Ƶ

‘Journalistic malpractice’: CNN staff rebel over network’s pro-Israel coverage

‘Journalistic malpractice’: CNN staff rebel over network’s pro-Israel coverage
CNN staffers say that the tone of the network’s coverage is set by new editor-in-chief and CEO Mark Thompson. (AFP)
Short Url
Updated 05 February 2024

‘Journalistic malpractice’: CNN staff rebel over network’s pro-Israel coverage

‘Journalistic malpractice’: CNN staff rebel over network’s pro-Israel coverage
  • Stories about the conflict pass through Jerusalem bureau before publication, staff say

DUBAI: Staffers at CNN are rallying against the network’s coverage of the Israel-Hamas conflict over claims that editorial policies are censoring Palestinian perspectives and promoting Israeli propaganda.

Journalists in CNN newsrooms in countries including the US said that the network’s story-approval process and management edicts have led to censored and biased coverage of the conflict.

“The majority of news since the war began, regardless of how accurate the initial reporting, has been skewed by a systemic and institutional bias within the network toward Israel,” a CNN staffer told The Guardian. “Ultimately, CNN’s coverage of the Israel-Gaza war amounts to journalistic malpractice.”

Daily news decisions are based on directives from CNN headquarters in Atlanta that maintain strict guidelines on coverage, according to accounts from six CNN staffers and more than a dozen internal memos and emails obtained by the British daily.

Guidelines include severe restrictions on quoting Hamas officials and reporting other Palestinian perspectives, while taking statements from the Israeli government at face value, the staffers said.

Stories must also be cleared by the Jerusalem bureau before broadcast or publication.

“There’s a lot of internal strife and dissent. Some people are looking to get out,” one journalist said.

Another staffer said: “Many have been pushing for more content from Gaza to be alerted and aired. By the time these reports go through Jerusalem and make it to TV or the homepage, critical changes — from the introduction of imprecise language to an ignorance of crucial stories — ensure that nearly every report, no matter how damning, relieves Israel of wrongdoing.”

Some journalists with long-term experience reporting on the Israel-Palestine conflict are said to be avoiding assignments in Israel over fears they will be prevented from writing impartial reports, while others believe they are being intentionally held back by senior editors.

CNN staffers say that the tone of the network’s coverage is set by new editor-in-chief and CEO Mark Thompson, who stepped into the role two days after the Oct. 7 Hamas-led attack.

Some employees have questioned Thompson’s ability to maintain editorial impartiality, owing to controversies in his previous role as director-general of Britain’s BBC public broadcaster, when he was accused of succumbing to Israeli government pressure on various occasions.

In one case, critics accused Thompson of removing a BBC correspondent from her Jerusalem post in 2005 on the advice of the Israeli government.

One internal CNN memo seen by The Guardian contained instructions from Thompson to remind audiences “of the immediate cause of this current conflict, namely the Hamas attack and mass murder and kidnap of civilians.”

For many staffers, the memo appears to reflect the network’s editorial strategy of justifying Israel’s actions through the Hamas massacre, and failing to provide additional context and background.

One staffer said: “How else are editors going to read that other than as an instruction that no matter what the Israelis do, Hamas is ultimately to blame?”

David Lindsay, CNN’s senior director of news standards and practices, issued a directive in November warning journalists to avoid publishing statements from Hamas officials.

“Most of it has been said many times before and is not newsworthy. We should be careful not to give it a platform,” he told the network’s staff.

Disgruntled staff have also pointed to CNN’s repeated airing of interviews containing inflammatory rhetoric from Israeli officials and their American supporters.

A CNN spokesperson rejected allegations of bias in a statement to The Guardian.

“Our reporting has confronted Israel’s response to the attacks, including some of our most detailed and high-profile investigations, interviews and reports,” it said.


US Navy veteran evacuating Afghans wins $5m in CNN defamation suit

US Navy veteran evacuating Afghans wins $5m in CNN defamation suit
Updated 18 January 2025

US Navy veteran evacuating Afghans wins $5m in CNN defamation suit

US Navy veteran evacuating Afghans wins $5m in CNN defamation suit
  • The settlement will avert a second phase of the trial that would have determined any punitive damages

WASHINGTON: CNN reached a settlement on Friday with a US Navy veteran who helped evacuate people from Afghanistan after the US military withdrew from the country in 2021, a judge said on Friday, hours after a jury found the TV news outlet liable for defaming him.

The six-person jury decided CNN had to pay damages totaling $5 million. The settlement will avert a second phase of the trial that would have determined any punitive damages. The verdict followed a two-week trial in Panama City, Florida, state court.

Circuit Judge William Henry did not provide details of the deal in announcing the settlement in open court.

