One of the many challenges that the Middle East is facing is the media’s coverage of political events. The Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting (IRIB) is one of the leading media houses in the Pacific and Asia regions. With its origins in Iran, IRIB succeeded the National Iranian Radio and Television in 1979 after the Islamic Revolution. The extent to which the Islamic Republic of Iran exercises “unrivalled” media coverage is manifested by the creation of a monopoly by the IRIB. The media player has set its branches in at least 45 countries thus reaching millions of people globally.
Besides the IRIB, two of the most present media outlets in the region are Al Jazeera and Al Arabiya, which have seen a growing rivalry owing to the favorable media atmospheres in Qatar and Saudi Arabia respectively (Chouliaraki and Blaagaard 77). Both of them are among the most commonly followed media outlets, not only in the Middle East but also on a worldwide scale. The two media corporations have received appraisal and criticism over their coverage of political events in the region. However, their weaknesses cannot be matched with that of the Iranian fourth estate residents led by the IRIB. Therefore, this paper will show how Iranian media is a nemesis in the Middle East’s fourth estate sector concerning political developments.
The Iranian government controls the operations of the IRIB implying that it influences its coverage of the Middle Eastern events. Notably, Article 145 of the Iranian Constitution underlines that the Supreme Leader has the authority to appoint or dismiss the head of a given radio or media house in the Islamic Republic of Iran. The Islamic Consultative Assembly in Iran oversees the appointment or dismissal of media house heads in the presence of two presidential representatives and the judiciary chief (Chouliaraki and Blaagaard 60).
In this respect, the legal framework governing the processes of the media is considerably influenced by the political interests, and thus reporting may involve biased reporting of news. In this regard, the Iranian media is authoritarian regulated. On the other hand, the Al Jazeera began reporting in 1996 after receiving a generous grant from Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa, Emir of Qatar. This aspect meant that the Qatari government had an influential role in the reporting. Likewise, Al Arabiya was a response to the creation of Al Jazeera, funded by the Saudi Royal family (Chouliaraki and Blaagaard 86). This aspect allowed them to counterattack Al Jazeera for the attack against the Royals. However, over the years, these two governments have continued to reinforce the reporting independence of the two outlets besides using them to benefit their regimes. Contrarily, the legal and political structures in Iran depict greater political influence on the media compared to the case of Saudi Arabia and Qatar.
The evidence of the Iranian news outlets being used as propaganda tools can be seen clearly in their biased reporting about sensitive political developments in the Middle East. This aspect can be linked to the fact that Iran and Saudi Arabia have religious differences. While Iran is a majority Shiite Muslim population, Saudi Arabia is mostly Sunni Muslims. Wehrey argues that Saudi-linked media has a tendency to depict Sunni Arabs as the victims of Shiite violence, which is a controversial notion (138).
In this light, Al-Jazeera has strategically been a voice for Saudi clerics who have used the media as a voice to express their anti-Iranian sentiments. One must also remember that Tehran ordered the closure of Al Arabiya headquarters in Iran during the 2009 elections for allegations of unfair reporting. Although the legitimacy of this claim cannot be confirmed, it is clear that there is an animosity from both sides, and that questionable reporting has been charged which has added to the tensions. In doing so, Iran portrayed its interference with the freedom of the media in the Middle East especially regarding the coverage of political issues.
Conversely, Al Jazeera has been identified as a media house that focuses on shading light on the various forms of injustices experienced in the Middle East. In 2005, violent riots broke out in the Iranian province of Khuzestan, Iran. The unrest was initiated by Arab separatists, who comprise a small percentage of Iran’s population in the southwest region. The Arab separatists staged an uprising against the Iranian authorities since they termed it as discriminative to the region’s minorities.
During the events, Al Jazeera was accused of perpetuating the chaos by acting as a voice for the Arabs in that region and sympathizing with the Iranian Arabs, particularly the Sunni. This case is just one of the events that have compelled Tehran to accuse Al Jazeera of showing antipathy to the Iranian causes (Elling 108). It is clear that these two networks have a political agenda, apart from reporting the mere facts. Despite the fact that Iran has never attacked a sovereign state, political influence has tarnished the image of the media in the Middle Eastern region.
In 2003, the Judiciary in Iran accused the IRIB of biased programs and reports concerning the activities of the justice system. An official of the judiciary, Ayatollah Sadegh Larijani, argued that in these programs, “they condemn the judiciary without the presence of opposing sides and in a biased manner” (Karami par. 1). Further, the public has criticized the way IRIB recruits its workforce since most people argue the recruitments are based on personal connections and not merit.
On the contrary, Al-Jazeera has been running a special series dubbed “Justice!” to highlight the plights of different individuals and groups in the Middle East by seeking the government intervention. For instance, in 2013, Al-Jazeera highlighted a story about the formation of the Muslim Brotherhood branch in the UAE, which would threaten the security of the country. Consequently, the judicial system in the UAE prosecuted at least 30 individuals amongst them Egyptians and Emiratis for intending to spread extremism in the Persian Gulf. In this light, Al-Jazeera has continually demonstrated an interest for a peaceful Middle East through various TV programs that address the various forms of injustices causing turmoil in the region, a trend that has also been embraced by Al Arabiya.
