Since the announcement of the formation of Al Jazeera America (AJAM) last winter, questions over the potential success and acceptance of the network have run rampant. AJAM’s parent company, Al Jazeera, faced harsh criticism in the months following 9/11 for airing footage of Osama bin Laden speeches. The memory of this controversy, combined with the network’s Qatari’s origins, provoked strong reactions to the creation of AJAM. Many feared, while some hoped, that it would break from American media orthodoxy, providing a new and radical perspective.
However the first few weeks of AJAM programming have been surprisingly bland. While detractors expected anti-American rants and rampant bias, liberal yet moderate shows graced the airwaves instead. Similarly, if viewers expected AJAM to resemble British-based Al Jazeera English, they were likely disappointed. After over a month of programming, it would appear that the pressure on AJAM to win the hearts and minds of the American people has forced the network to give up some of its journalistic aims. Americans may not be ready for a provocative American version of Al Jazeera, but we will never know as long as AJAM’s programing continues to resemble mainstream American news.
An American Network?
AJAM brands itself as an “unbiased, fact-based, in-depth” news source, one that is unafraid to call the plays as it sees them. Its snappy slogan “There’s more to it” seems to be a subtle criticism of traditional American media. Yet AJAM has added a number of big names in American news to its starting line, including Joie Chen, Soledad O’Brien, and Ali Velshi. Though all of these journalists are respected and renowned in their field, the incorporation of well-known faces in American media seems an odd choice for a network focusing on distancing itself from the other major American news sources.
Despite the all-star team and promise of a different perspective, initial ratings were not positive. During the first week of programming AJAM’s highest rated show “Real Money with Ali Velshi” came in with only 54,000 viewers, far below the numbers of the channel’s competition. Still the network’s outlook was optimistic. As AJAM told TheWrap, “the combination of those who watched our programming on air, those who visited our website … confirms that there is indeed a significant interest in and demand for the in-depth and unbiased reporting we are providing.”
Whether the network could really be satisfied with ratings that drop so far beneath the threshold needed to compete in American media remains questionable. However the network was definitively wrong as to why those viewers who are tuning in to AJAM are doing so. It clearly is not the result of a dramatically different way of covering the news.
A report by the Pew Research Center found that Al Jazeera America’s coverage of the crisis in Syria was very similar to that of other networks, particularly CNN. In fact, the report found that AJAM’s pro-intervention message was also the message of the hour for CNN, MSNBC, and FOX News, with BBC America being the only real outlier.
At first, it might seem that the most shocking aspect of this report’s conclusion is that CNN, FOX, and MSNBC agreed with each other in the first place. However, the more troubling finding is that AJAM agreed with all three, despite the hype suggesting that it would provide a different perspective. Clearly, AJAM has fallen far short of expectations and of its self-professed aspiration to “give a voice to the voiceless”
Al Jazeera English Vs. Al Jazeera America
The extent to which AJAM has failed to live up to its mission is underscored by juxtaposing it with Al Jazeera English. When Al Jazeera English was launched in 2006, it was a step back from the more aggressive language seen in the original Al Jazeera channel. Al Jazeera English, whose programming is more comparable in style, tone, and content to the BBC than CNN, caters to the international viewer. It covers a wider span of issues than its Arabic or American counterparts, and has the advantage of not pandering to the viewing preferences of one particular region.
The network has seen great success in the UK and Canada, but it has been unable to gain traction in the United States. William Youmans, professor of media and public affairs at George Washington University, told the HPR: “[Al Jazeera English] could never really break into the U.S. cable market, which is the key to getting access to the American audience.” Youmans suggested that this is partly because “Americans saw it as this terrorist network” and partly because “our country just isn’t interested in international news.”
If a negative reputation and a less than interested American audience are what have kept Al Jazeera English from success in the United States, it only makes sense that AJAM would try a different route. Indeed, the strategy of including prominent American journalists and adopting a stance similar to established American networks may offer AJAM its best chance of attracting viewers. Unfortunately, maintaining viewership while meeting expectations and self-professed goals requires a careful balance that AJAM has so far been unable to achieve.
Furthermore, the creation of AJAM, with its specific emphasis on the United States, has all but eradicated the already limited Al Jazeera English presence in American media. By crowding out Al Jazeera English without matching the brand of journalism that Al Jazeera English provided, AJAM has left viewers without a real cable alternative to traditional news sources.
The American Media Bubble
The larger concern moving forward might not be whether AJAM is sticking to its principles, but the factors that caused it to lose sight of those principles in the first place. Though it is apparent that American media has remained dramatically different from foreign sources, the Americanization of foreign news media is reaching new heights.
For a country that prides itself on freedom of the press and freedom of speech, our media is restricted by a startling number of self-impositions. The way our media functions is as much the responsibility of the citizenry as it is that of the people who run the show. When we, as private citizens, refuse to give new and different perspectives in news media a fighting chance, it’s no one’s fault but our own that traditional media never changes or that new networks bear such a resemblance to the networks we already have.
Again and again we hear rants against the “conservative media” or the “liberal media”, but we ignore the real issue. The issue is that we continue to see publications like Time Magazine releasing a dumbed down cover story for the American edition, forgoing what might be controversial or against public opinion. The issue is that we have reached the point where Al Jazeera, the network that has been called anything from anti-American to terrorist propaganda, comes to the United States, and suddenly looks like CNN. We limit any new perspective in American media by consciously choosing not to watch it.
Photo Credit: Wikimedia
© 2024 Harvard Political Review. All rights reserved.