Plaintiff Zachary Young sued CNN in 2022, accusing the Warner Bros Discovery unit of destroying his reputation in a segment on “The Lead with Jake Tapper” by branding him as a profiteer who exploited desperate Afghans by charging exorbitant fees.

CNN stood by its story and denied defaming Young, though the network said in March 2022 that it regretted using the term “black market” to describe Young’s work.

A CNN representative said the network remains proud of its journalists but “will of course take what useful lessons we can from this case.” The representative declined to offer details of the deal.

Young’s lawyer Vel Freedman said in a statement that he was very pleased to clear Young’s name, obtain punitive damages and settle the case.

Young, wearing a dark suit and blue tie, smiled as Henry thanked the lawyers for their work before dismissing them.

The case stems from Young’s work as a security consultant helping corporations and charities extract people from Afghanistan after the Taliban swiftly took back control following the chaotic US withdrawal.

In a segment on The Lead, CNN said “desperate Afghans” trying to escape the country were being “exploited” with “exorbitant” and “impossible” fees charged for evacuations.

The segment turned to focus on Young, displaying his name and photo next to a chyron saying evacuees faced a perilous “black market.”

“The sum and substance of the segment states and implies that Young marketed evacuations directly to Afghan citizens, that he exploited Afghan citizens, and that he sold them illegal goods/services on a black market,” Young said in his lawsuit.


TikTok ban: Last-minute reprieve or rule of law?

TikTok ban: Last-minute reprieve or rule of law?
Updated 17 January 2025

TikTok ban: Last-minute reprieve or rule of law?

TikTok ban: Last-minute reprieve or rule of law?
  • As the Jan. 19 deadline looms for TikTok’s potential ban in the US, rumors are rife speculating on the future of the video app

DUBAI/LONDON: With just days left until the official ban of Chinese-owned social media platform TikTok is set to take effect in the US, speculation is mounting over what happens next — and whether there could still be a last-minute twist.

The short answer: No one knows for certain.

In March 2024, the US House of Representatives passed a bill that, if signed into law, would force ByteDance, the China-based owner of TikTok, to sell the video-sharing app. The Senate passed the bill, and President Joe Biden signed it, ordering ByteDance to sell TikTok to an American company or face a ban in the US by Jan. 19.

At the time, TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew said that such a law “will take billions of dollars out of the pockets of creators and small businesses” and put more than 30,000 American jobs at risk.

Neither he nor the company were willing to give up without a fight. In May 2024, TikTok and ByteDance sued the US federal government challenging the law, alleging that it was unconstitutional.

In December, a federal appeals court ruled the TikTok law was constitutional. A month later, on Jan. 10, the Supreme Court heard arguments in a pivotal case brought by TikTok and its users challenging the law on the basis of US users’ First Amendment rights.

On Friday, the Supreme Court upheld the TikTok ban after days of speculation, during which it refrained from making public comments on the case, leaving a sliver of hope for a last-minute reprieve. With the decision now confirmed, TikTok’s options have significantly narrowed.

In its ruling, the court stated: “We conclude that the challenged provisions do not violate petitioners’ First Amendment rights. The judgment of the United States court of appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit is affirmed.”

This decision means TikTok will no longer be available for download from app stores starting Jan. 19.

“There is no doubt that, for more than 170 million Americans, TikTok offers a distinctive and expansive outlet for expression, means of engagement, and source of community. But Congress has determined that divestiture is necessary to address its well-supported national security concerns regarding TikTok’s data collection practices and relationship with a foreign adversary,” the ruling reads.

The outcome seemed increasingly likely during the hearings, with Justice Elena Kagan saying: “The law is only targeted at this foreign corporation that doesn't have First Amendment rights. Whatever effect it has, it has.”

Justice Amy Coney Barrett added: “The law doesn’t say TikTok has to shut down. It says ByteDance has to divest.”

Amid the legal back and forth, TikTok’s knight in shining armor might just be President-elect Donald Trump, who is set to take office on Jan. 20 — one day after the purported ban.

Despite trying to ban the app during his first term over national security concerns, he joined TikTok during his 2024 presidential campaign, during which he pledged to “save TikTok.” He also lauded the platform for helping him win more youth votes.

When asked about his policies on social media regulation, particularly the impending ban of TikTok, Karoline Leavitt, Trump-Vance Transition Team spokeswoman, told Arab News: “The American people re-elected President Trump by a resounding margin, giving him a mandate to implement the promises he made on the campaign trail. He will deliver.”

Just last month, Trump urged the Supreme Court to pause the ban.

The brief submitted to the court says Trump “alone possesses the consummate dealmaking expertise, the electoral mandate, and the political will to negotiate a resolution to save the platform while addressing the national security concerns expressed by the Government.”

Moreover, earlier this week, reports emerged that TikTok CEO Chew has been invited to Trump’s inauguration and offered a “position of honor,” suggesting a willingness to engage with the company.

