Aljazeera Tv.

[Luckydog]

I have seen a lot of very good documentaries and the news is very well done.

I thought it was supposed to be very biased but I don't see that!

At least you don't get those awful commercial breaks as on CNN and Fox.

[JimmyTheMook]

I have seen a lot of very good documentaries and the news is very well done.

I thought it was supposed to be very biased but I don't see that!

At least you don't get those awful commercial breaks as on CNN and Fox.

I like seeing all the western washed up newscasters being gainfully employed with that filthy outfit.

[qwertz]

Good coverage, no more biased or controlled than any other news channel.

[Tarragona]

I enjoy it.

They seem to take more of a look at how events affect ordinary people than other channels, particularly in the Middle East, of course, but other parts of the world too.

I've now seen two discussions with people from different sides of the Thai political situation who are actively involved in what's going on, something I haven't seen on other channels. They haven't gone too deep but enough to get a thread on here locked when someone reported the first one.

Edited June 28, 2007 by Tarragona

[tijnebijn]

I think Al jazeera actually has very good reporting , interviews etc . They seem to llok at thing more like how the common guy sees it . Although BBC world I think is still the best , but AJ is not far away .

[JR Texas]

I think Al jazeera actually has very good reporting , interviews etc . They seem to llok at thing more like how the common guy sees it . Although BBC world I think is still the best , but AJ is not far away .

JR Texas: Very surprised at the change.....it is now about 1000 times better than FOX News (which is not really news). But it is still propaganda...just of a different type.

[GuestHouse]

There is bias in all news reporting, the availability of AJ provides the viewer with the oportunity to get a different view and then if s/he is personally able to come to a balanced view from the broader spectrum of views.

In my mind AJ is a welcome addition to the field of international news reporting.

[Robski]

Now that the day to day events in Gaza are no longer as important in the western media, at least there is a channel willing to highlight the continuing suffering of the people there.

[sgunn65]

Is it just me or does anyone get the sense of Lord Haw Haw when you see the Brit journo's crowing about how well the Taletubbies are doing?

I don't agree with our troops being out there (and I have a vested interest as my son is serving in Afghanistan and is in action almost daily) and I know we should have balanced reporting but I can't get away from the fact that seeing an English man batting for the other team just seems wrong!!!

[Sir Burr]

AJ has managed to upset pretty much every Arab government in the Middle East, Iran, the USA and UK. Shows they must be doing something right. They are based in Oman and to give the Omanis credit, they have refused to gag AJ when asked to by other Arab governments.

I believe most of the reporters came from the BBC's World Service radio which had cut-backs a few years ago.

[GuestHouse]

I can't get away from the fact that seeing an English man batting for the other team just seems wrong!!!

While I would not question your patriatism, especially given your son is serving in Afganistan, for which he and all your family have my sincere hopes for his safe return.

I think it is nevertheless necessary to understand that giving the news from a different angle may in truth be doing the nation a service.

The solemn statements, promisses and decisions of our political leaders have too often turned out to be self serving lies.

I'm quite certain that Bush and his cronies would rather you did not see AJ.... we have proof of that in that the US forces bombed AJ's offices in Bagdad at the start of the Iraq war.

[Naam]

excellent channel!

[tijnebijn]

Guesthouses point is a vey solid one ! I agree what he said about AJ.

The past week they are focussing on Thailand , with a very interesting view why Thailand is in the current situation politically , and the problems in the South . The English reporting makes it better to follow and they do an excellent job , they seem more freely to ask what they want , and to what their job should do , giving the common people the information why surten political parties , government etc do what they do . And why they choose to go in war for whatever reason . I do not think it is collaborating with the enemy .

[a2396]

I agree this is one of the best serious news channels available. Maybe a bit biased toward the middle east point of view, but not much. BBC on KTV is usually not watchable due to various satellite link problems. Fox is an absoulte propaganda mouthpiece for the Bush administration and for viewers with 2 second attention spans. It's scary thier holding company wants to buy the Wall Street Journal.