The Saudi Arabian-backed media has not only demonstrated fair reporting practices in its native land, but also in Iran and Yemen. Notably, the ongoing civil war in Yemen has led to violence and left the country in shambles. Saudi Arabia has used this opportunity to step up and assert its force in the Gulf region. They backed the exiled President Abd-Rabbuh Mansur Hadi and engaged in advocacy efforts to weaken the Houthi rebels. Yemen TV, which is owned by the government, fell into the hands of the rebels, and Saudi Arabia reacted by creating their channel in support of the exiled president called Al-Shar’iyah, or “legitimacy”.
The move showed the concern that Al Arabiya has for the people of Yemen as it sought to foster political stability in the war-torn country. Besides the pressure from the Iranian media corporations led by IRIB that sought to pursue the government to continue supporting the Houthis, the government saw no point of backing the rebels since there was nothing substantial to gain. Mainly, the Iranian media house envisioned a situation similar to the one in Lebanon where the government supported the Hezbollah movement successfully (Jafari par. 2).
The Saudis did not stop the propaganda war seeking the liberalization of people of Yemen from the rebels at that point. They created another news outlet with the same name and logo as the state-owned Yemen TV. Despite many of the residents in Yemen not having electricity and are unable to watch either of the programs, the strategy sought to urge the Yemeni fourth estate to assume its position in promoting equality in the Middle East.
One of the interesting points of this media war is that Saudi Arabia intervening in the Yemen media was not reported on many of their media outlets including Al Jazeera. This aspect shows that the Saudi royals and government are careful in carrying out their political stability campaigns by sensitizing the local structures to stand against any form of injustices in a way that prevents the escalation of the crisis. On the other hand, The IRIB has shown weak efforts of influencing the establishment of media structures that oppose the perpetrators of social and political tensions in Middle Eastern countries like Yemen.
The IRIB published stories in support of a Shia Sheikh, Nimr Baqir al-Nimr, before he was arrested and executed by the Saudi Arabian authorities. Sheikh Nimr, a Shia, who agitated for the rights of minority Shia Arabs in the Eastern Province of Saudi Arabia, was seen as a radical who had the potential of creating unrest in the country. Notably, Al Arabiya increased awareness among the Saudis concerning the motives of Sheikh Nimr, who threatened to organize a Shia revolution in the Eastern Province by radicalizing the youth (“Al Jazeera: Iran and Saudi Arabia wage war of words” par. 4). The IRIB supported the move by terming it as a way of giving a voice to the minority groups in foreign countries.
Nonetheless, the government of Saudi Arabia regarded the intentions of the Sheikh as dangerous to the peace and stability of the country since the secession of the Shias in the Eastern Province would mean translate to political instability. Al Jazeera covered the events where Sheikh Nimr and other 46 terrorism perpetrators were executed, emphasizing the need for the eradication of extremism in the Gulf region. In response, the IRIB aired the sentiments of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s Supreme Leader, who reckoned that Saudi Arabia would face a “divine revenge”. In this case, Iran overlooked the detriments of extremism that could arise from the influence of Sheikh Nimr’s endeavors in the name of religious beliefs, thus giving an opportunity to Al Jazeera and Al Arabiya to condemn his undertakings.
The media in the Middle East has a played a major role in shaping the region’s political atmosphere. Particularly, Al Jazeera and Al Arabiya have been at the forefront in advocating peace and stability as seen in their coverage of sensitive events in the Persian Gulf. The intervention of Al Arabiya in Yemen portrays the extent to which the media corporation is against the activities of rebels and terrorists in the Middle East.
Similarly, Al Jazeera has also shown concern for the prevalence of peace and stability in the region as depicted by various programs and news coverage on various aspects of injustices. Conversely, the IRIB, a national broadcaster in Iran, has shown reluctance in advocating for regional peace and stability. Notably, the authoritarian-regulated nature of Iran’s media sector has always put the interest of the political leaders at heart thus facilitating its detachment from promoting peace and stability in the Persian Gulf region.
Works Cited
Al Jazeera: Iran and Saudi Arabia Wage War of Words. 2016. Web.
Chouliaraki, Lilie, and Bolette Blaagaard. Cosmopolitanism and the New News Media, London: Routledge, 2015. Print.
Elling, Rasmus. Minorities in Iran: Nationalism and Ethnicity after Khomeini, New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2013. Print.
Jafari, Saeid. Why Iran doesn’t want to stay in Yemen 2015. Web.
Karami, Arash. Iran Judiciary Accuses Iran TV of Bias 2014.
Wehrey, Frederic. Dangerous but Not Omnipotent: Exploring the Reach and Limitations of Iranian Power in the Middle East, Santa Monica: RAND Corporation, 2009. Print.