And Mike Waltz, Trump’s incoming national security adviser, told FOX News that the new administration would “find a way to preserve (TikTok) but protect people’s data.”

Any intervention by Trump, however, would likely take the form of an executive order temporarily pausing the ban, contingent on TikTok demonstrating progress toward separating from ByteDance. Even then, such an order could face legal challenges, and the law only allows a limited delay of 60 to 90 days to give extra time for negotiations.

Outgoing President Biden, who will leave office on Jan. 19, will not enforce a ban on TikTok, a US official said Thursday, leaving its fate in the hands of Trump.

Rumors of a potential sale have intensified in recent days including speculation of interest from high-profile buyers, such as Elon Musk, but ByteDance dismissed these reports as “pure fiction.”

The company has consistently rejected the possibility of a sale, saying it “is simply not possible: not commercially, not technologically, not legally.”

As the Jan. 19 deadline approaches, the situation remains shrouded in uncertainty, even after Friday’s ruling.

For now, TikTok’s chances of remaining accessible in the US appear practically null, as the case is steeped in complex issues of politics, national security, economic interests, and digital rights.

The law underpinning the ban targets a wide network of US-based partners that facilitate TikTok’s operations, effectively making common workarounds, such as using virtual private networks or changing a phone’s regional settings, either ineffective or impractical, according to experts.

At best, users might gain limited access to a web-based version of the app, which lacks many of its features. However, even that option may not function reliably, experts warned.

The most likely enforcement mechanism would involve compelling app stores like Google Play and Apple’s App Store to remove TikTok from their platforms in the US. Lawmakers have already instructed tech companies to prepare for this scenario if the ban is enacted.

If the app is banned, TikTok reportedly plans to display a pop-up message for users attempting to access the platform, directing them to a website with information about the ban, according to a Reuters report citing sources close to the matter.

For now, TikTok’s operations continue as usual, with the company having reassured employees that their jobs are secure regardless of the Supreme Court’s decision. However, morale within the company is said to be low, despite these reassurances.

What is certain is that TikTok’s leadership has been “planning for various scenarios.” With Friday’s decision now final and the Jan. 19 ban imminent, the company’s next steps will likely take one of two paths: intervention by Trump or divestment to a non-Chinese entity.

Meanwhile, users and critics alike wait in anticipation, seeking clarity on the far-reaching consequences of the ban — potentially rippling as far as the Middle East — and whether any last-minute developments might offer a reprieve for the platform and its millions of US users.


London’s pro-Palestine demo set for standoff as police-approved route rejected

London’s pro-Palestine demo set for standoff as police-approved route rejected
Updated 2 min 36 sec ago

London’s pro-Palestine demo set for standoff as police-approved route rejected

London’s pro-Palestine demo set for standoff as police-approved route rejected
  • Organizers say they will assemble at Whitehall on Saturday to protest the police ban on their original demonstration route
  • Police ban on the original gathering at the BBC headquarters, citing a potential threat to the Jewish community, has sparked backlash

LONDON: Tensions are rising ahead of a planned pro-Palestine demonstration in London after the Palestine Solidarity Campaign and its coalition partners vowed to reject the Metropolitan Police’s proposed new route for the march.

Organizers have announced they will gather at Whitehall on Saturday to protest the police decision instead.

PSC, alongside Stop the War, the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, the Muslim Association of Britain, Friends of Al-Aqsa, and the Palestine Forum in Britain, made the announcement on Friday following protracted negotiations with police.

The Met had last week banned the original march, which was scheduled to start at the BBC’s headquarters, citing its proximity to a synagogue and potential security concerns.

“Despite intensive efforts to reach a compromise with the Met, it has so far refused to accept or offer a reasonable solution,” said the coalition in a statement. “However, we will assemble on Whitehall on Saturday at noon. We reiterate our call on the police to lift their repressive conditions and allow us to march. If they continue to refuse to do so and prevent us from marching, we will be rallying in Whitehall to protest.”

The controversy erupted after the police revoked the pre-approved march route, which had been announced in November, over claims it could pose a threat to the Jewish community.

Organizers described the decision as “discriminatory” and accused the authorities of bowing to political pressure from pro-Israeli groups.

“The Met has seemingly accepted and acted upon the arguments of pro-Israel groups that seek to delegitimise our protest as antisemitic or a threat to Jewish people,” said PSC Director Ben Jamal. “This is a gross distortion of the truth. There is not a single instance of our marches posing any threat to synagogues or Jewish individuals. Indeed, we count a large, self-organised Jewish bloc as some of our most indefatigable supporters.”

Organizers also said they offered to reroute the march to avoid clashing with Shabbat services at the synagogue, but claimed the police refused their proposals.

