Television and the Hearts and Minds In The ME

Annie

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2003
Messages
50,848
Reaction score
4,826
Points
1,790
US is losing, badly:

http://weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/013/127nftww.asp?pg=1

Al Qaeda TV
A new 24-hour insurgent station reveals al Qaeda's increasing sophistication, and our continuing confusion.
by Daveed Gartenstein-Ross & Nick Grace
01/03/2007 12:00:00 AM


AL QAEDA AND its allies now have their own 24-hour television station. Based at a secret studio in Syria, its signal is broadcast to the entire Arab world from a satellite owned by the Egyptian government. This development highlights al Qaeda's increasingly sophisticated propaganda efforts.

Al Qaeda placed great emphasis on communicating its message effectively throughout 2006. Osama bin Laden and deputy Ayman al-Zawahiri issued more tapes in 2006 than in any year since the 9/11 attacks. In the past, al Qaeda tapes were generally released to Al Jazeera, but 2006 saw more Internet releases: the terrorist group's message was thus more quickly disseminated. Al-Zawraa TV, the 24-hour insurgent station, is an extension of this trend.

Al-Zawraa hit the airwaves on November 14. According to Middle East-based media monitor Marwan Soliman and military analyst Bill Roggio, it was set up by the Islamic Army of Iraq, an insurgent group comprised of former Baathists who were loyal to Saddam Hussein and now profess their conversion to a bin Laden-like ideology.

...

Al-Zawraa's value to the enemy is clear. The visual medium is extremely powerful, particularly in a part of the world with high illiteracy rates. This is not simply a station with an anti-American message: it is enemy propaganda, designed to further destabilize Iraq, empower the insurgency, and win support for the insurgency throughout the greater region.

The U.S. government, however, has thus far been unable to remove Al-Zawraa from the airwaves. A State Department official, asked to comment on efforts to combat the channel, told us, "We are strongly supporting the Iraqi efforts to work with the Egyptians to get this off the air."

Yet this statement doesn't accurately encapsulate the situation. Radio Netherlands' media analyst Andy Sennitt said of Al-Zawraa's broadcasts on Nilesat, "Nilesat is mostly Egyptian owned, so it means they will turn down any customer who is thought to produce material against Egypt's national interest. So apparently the Egyptian authorities are happy with al-Zawraa."

The United States provides Egypt with $2 billion a year in aid, more than it sends to any other country save Israel. This should provide the United States with a great deal of influence over Hosni Mubarak's government; however, it remains to be seen if the Bush administration is willing to exploit this leverage.

Removing Al-Zawraa from the airwaves through alternative means, including jamming its signal, may prove difficult since the physical location of the signal's feed would need to be located and, according to Sennitt, it could be anywhere. "All that's needed is a dish pointing at the satellite, and a transmitter on the correct uplink frequency," he said. "The satellite will carry whatever signal it receives." The easiest route to shutting down Al-Zawraa then is to persuade Egypt to remove the station from Nilesat.

In the five years since 9/11, the United States has failed to develop a message capable of winning over Middle Easterners, or turning them against bin Laden's radical worldview. The lack of a message is one thing, but the inability to combat inflammatory enemy propaganda is another. If the administration cannot act decisively to prevent Al-Zawraa from spreading its poisonous message, America will only be seen as the "weak horse" that bin Laden spoke of shortly after he succeeded in toppling the Twin Towers.
 

UnAmericanYOU

VIP Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2006
Messages
389
Reaction score
103
Points
78
Yes, we're losing this, too bad for us that the MSM is soooooooo liberal. They still want to try to "tolerate" radical Islamics.

Can't often tell the difference between an AP article and a Al-Jazerra article. Zaraqwi has all the latest issues of Newsweek scattered around his last known safe house for a reason.

Really sucks when a country such as Canada produces pro-Muslim, anti-Israel propoganda. "Little Mosque on the Prarie" springs to mind:

OTTAWA, (AFP) - Canada's public broadcaster CBC hopes to lighten religious tensions between this country's Christian majority and Muslims with a new sitcom, "Little Mosque on the Prairie."

The show is a parody of the acclaimed US drama "Little House on the Prairie" (1974-1983), starring Michael Landon and Melissa Gilbert, about the life and adventures of the Ingalls family in the 19th century American West.

But instead of raising pitchforks, tumbling down hills and selling eggs at the general store, this fictional Muslim family struggles to find its place in Canada's vast western prairies in a post-September 11, 2001 world.

CBC spokesman Jeff Keay said Monday the broadcaster has ordered eight episodes and will begin airing them in January.

"The producers recognize that this is a potentially sensitive topic," Keay said.
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/02102006/3...sque-prairie-aims-ease-religious-tension.html

Gee, a sensitive topic, who'da thunk? Propoganda disguised as humor....
 

ekrem

Silver Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2005
Messages
7,527
Reaction score
461
Points
93
Are there any other proofs besides this article, that this Al-Qaeda TV?
Even if so, the thread headline is simplified. Allthough not knowing TV-Stations in ME besides Turkish ones, i assume that overwhelming ( >99%) of TV-Stations have nothing to do with Insurgents, Terrorists or how you call them.
 

trobinett

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2004
Messages
1,832
Reaction score
162
Points
48
Location
Arkansas, The Ozarks
Yea, I've read a few articles about these kind of goings on, and I've found it more than a little confusing.:confused:

First, how can ANYBODY out spin the USA, I mean, we've got people that make a career out of "spin doctoring"?

