Villain to victim: How Al Jazeera’s ‘terror network past’ is being forgotten

In this Jan. 1, 2015, file photo, staff members of Al-Jazeera International work at the news studio in Doha, Qatar. (AP Photo/Osama Faisal, File)
Updated 04 July 2017
Follow

Villain to victim: How Al Jazeera’s ‘terror network past’ is being forgotten

LONDON: Following the list of 13 demands that were presented to Qatar on June 23 from four Arab states, media commentators have been focusing on one in particular — that Qatar must terminate its Al Jazeera TV network.
Interestingly though, the perceptions of the network have morphed over the past few weeks from villain to victim — with many fellow journalists coming out in Al Jazeera’s defense, ignoring what some see as the highly questionable terror-related content the Doha-based network has been infamous for.
The broadcaster — which opened in 1996 as an Arabic channel, followed by its English-language service in 2006 — has found itself at the center of a media storm since the demands were delivered, with titles such as The New York Times defending its right to exist, forgetting that it too has been critical of the channel for the very same reasons that are being raised by Qatar’s Gulf neighbors today.
For its part, Al Jazeera has launched a campaign entitled “We too have demands,” and is using every opportunity to position what is going on as an attack on press freedom.
Amid the media storm, it may easily be forgotten that not everyone has been such a fervent supporter of the network, with many media outlets and politicians pointing to Al Jazeera’s alleged sympathy toward terror groups in the past.
With the clock ticking on its fate, here is how Al Jazeera has been received over the years — and how some of those who criticized it in the past are defending it today:

 


The New York Times
NOW: June 2017. The newspaper’s editorial board recently wrote: “Al Jazeera is hardly a perfect news organization: Critical reporting on Qatar or members of Qatar’s royal family is not tolerated. But much of the rest of its reporting hews to international journalistic standards, provides a unique view on events in the Middle East and serves as a vital news source for millions who live under anti-democratic rule. Those are reasons enough for the monarchs and dictators attacking Qatar to silence Al Jazeera. And reason enough to condemn their action.”
THEN: November 2001. Two months after Al-Qaeda’s 9/11 attacks on the US, Fouad Ajami, a Lebanese-born American scholar, analyzed Al Jazeera in the New York Times Magazine. He wrote that Al Jazeera “may not officially be the Osama bin Laden Channel, but he is clearly its star... A huge, glamorous poster of bin Laden’s silhouette hangs in the background of the main studio set at Al Jazeera’s headquarters in Doha, the capital city of Qatar… The Hollywoodization of news is indulged with an abandon that would make the Fox News Channel blush. The channel’s promos are particularly shameless. One clip juxtaposes a scowling George Bush with a poised, almost dreamy bin Laden; between them is an image of the World Trade Center engulfed in flames.”

 

The Washington Times
NOW: June 2017. An editorial piece published on June 27 had this to say of the demand to close Al Jazeera: “You may like the content offered on Al Jazeera. You may not. You may not be familiar with it at all. But regardless, you surely support the concept of a free and open media delivering its message to the broadcast world… For a foreign nation or nations to hold another hostage, however, to literally blackmail them into pulling the plug on a worldwide broadcast or else face economic destruction, that’s an act of war. Perhaps more importantly, it is an act directly opposed to the freedoms we cherish in America and which we attempt to export everywhere.”
THEN: October 2013. An opinion piece took aim at Al Jazeera in 2013, with Christopher Harper writing: “Everyone should know where (Al Jazeera America) stands — right under the thumb of the Qatari princes. The agenda is to get a seat at the political table through the network, which aims at focusing mainly on the failures of the United States rather than its successes, with a bias now made plain for all to see.”


 

 

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan
NOW: June 2017. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has weighed into the debate on Al Jazeera, saying of the demands on Qatar that the ultimatum is “against international law.” He added: “We welcome (Qatar’s position) because we consider the 13-point list against international law.”
THEN: Some have commented that there is a certain irony in Erdogan standing up for Al Jazeera, given that Turkey reportedly has more journalists in its prisons than any other nation. According to the Committee to Protect Journalists, Turkey accounted for a third of all journalists imprisoned worldwide in 2016. Erdogan insists that those locked up are all “terrorists.” The Al Jazeera Türk website was shut down in May 2017, in a move attributed to staffing optimization.