“Over the past week the Met Police have imposed a series of repressive conditions to prevent us marching and have even attempted to impose a route that the Board of Deputies of British Jews announced they had suggested to the police. This has been firmly rejected by the Palestine Coalition — it is an affront that pro-Israel groups can attempt to decide where we can or cannot march,” read the group’s statement.

On Friday, the coalition said that while they plan to defy the ban, they would gather at Whitehall instead of the BBC’s Portland Place headquarters. They also claimed the police had backed away from plans to arrest protesters assembling outside Russell Square, which the Met had suggested as a designated protest zone.

The police’s decision has drawn widespread criticism, with several cultural figures and members of the Jewish community urging the authorities to reverse the ban.

“The Met’s approach has been confrontational, heavy-handed and intransigent. Their use of powers under the Public Order Act has been based on flimsy grounds and arbitrarily applied, which erodes the right of peaceful protest that is fundamental in a democracy,” Jamal said. “Despite this, our protest tomorrow will go ahead — we call on all those who seek justice for Palestine to stand with us.”


Lebanese journalist appointed presidency spokesperson

Lebanese journalist appointed presidency spokesperson
Updated 17 January 2025

Lebanese journalist appointed presidency spokesperson

Lebanese journalist appointed presidency spokesperson
  • Charafeddine is one of two women appointed to the president’s team

DUBAI: Lebanese journalist Najat Charafeddine has been appointed as spokesperson for the presidency, the first woman to hold such a position.

Charafeddine is one of two women appointed to the president’s team, an unprecedented move announced a week after the election of Lebanese President Joseph Aoun.

Diplomat Jeanne Mrad, who serves at Lebanon’s permanent mission to the United Nations, has been appointed as an adviser for diplomatic affairs at the presidency.

The appointments were hailed by the Lebanese media as a step toward empowering women on the political scene.

Charafeddine, a native of the southern Lebanese town of Taybeh in the Marjeyoun district, holds a bachelor’s degree in communication and media studies from the Lebanese University, and lectured for three years at Antonine University.

She started her career at Future TV, where she worked for 20 years between 1993 and 2013. She first appeared to the public as a news anchor before hosting the programs “Why Taif?” and “Transit.”

Her success in Lebanon paved the way for international reporting. She covered the wars in Afghanistan (2001) and Iraq (2003) as a correspondent for Future TV. Charafeddine also reported on several international conferences and participated in political and media forums in Washington, London, Jordan, Tunisia, Morocco, and other countries.

In 2015, Charafeddine moved to Al-Araby TV, where she hosted programs such as “Arab Neighbors” and “Special Dialogue” until 2018. Later, she continued her career in radio, presenting the political program “Sunday Encounter” on Voice of All Lebanon radio.

In addition to her broadcast work, Sharafeddine has written articles for publications such as As-Safir, Al-Araby Al-Jadeed, and Al-Shiraa magazine.

She is the wife of former Finance Minister Ghazi Wazni, who was chosen by Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri in the government of Hassan Diab.


Abdel Latif El-Menawy appointed CEO of News and Journalism at United Media Services

Abdel Latif El-Menawy appointed CEO of News and Journalism at United Media Services
Updated 17 January 2025

Abdel Latif El-Menawy appointed CEO of News and Journalism at United Media Services

Abdel Latif El-Menawy appointed CEO of News and Journalism at United Media Services

DUBAI: United Media Services (UMS) has appointed acclaimed Egyptian journalist, Abdel Latif El-Menawy, as the CEO of News and Journalism.

The decision aligns with the company’s development strategy, spearheaded by Chairman Tarek Nour, which aims to enhance the performance of news channels, newspapers, and digital platforms, UMS said in a statement.

El-Menawy is a prominent journalist and writer with a daily column in Al-Masry Al-Youm and articles in Arab News. He also contributes to other regional and international publications. He served as Managing Director and Editor-in-Chief of Al-Masry Al-Youm until October 2023, when he decided to dedicate more time to writing and research.

Previously, El-Menawy was Head of the News Sector at Egyptian Television and the founding director of Al-Ghad News Channel. He also served as Managing Editor at Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper.

In addition to his journalistic work, El-Menawy has hosted current affairs television programs and is a member of the judging panel for the International Emmy Awards. He also serves on the board of the International Academy of Television Arts & Sciences in New York.

El-Menawy is the author of several books, including the notable "18 Days... The Final Days of Mubarak's Rule" and his most recent work, "The Copts: An Investigation of the Roots of the Conflict Between Muslims and Copts in Egypt". His other works, primarily in Arabic, explore topics such as political Islam, the Copts in Egypt, and various political and social issues.

Established in May 2016, UMS owns several TV channels and networks, including general channels dmc – ON, CBC, Al-Hayat, specialized sports channels ON Time, and news channels Al Qahera News – Extra News.