To think of the US loosing a propaganda war is just dumb founding. I know I've found myself thinking that maybe this is one of those, double, double cross deals. Our spin is so good, people don't even know we're spinning.

Yea, kinda crazy huh?:cuckoo:

Second, why do otherwise intelligent people buy into propaganda from know terror organizations? I wouldn't trust ANY information coming out of such sources. I don't know, maybe its just me, but we don't seem to apply the same critical eye to foreign sources as we do to our own.:sad:

Am off base with my feelings, what's the board's feelings?:eusa_think:
 
OP
Annie

Annie

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2003
Messages
50,848
Reaction score
4,826
Points
1,790
Yea, I've read a few articles about these kind of goings on, and I've found it more than a little confusing.:confused:

First, how can ANYBODY out spin the USA, I mean, we've got people that make a career out of "spin doctoring"?

To think of the US loosing a propaganda war is just dumb founding. I know I've found myself thinking that maybe this is one of those, double, double cross deals. Our spin is so good, people don't even know we're spinning.

Yea, kinda crazy huh?:cuckoo:

Second, why do otherwise intelligent people buy into propaganda from know terror organizations? I wouldn't trust ANY information coming out of such sources. I don't know, maybe its just me, but we don't seem to apply the same critical eye to foreign sources as we do to our own.:sad:

Am off base with my feelings, what's the board's feelings?:eusa_think:
Actually I believe the 'audience' were those proned to believing the alternative. Sort of related to this:

http://usmessageboard.com/showthread.php?t=46327
 
OP
Annie

Annie

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2003
Messages
50,848
Reaction score
4,826
Points
1,790
That was an eye opening article.

I still wonder though, if we are actually "losing" the propaganda wars, and if so, HOW?
Hell, the 'right' is losing it at home, daily.
 

eots

no fly list
Joined
Jan 6, 2007
Messages
28,995
Reaction score
2,097
Points
205
Location
IN TH HEARTS AND MINDS OF FREE MEN
Washington calls it the "smoking gun" that puts Bin Laden's guilt beyond doubt, but many in the Arab world believe the home video of the al-Qaeda chief is a fake. Could it be?
The sound is muffled, the image at times blurred and juddery, but the dialogue - if genuine - is damning.

Osama Bin Laden, or someone who looks a lot like him, talks on camera about his prior knowledge of the 11 September attacks on the World Trade Center.

But while Washington's allies have been quick to judge the tape as evidence of Bin Laden's guilt, many in the Arab world doubt its authenticity.

There have been:


Claims that the Bin Laden figure is a look-alike
Suspicions that Bin Laden's voice has been dubbed over the original soundtrack
Allegations that Bin Laden was not discussing the WTC attacks, but an assault on US military targets some years ago
Rudimentary film editing - overlaying a new soundtrack, changing the order of the film - is open to anyone with a camcorder or some basic PC software.



It would be much more convincing if he was face-on to the camera

Nikki Nahal
Experts in the West seem in no doubt that the tape is genuine. But if it were fake, could it look convincing?

A lot depends of whether lip movements on film match the words that are being spoken. In this case there is synchronisation between the voice and the lips, says linguist John Gibbons, of the University of Sydney.

But the view of Bin Laden is not that clear, says video picture editor Nikki Nahal.

"The more the person's head is facing away from the camera, the easier it is to con it. A lot of the picture of [Bin Laden] is side on and that does open the possibility that someone else's voice could be put on top," she says.

"It would be much more convincing if he was face-on to the camera, a lot closer and the sound quality was better."

Sound authentic

But even then, it's not that simple, says Dr Peter French, a forensic expert specialising in audio, speech and language.



His lips are synchronised, but that's not conclusive proof

"You've got to make the conversation sound right. It's not just a case of getting the right words in the right order, but you have to think about the rhythm, the intonation and the pitch drift from the start to the end of a sentence," says Dr French.

"It is possible to manipulate the pitch on some advanced computer software, but that's difficult to make convincing."

Could such edits be detected on a third or fourth generation copy of a video tape?

In the days before widespread digital technology, it was easy, says Dr French.

Digital makes it difficult

"You would look for 'switching transients' - surges of electrical energy transmitted from the heads of the tape recorder when it was switched to on or off.

"These could be detected on screen or by putting the tape under a microscope."

But today, using digital equipment, "it's possible to edit or fabricate in ways that completely defy forensic detection," says Dr French.

So, if there was a section where the fakers couldn't get Bin Laden's lips to match the soundtrack they could cut and paste in a bit of film of someone else in the room. And no-one could be sure whether the edit was made by manipulating the video.

But both Dr French and Ms Nahal agree that, unlike in stills photography, it's impossible to convincingly alter the picture by adding new elements or playing with the images.

"I'd be able to spot something like that in the first frame," says Ms Nahal.
 
OP
Annie

Annie

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2003
Messages
50,848
Reaction score
4,826
Points
1,790
You need a link here...
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top