[britmaveric]

Rubbish and mouth piece for terrorists. Should send an emf pulse and knock em off the air.

[rainman]

You don't get Al-Jazeera on UBC though, right?

[Luckydog]

Rubbish and mouth piece for terrorists. Should send an emf pulse and knock em off the air.

I bet Sir david Frost will be pleased to hear that he is working for such peeps.......Shut up!

[britmaveric]

Well couldnt get work elsewhere Bit shameful - just being used really.

[Old Croc]

AJ was initially the only english speaking channel I could find on my hotel tv the other week until I managed to tune in a couple of others including Fox.

Both are as biased as each other in a chalk and cheese way.

AJ did surprise me a bit ( I suppose I was waiting for the beheadings and such like to happen!), but it certainly focused on certain localised events from a point of view alien to me. Different at first, but irksome after a while in the same way I can't watch those arrogant, smug pricks on Fox.

Can do without both.

Edited June 30, 2007 by Old Croc

[chinthee]

AJ was initially the only english speaking channel I could find on my hotel tv the other week until I managed to tune in a couple of others including Fox.

Both are as biased as each other in a chalk and cheese way.

AJ did surprise me a bit ( I suppose I was waiting for the beheadings and such like to happen!), but it certainly focused on certain localised events from a the point of view alien to me. Different at first, but irksome after a while in the same way I can't watch those arrogant, smug pricks on Fox.

Can do without both.

Most intelligent post in this thread. Fox is right-wing propaganda and AJ is something else entirely, not sure if they're really cleaned up yet or just posturing to get viewers.

[Ulysses G.]

Rubbish and mouth piece for terrorists. Should send an emf pulse and knock em off the air.

Exactamondo!

[farangsay]

Rubbish and mouth piece for terrorists. Should send an emf pulse and knock em off the air.

Exactamondo!

I have never seen this channel first hand so cannot offer an opinion.

I presume , from the vehemence of your opinions , that both you gentlemen have ?

Just curious.

[Jet Gorgon]

Interesting. I watched various newscasts just after 9/11 and one was an Arabic channel (forget the name). Arabic male and female reporters/anchors. I was pleasantly surprised that they were sincerely horrified at the loss of life that day. The reporting was unopinionated and non-US bashing. Of course, opinions always come through by what is shown and what is not. The Beeb is notorious for this -- showing only the views that support it's stance. FOX. Geez, I watched it first in Hadyai on a visa run; <deleted>? International cable and all they talked about was some American chick missing in Aruba. Oh ya and around the world in 90 seconds or something. Nice suits though.

I'll look up Al Jaz on the net. Don't watch TV anymore. But as a prev poster noted, beheadings spring to mind when I hear its name.

[Ulysses G.]

Rubbish and mouth piece for terrorists. Should send an emf pulse and knock em off the air.

Exactamondo!

I have never seen this channel first hand so cannot offer an opinion.

I presume , from the vehemence of your opinions , that both you gentlemen have ?

Just curious.

Of course.

[uptou]

aj has caught my attention only the last couple of weeks funny enough,before i saw this thread.it must be because it seemed to give the other sides point of veiw,or rather the veiw that you dont seem to get from fox etc.fox news is great though for entertainment value,largely presenters who talk over people unless they are talking the right line.

[pampal]

It's always better when you have news channels representing opposing view points.

[mcgriffith]

I don't watch television (except MotoGP motorcycle races!).

But I have bookmarked Al Jazeera in my World News folder in my Favorites, along with Pravda, LA Times, BBC News, Nikkei, etc.

What's wrong with reading an opposing viewpoint?

I think their reporting is as fair and balanced as anyone else's.

As far as I am concerned (off thread, I know!) Fox News (and Rupert Murdoch by extension) are an ugly pimple on the buttock of humanity.

Let the Flame Wars begin!