 

The US administration
NOW: June 2017. US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, in his first public comments about the ultimatum issued against Qatar, said that “some of the elements will be very difficult for Qatar to meet,” although he did not specify anything about Al Jazeera. One of his predecessors, Hillary Clinton, praised Al Jazeera in 2011, when the US administration supported the Arab Spring. In what marked a sharp U-turn from the stance of the previous administration over Al Jazeera, Clinton told members of the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee: “You’ve got a global — a set of global networks — that Al Jazeera has been the leader in, that are literally changing people’s minds and attitudes…Viewership of Al Jazeera is going up in the United States because it’s real news.”
THEN: Al Jazeera was reportedly nicknamed the “terror network” by the administration of George W. Bush. The former US president allegedly discussed bombing the offices of Al Jazeera in 2005, leading senior channel management to seek a meeting with the then-UK Prime Minister Tony Blair.

 

OTHER MEDIA ON AL JAZEERA 

Fox News
THEN: February 2011. Former Fox News host Bill O’Reilly, interviewing Alan Colmes (a Fox News contributor), said in 2011 that the Qatari broadcaster is “an anti-Semitic, anti-American network.” He added: “It doesn’t come any more anti-Semitic than Al Jazeera.” O’Reilly then told Colmes — a Jewish man — that “they would do violence to you.”

 

MSNBC’s Morning Joe
NOW: June 2017. Host Joe Scarborough, a former member of the US House of Representatives, was speaking about the diplomatic row in the Gulf, when he quipped: “You’ve got the Saudis, the UAE, Israel, a lot of people correctly saying (that) Qatar has been funding terrorist organizations, Hezbollah, they’ve been funding radical aspects of the Muslim Brotherhood, they have been spreading disinformation…Through Al Jazeera… What the Saudis and the UAE (were) saying to them for years (was) ‘why are you glorifying Osama Bin Laden? Why are our children turning on the TV set and seeing these wonderful documentaries about Osama Bin Laden, the guy who’s trying to kill us?’ So it’s not as if the UAE and the Saudis don’t have a point here.”

 

 

Der Spiegel
THEN: February 2013. German newspaper Der Speigel published an article titled “Al-Jazeera Losing Battle for Independence,” in which the reporters claimed that Al Jazeera “has a problem: More than ever before, critics contend that the broadcaster is following a clear political agenda, and not adhering to the principles of journalistic independence... the Arab programming of Al-Jazeera — which means ‘the island’ in Arabic — was launched in 1996 with a noble goal: It aimed to serve as an objective medium in a world of rigorous censorship. The network broadcast messages from Osama bin Laden, prompting outraged criticism from the US, where it was referred to as a ‘terror network’.”


Syrian TV presenter runs for cover on air as Israeli strikes hit Damascus

Updated 16 July 2025
Follow

Syrian TV presenter runs for cover on air as Israeli strikes hit Damascus

  • In a major escalation, the Israeli army bombed the Syrian military headquarters in Damascus

DUBAI: A widely circulated video showed a Syrian news presenter visibly startled and leaving her live segment to take cover as Israeli strikes hit Damascus on Wednesday.

Israel’s Defense Minister, Israel Katz, shared the video on X with the caption: “The heavy blows have started.”

In the video, the presenter jolted on air at the sound of the explosion, as a missile struck the building behind her.

 

 

In a major escalation, the Israeli army bombed the Syrian military headquarters in Damascus and carried out additional strikes on Syrian forces in the southern city of Sweida amid intensified clashes between government troops and Druze armed groups.

Israel has attacked Damascus following on threats to ramp up attacks if the Syrian government forces did not withdraw from Sweida, vowing to protect the Druze religious minority.

Before the live segment was interrupted, the presenter was reporting on Katz’s statement that the Israeli army would continue “to operate vigorously in Sweida to destroy the forces that attacked the Druze until they withdraw completely.”

Clashes raged in Sweida on Wednesday after a ceasefire between government forces and Druze armed groups collapsed. Israel has launched a series of airstrikes on convoys of government forces in southern Syria since the clashes erupted and has beefed up forces on the border.

The army said it struck near the entrance to the Syrian Ministry of Defense in Damascus.


Houthi-linked arms traders using X, WhatsApp to sell weapons: Report

Updated 16 July 2025
Follow

Houthi-linked arms traders using X, WhatsApp to sell weapons: Report

  • Arms dealers linked to Houthi militants in Yemen use social media platforms as storefront for weapons trade, including US and Russian-made rifles and grenades
  • Tech Transparency Project said open trade appears to breach X, WhatsApp policies on firearms dealing, accuse platforms of failing to stop it

LONDON: Arms dealers linked to Yemen’s Houthi militia have been using social media platforms such as X and WhatsApp to sell weapons, according to a new report.

The Tech Transparency Project, or TTP, identified hundreds of accounts openly dealing in rifles, rocket-propelled grenades and other military-grade equipment, in apparent violation of the platforms’ policies.

