a threat to their very existence. The image of the US in relation to Nationalists can be seen on three different ‘other’ levels: Political, cultural, and economic others. Generally, Nationalists see the US politics in the region as a threat to Arab unity, they believe that the US pressurizes Arab nations to adopt US political point of view creating problems between Arab ‘brothers’ so that they would forget about core problems f acing the Arab world especially Palestine. They see the US as ‘unfair’ mediator for the peace process and that they are working for the best interest of Israel on the expense of Arabs. Nationalists believe that pan- Arabism is the solution against American hegemony. Nationalists use historical figures to remind Arabs about their ‘history’ Arab figures like Gamal Abdel Nasser were presented as heroes who stood against western hegemony and fought for the unity of the Arabs; Nationalists figures, especially Nasser was used as an example of Arab pride against ‘US’ hegemony and that the Arab world is in need for another Nasser. Syrian commentators, for example, see President Assad as the new symbol Pan Arabism and that Arabs need to revolve around him against American imperialism. The same for Saudi’s who see in King Abdullah initiatives for Arab unity as solutions to solve Palestinian, Iraqi and Lebanese problems, the same for UAE supporters who propagate for UAE leader, and so on. That was apparent during Al Arabiya coverage of the Arab summit, where figures were used as a symbol of ‘Pan Arabism’ ‘Culturally,’ the sense of pride being an Arab is clear in Nationalists while describing themselves (us) against the United States (Other.) This sense of pride came from Arab long history as producers of culture and knowledge to the world. In many occasions Nationalists compare their history to that of the United States. Nationalists use of vocabulary degrading the US; for Nationalists, the US is seen as a nation of ‘lower cultural esteem’, ‘fast culture that is consumed fast and produce no benefit.’ the US can be generally described a s ‘lower class’ of culture. In general, the US is seen as cultural invaders more than military occupiers. United States Call for democratization was
severely attacked by nationalists. Messages against US version of democracy was highly criticized by Nationalists stating that ‘democracy cannot be imported from abroad especially from imperialists who live over he expense of poor nations. News about President Bush Vito Congress decision that about troop withdrawal from Iraq were highly criticized describing Bush as a dictator who stood against people will to fulfill his ‘imperialistic deeds.’ Economically, Nationalists viewed the United States occupation as an ‘economic threat for Arab natural resources.’ Nationalists explain US presence in the region for ‘exploiting Arab oil.’ Many comments during the Arab summit expressed that Arab need to punish the US economically through uniting their resources believing that the first step towards Arab unity is by Arab economic integration. Dealing with other Arab voices over the Internet, disputes between Nationalists and ‘other’ Arab ideological networks over the Internet was clear. For example during the Arab summit, Islamists saw Arab leaders as traitors and Liberals saw the meeting as another protocol meeting for a failed ideology, nationalists interpreted news from the summit positively seeing the summit as a success for pan Arab nation and a step towards Arab unity. News about the need to democratize the Arab world were seen by Nationalists as a step towards Arab disintegration and an attempt to destroy Arab traditional Nationalist legacy that was built on the expense of the Western colonization. It is worth noting that within Arab Nationalists, we can see several ‘us’ and ‘them’, describing individual attitude towards Nationalism. Politically, nationalists from Egypt see the Egyptian political experience is superior to the rest of the Arab World and that Arabs should follow Egyptian Nasserit experience; whereas Syrians see in late President Hafez Al Assad and his successor Bashar as symbol of Arab Nationalism against American imperialism. This notion is true on individual level as well, for example Libyans see themselves as the sole survivors of Nasserit Nationalism criticizing ‘Americanized’ Arabs, and ot her Arabs would criticize Libyans for being unrealistic in their ‘resistance.’ Palestinians, on one hand, see themselves as the true Nationalists being in the front line of confrontation with the United States and Israel attacking the rest of the Arab world for their lame attitude towards the Palestinian issue.