[zaza]

AJ has managed to upset pretty much every Arab government in the Middle East, Iran, the USA and UK. Shows they must be doing something right. They are based in Oman and to give the Omanis credit, they have refused to gag AJ when asked to by other Arab governments.

I believe most of the reporters came from the BBC's World Service radio which had cut-backs a few years ago.

First,I'd like to clear a thing: Aljazeera channel is owned and based in Qatar not Oman;Qatar has always tried to recognize itself with allieng with US and Israel (the biggest US ARMY base is in the capital Doha) and shaking hands and hugging the Isreal PM on his last visit to Doha!! so this channel is not anti-foreigne media channel.

There are two Aljazeera channel.The arabic one started long time ago and have a big effect in the Arab's issues ; it was mainly funded with Saddam's money to show the world his point of view (search for that scandal)! this bad channel from Qatar soon had a challeng from Al-Arabya (Saudi funded NEWS channel) because there are some kind of hidden dispute between those two major oil gulf countries and their curropted (Sheiks).The reasons for that conflict were mainly the parade for more oil theft,women and gaining the consent of the west just to impose their powers of owning the countries they rule.

Then the USA tried to start a news channel to confront those 2 seemi-fantiac channels after recogizing those channels effects on the mass opinon and the arabic world also had started a very up-class arabic news channel called (alhurra) to beat all the other channels and of course to show their point of view .

But this aljazeera in arabic(covering only the Arabic world issues especially Iraq) is causing a lot of hatered and secatarian rage between the Iraqi ppl since the invation and had a great leading role in playing and litting the fire to start differences and ethnic problems in Iraq by broadcasting and advertising beheading and vilolence scenes with venges comments;because the leading minds of that channel r Sunnies and Palestanians ,thus u can find a bias standards when dealing with the sectarian war in Iraq.

The other Jazeera channel in english, it has been started couple of months ago with huge expert staff with (Armani suites); this channel has adopted more professioal approach but still have some spices in covering some facts .But u can notice the international news covering with a decent western mutual opinon.

But if u compare these channel(the english) with the foxy Fox news u would consider it truly excellent and genuine not fabricated and stageacted as most Fox news are,most of the Iraqi news u watch in that channel is about the achievments of the superior American angels who were sent from above to bring salvation and to pull out Iraqies from caves to civilization;like these stories u can always watch on Fox news ::Brave kind american soldier carrying a torn bombed body of a child ;but whose airplain did that bombing at the first place???they don't tell u (cuz it's them who started that chaos and mess in Iraq without any prior planning or the least needed studying of homework to enter such a very troubled area),only they show u how nice and tender they are and how savage brutal monsters the Enemy are!(without going through the numbers of victims of both wars and 13 years embargo which led to a whole 1 million childrens deaths and the miserable homless Iraqies since the 2003)

P.S. if the US are in Iraq for good reasons;how come they call the majority of the ppl :Enemy (I guess it is more easier to kill a human if u deal with him as an enemy!!)

Edited June 30, 2007 by zaza

[farangsay]

Interesting , this thread.

Prompted me to find the web version of the English channel and , whilst I found the presentation less "professional" than other news web sites (see their front page and the unpleasing blurred photos with hard-on-the-eye text) , there were one or two articles (one on the US congress not renewing the US President's right to unilaterally sign trade treaties - and Condi Rice characterising this as a "threat to national security" ) which seem to be unreported elsewhere.

PS Thank you Zaza , I have read and appreciated your insights.

[zaza]

Interesting , this thread.

Prompted me to find the web version of the English channel and , whilst I found the presentation less "professional" than other news web sites (see their front page and the unpleasing blurred photos with hard-on-the-eye text) , there were one or two articles (one on the US congress not renewing the US President's right to unilaterally sign trade treaties - and Condi Rice characterising this as a "threat to national security" ) which seem to be unreported elsewhere.

PS Thank you Zaza , I have read and appreciated your insights.

You are most welcomed