“X and WhatsApp are providing an essential platform to Houthi-linked arms dealers selling weapons of war,” the report read. “The companies have policies in place that prohibit that kind of illicit trade but are allowing it to take place in the open.”

TTP called the activity “a threat to US national security interests,” noting the Iran-backed group is designated as a terrorist organization.

The months-long investigation by the Washington-based watchdog, which monitors accountability in Big Tech, found that Houthi-affiliated arms dealers had been running commercial weapons stores on both platforms for months, and in some cases, years.

This account offered a Soviet rocket-propelled grenade launcher and a collection of Turkish-made M4 carbine clones. (TTP/File)
This account offered a Soviet rocket-propelled grenade launcher and a collection of Turkish-made M4 carbine clones. (TTP/File)

Researchers identified at least 130 Yemen-based X accounts and 67 WhatsApp business accounts advertising military-grade equipment or promoting catalogues of guns for sale. These included US-manufactured weapons — some marked “Property of US Govt” — and other Western arms labeled with “NATO.”

In one instance, a seller listed four M4 carbines — an assault rifle used by the US military and manufactured by FN Herstal and Colt — and directed buyers to WhatsApp. Another account offered a package deal that included a ballistic helmet, night-vision goggles and grenades.

Russian weapons, including RPG-7 launchers and AK-47s, also featured prominently. A Soviet RPG-7 was offered for about $1,800, while another account advertised a “zero mileage” Russian AK-47.

Prices for some weapons reportedly reached $10,000, suggesting sales may be intended for other armed groups or insurgents.

Many of the accounts displayed allegiance to the Houthi, including photos of weapons in crates marked with Houthi slogans such as “Death to America, death to Israel.”

The emblem states “God is great, Death to America, death to Israel, damnation to the Jews, victory to Islam.” (TTP/File)
The emblem states “God is great, Death to America, death to Israel, damnation to the Jews, victory to Islam.” (TTP/File)

More than half of the X accounts listed Sanaa — under Houthi control for more than a decade — as their location. Many accounts funneled buyers to WhatsApp business profiles, some of which openly displayed catalogs of rifles and ammunition. A number of these were also linked to Facebook and Instagram accounts, raising further concerns over Meta’s enforcement of its firearms policies.

Meta, which owns WhatsApp, says it reviews all images submitted to product catalogs, yet researchers found little evidence of enforcement. The company said it had since removed several accounts and claimed it does not profit from this type of activity but declined to answer how the content had bypassed existing filters.

“X and WhatsApp both have policies against weapons sales but they are allowing arms traders linked to a US-designated terrorist group to traffic weapons on their platforms,” said Katie Paul, the director of TTP.

“In some cases these companies may be profiting off violations of their own policies that create risks for US national security.”

This arms trader X account linked to a WhatsApp business account with a catalog of guns and a banner photo of Mahdi al-Mashat, a top Houthi official, firing a rifle. (TTP/File)
This arms trader X account linked to a WhatsApp business account with a catalog of guns and a banner photo of Mahdi al-Mashat, a top Houthi official, firing a rifle. (TTP/File)

TTP’s findings, which build on a similar August 2024 investigation by The Times, suggest most of the Houthi-linked arms dealer accounts were created or became active following mass layoffs at X and Meta that weakened enforcement capabilities. Many handles had blue ticks and were subscribed to premium services that are supposed to be moderated.

Roughly two-thirds of the accounts appear to have posted weapons content in the past six months.

“Both Meta and X have the capital, the tools and the human resources to address this problem, but they’re not doing so,” Paul said.


Asharq News revamps ‘Da’erat Asharq’ with a sharper political focus

Updated 15 July 2025
Follow

Asharq News revamps ‘Da’erat Asharq’ with a sharper political focus

  • Daily programme featurs one-on-one conversations with top editors and analysts from across SRMG platforms, unpacking regional and global developments

RIYADH: Asharq News has launched a refreshed edition of its daily political programme “Da’erat Asharq”, returning with a renewed format and deeper analysis of political developments shaping the regional and international landscape. 

The show features in-depth, one-on-one conversations with leading journalists, analysts, and experts from across the Saudi Research and Media Group (SRMG), bringing to life a shared editorial ecosystem that enriches Asharq News’ analytical programming. 

Presented by journalist Mirasha Ghazi, each episode delves into the layered contexts behind unfolding events, guided by balanced dialogue and rigorous inquiry. The programme draws on the editorial strengths of SRMG’s flagship outlets, including “Asharq Al-Awsat”, “Independent Arabia”, “Al Majalla”, and “Arab News”, offering trusted perspectives rooted in real-world expertise. 