On the cultural level, Maghreb countries (Libya, Tunisia, Algeria and Morocco) see their cultural identity unique in comparison to other Arab countries looking down to Gulf Bedouin culture; Egyptians see current Arab culture is based on Egyptian one, where Saudis see themselves as the main producers of current Arab culture. Rich Gulf states see themselves superior to other poor North African and Levant countries; it is common to find members of Gulf states writing comments of sarcasm to their Egyptian, Jordanian or Algerian counterparts. On the other hands, members of these poor countries return the insult-mocking Gulf ‘mindless spending.’ Liberal Networks and the US Liberal networks include members of Arab Opposition parties as well as banned political groups and organizations like the Saudi Democratic Front Party and human rights groups who were deprived of their freedom of expression to approach masses in their homeland. They found in the Internet a tool to get engaged with Arab masses in hot discussions about political reform, expressing their opposition to Arab government practices; their strategy is using diplomacy and reason to create intimacy with public in order to gain their support. In relation to the US, they see share Nationalists notion that the United states as political, cultural and economic colonizers however, they see current Arab regime rigidness and political stagnation as one of the main reasons for American imperialism in the region. Indeed Liberalist language is not violent against the US, further they don’t directly blame the US for Arab problems, but rather the current Arab system that cannot function in the ‘World New Order.’ They believe that the Middle East needs democratization, however they believe that democracy cannot be imported from the US, further freedom cannot be enforced from abroad, but rather through internal dialogue in each and every country. This notion was clear in Liberalist responses to Al Arabiya coverage to the dispute between Fatah and Hamas movement in Palestine, they opposed US stand not dealing
with the elected Palestinian government although they came to power through fair and democratic elections. In Al Arabiya coverage of the problems between the US congress and the US president, they saw in the dispute an example of strong democracy, where the congress fights for the right of the people and the pres play its role as a watchdog over government performance, calling for a replication of this democratic share of power in Arab countries. It is clear that in their call for support to Arab citizens to adopt liberal ideals, they use futuristic visions of how the Arab world would look like. Unlike Islamists and Nationalists w hocus on Arab history, Liberalists criticize Arab closing themselves in historical shells where the world is opening up. When using examples, Liberals use contemporary examples of successful political and economical models that can be replicated in the Arab world. For example Liberals use Malaysian political reform as a democratic experience that needs to be adopted as it benefited their citizens and transformed the country to a democratic society. Other examples come from Eastern European countries and their successful experience in adopting free market policies helped them in boosting their economy On another level Liberalists see Nationalists and Islamists as a threat to the development of the Arab world, Liberalists use the message board to constantly defy Nationalist and Islamists posts over the messageboard usually getting in a ‘war of words’ with Nationalists and over voiced by a stream of Islamist supporters. For example during the US president dispute with the congress, Unlike the Nationalists who saw the US president as a dictator, Liberalist saw the dispute as an example of democratic practices between two entities who share power. During the Arab summit while Nationalists saw the summit succeeded in bringing Arabs together in a step towards unification, Liberalists saw it as an example of ‘Protocol meeting’ of dying systems that needed to be replaced. Further liberalists comment on Nationalist internal Arab problems exposing and repeating their problems to intensify the feeling that Nationalism is not the solution. Dealing with Islamists, Liberalists warn Arabs from falling into their trap seeing their aim is not to reform the Arab world on Islamic base but a technique to reach to power to replicate Iranian example of Islamic state on regional level
It is worth mentioning that in ‘attacking’ the US and ‘other Arab identities,’ liberalists are networked with civil movements along the Arab especially in Egypt, Tunisia, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. For example in their response to Nubian call for separation in Egypt, Egyptian Kefaya (Enough) movement which is a liberal movement against 27 years of Mubarak regime wrote tens of comments in several occasions calling for democratic reforms in Egypt. Conclusion As mentioned earlier, The United States currently faces serious challenges as a result of its deteriorating image in the Arab Middle East, recent polls show that the overwhelming majority of Arab opinion responds is critical of US foreign policy. Nine Eleven events intensified the waves of negative attitude against the US. The current study showed that generally Arab media and Arab blogosphere are critical to the US policy and attitude towards the region Analysis of al Aarabiya blogosphere showed that religious comments occupied the major bulk of messages voiced over Al Arabiya website. It was clear that these comments were call for support for religious cause and an invitation to join. For radical Islamists, their cause was to join the holy jihad against the US crusaders who came fill a long battle of unfinished business, believing in a US agenda that after getting rid of the ‘red threat’ (communists) it is now the turn for the ‘green threat (Islam) and it is up to the Mujahedin to stop the crusade threat the same way early Muslims dealt with them half a century ago. Moderate Islamists, portrayed themselves’ as an alternative political and social party, with and ideology of reviving Islamic culture to stop US political and cultural invasion. Perhaps, Shiite minorities were most active in terms of effort for networking seeing it a step towards their autonomy, that is why their language against the US was less aggressive, however still seeing the US as a threat but needs to be attend to later after taking care of their own ‘establishment.’ Finally, Christian voices were more clinging towards the Us calling for help to solve their internal problems with their local governments, however there is a growing opposing idea to their notion as other Christian voices are calling for solving the problems indoor as ‘calls for the Us’ will only lead to civil uprubt.’
Nationalists see themselves as ‘true Arabs’ in terms of the ir political, economical and cultural ideology. They view the United States as ‘imperialist colonizers’ who want to control Arab cultural ideals and natural resources. They see the way to preserve Arab culture is through returning to Arab Nationalistic ideals to preserve Arab existence. Within Arab Nationalists, Arab nation identities are causing disputes within Nationalists as people see their national identities more important than Arabism. Liberalists’ comments looked more like bloggers in their use of reason and educated logical comments to attract more audience in their cause in one hand and to undermine US democratic experience calling for internal democratic movement that comes from the Arab world and not imported from the US or the west. To spread democratic ideals, liberal parties are tying themselves with other liberal movements and civil societies to gather empathy to their cause. To Sum up, US image in the Arab blogsphere is associated with many negative images and meanings such as unfair country adopts imbalanced policies toward Middle East. It always adopts offensive policies as an imperial country but in a new way. It violates law or uses law to justify illegal actions. Arab and non Arab web sites didn’t differentiate or separate between US a country and US as a foreign policy.
i
Such as El Naway, M and Iskandar A Al Jazeera: How Free Arab News Network Scooped the World and Changed the Middle East. (Westview Press 2002). Sakr, N Satellite Realms: Transnational Television Globalization and the Middle East. (London: I.B, Taurus 2001) ii Jon Alterman “ New Media, New Politics? From Satellite Television to the Internet in the Arab World”. Washington Institute For Near East Policy (Washington, 2000). iii Rheingold Virtual Communities: Homesteading on the Electronic Frontier. (Cambridge MA: MIT Press 1993) iv Ahmed El Gody, “New Media New Censorship” New Media and the New Middle East ed Philip Seib (New York: Palgrave, 2007),213-234 v Manuel Castells, The Rise of Network Society. Second edition. (Oxford, UK: Blackwell, 2000), vi Castells, Ibid vii James Curran, David Morley (2001) Media and Cultural Theory (New York: Routledge), 288. viii James Curran, Media and power; (New York: Routledge, 2000), 168. ix Philip Auter (2008) The Image of the United States Portrayed in Arab World Wide Web A paper presented to the Ninth International Synposium on Online Journalism. University of Austin,
Texas x Auter, Ibid xi . Mamoun Fandy (2004) in his article Arab Media: Tools of the Government; Tools for the People available at http://www.tbsjournal.com/Archives/ xii Kai Hafez (2004) Arab Satellite Broadcasting: Democracy Without Political Parties? Transnational Broadcast journal issue 15 2004. available at http://www.tbsjournal.com/ Archives/Fall05/Hafez.htm, xiii Alterman, Ibid and Ayish, Muhammad (2003). Arab World Television in the Age of Globalization: an Analysis of Emerging Political, Economic, Cultural and Technological Patterns. Hamburg: Deutsches Orient-Institut. 121 xiv Ayish, Mohamed The New Arab Public Sphere. (Frank& Timme 2008) xv M. Lynch. Blogging the New Arab Republic. Available at http://arabmediasociety.com/topics /index.php?t_article=32 xvi Ayis, 2008, Ibid xvii Lynch, Ibid xviii Auter, Ibid xix Hafez, Ibid xx Naila Hamdy (2008) Arab Citizen Journalism Shaped by Technology: Creates a Challenge to Mainstream Media, Authorities and Media Laws Paper prepared for Presentation at the International Association for Mass Communication Research – IAMCR 2008 Congress 20-25 July, 2008 Stockholm, Sweden xxi Al-Saggaf, Y. (2006). The online public sphere in the Arab world: The war in Iraq on the Al Arabiya website. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12(1), article 16. xxii Alterman, Ibid xxiii Ammar Bakkar (2006) Who says what on the Arabic Internet? Notes about content of Arabic internet messages. Available at http://www.middle-east.sdu.dk/workingpapers/manus.pdf xxiv Bakkar, Ibid xxv Bakkar, Ibid xxvi Bakkar, Ibid xxvii Castells, M (2008) The New Public Sphere: Global Civil Society, Communication Networks and Global Governance. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 78-93 xxviii Seib, P. (2005) ‘The Fight for Air Time’, The Dallas Morning News, 8 February, http://dallasnews.com/s/dws/dn/opinion/viewpoints/ stories/020905dnediseib.html xxix Rugh, W. (2004) ‘Fixing Public Diplomacy for Arab and Muslim Audiences’, in S.A. Garfinkle (ed.) A Practical Guide to Winning the War on Terrorism, pp. 145–61.California: Hoover Press. xxx Rugh, Ibid xxxi El Gody, Ibid xxxii Jones, S. G. (1997). The Internet and its social landscape. In S. G. Jones (Ed.), Virtual Culture: Identity & Communication in Cybersociety (pp. 7-35). London: Sage. xxxiii John E Richardson (2003) Analysing Newspapers: An approach from critical discourse analysis. New York Pilgrave xxxiv van Dijk, T.A. (2001) ‘Critical Discourse Analysis ’, in D. Tannen, D. Schiffrin and H. Hamilton (eds) Handbook of Discourse Analysis,. Oxford: Blackwell. pp. 357–71 xxxv Richardson, ibid xxxvi Richardson, ibid and Van Dijk, Ibid xxxvii Richardson, ibid and Van Dijk, Ibid xxxviii Richardson, ibid xxxix Richardson, ibid xl Castels, ibid and Richardson, Ibid xli Richardson, ibid