“Da’erat Asharq reflects our editorial mission to deliver credible content and deep analysis,” said Dr. Nabeel Al Khatib, General Manager of Asharq News. 

“In an era of political noise, audiences need level-headed perspectives and meaningful conversation, and that’s exactly what this programme offers.” 

Ghassan Charbel, Editor-in-Chief of Asharq Al-Awsat, added: “Our ambition is to offer high-quality analysis that helps audiences gain a deeper understanding of the region and the world, powered by the depth and talent of our journalists and analysts.” 

Odwan Al Ahmari, Editor-in-Chief of Independent Arabia, said: “This initiative is rooted in the group’s vision for editorial integration. We’re proud to contribute to this promising project that promotes collaboration and shared content creation.” 

Ibrahim Hamidi, Editor-in-Chief of Al Majalla, remarked: “This partnership enhances editorial alignment across SRMG’s platforms. Our contribution includes in-depth commentary from some of the most respected voices across the Arab world and beyond.” 

Faisal Abbas, Editor-in-Chief of Arab News, said: “We’re pleased to participate in this programme by bringing an international perspective that spans from Tokyo to Toronto, reinforcing our close, ongoing editorial collaboration with Asharq.” 


Two Palestinian journalists killed in less than 24 hours as Israeli strikes intensify in Gaza

Updated 14 July 2025
Follow

Two Palestinian journalists killed in less than 24 hours as Israeli strikes intensify in Gaza

  • Fadi Khalifa was killed while inspecting the remnants of his house
  • In a separate strike on their tent, Hussam Saleh Al-Adlouni was murdered alongside his wife Suad and their three children

LONDON: Two Palestinian journalists were killed in separate Israeli airstrikes on Sunday, in the latest deadly escalation targeting media workers in the Gaza Strip, according to local sources.

Fadi Khalifa was killed along with at least one other person while inspecting the remains of his home in the Al-Zaytoun neighborhood of southeastern Gaza City, multiple sources reported.

In a separate strike, photojournalist Hussam Saleh Al-Adlouni was killed alongside his wife Suad and their three children when an Israeli airstrike hit their tent in the Al-Qarara area, north of Khan Yunis in southern Gaza.

According to WAFA news agency, the family had been sheltering there after being displaced.

The Palestinian Journalists Syndicate condemned the killings, saying they added to Israel’s “abysmal record” of violence against members of the press.

Their deaths bring the number of Palestinian journalists killed in Gaza since Oct. 7, 2023, to 231, according to official figures.

The Committee to Protect Journalists puts the toll at 178: 176 Palestinians and two Israelis.

Medical sources reported that at least 92 civilians were killed across Gaza on Sunday alone, including 52 in central and southern areas of the Strip.


BBC’s Gaza documentary breached accuracy guideline, review finds

Updated 14 July 2025
Follow

BBC’s Gaza documentary breached accuracy guideline, review finds

  • “Gaza: How To Survive A War Zone” was pulled after it was discovered that the 13-year-old son of a Hamas official was the narrator of the documentary
  • Review found the program breached a guideline on accuracy that deals with misleading audiences but no other breaches of the BBC’s editorial guidelines, including on impartiality

LONDON: A BBC documentary about children’s lives in Gaza narrated by the 13-year-old son of a Hamas official breached its editorial guidelines on accuracy, an internal review by the British public broadcaster said on Monday.
The investigation, however, found there were no other breaches of the BBC’s editorial guidelines, including on impartiality, and no evidence that outside interests “inappropriately impacted on the program.”
The BBC removed “Gaza: How To Survive A War Zone” from its online platform in February, five days after it was broadcast, saying it had “serious flaws.” The documentary was made by independent production company HOYO Films.
A review found the program breached a guideline on accuracy that deals with misleading audiences.
The background on the narrator’s father — a minister in the Hamas-run government in Gaza — was “critical information,” which was not shared with the BBC before broadcast, the review found.
Gaza’s health ministry says more than 58,000 people have been killed since the start of the war on Oct. 7 2023, when Hamas-led militants stormed into Israel, killing about 1,200 people and taking 251 hostages into Gaza.
The BBC’s coverage of the war has been heavily scrutinized throughout the conflict, with both supporters of Israel and its critics saying the broadcaster had failed to strike the right balance.
“Regardless of how the significance or otherwise of the Narrator’s father’s position was judged, the audience should have been informed about this,” said the report by Peter Johnston, BBC Director of Editorial Complaints and Reviews.
BBC Director-General Tim Davie said the report identified a significant failing in relation to accuracy.
“We will now take action on two fronts – fair, clear and appropriate actions to ensure proper accountability and the immediate implementation of steps to prevent such errors being repeated,” Davie said in a statement.