March 2003 - Air-L - lists.aoir.org

Perceptions: Where Al-Jazeera & Co. Are Coming From
by Karim R. Lakhani 29 Mar '03

29 Mar '03

A very nice, thoughtful and disturbing commentary on Al-Jazeera and the rest of the Arab media in WashPost. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A45183-2003Mar28.html I am my self very conflicted about this type of coverage. On the one hand I cringe at the sight of such carnage and blood and think that it is just "political porno." However on the other hand I think that we should all be witnesses to the true cost of war on both sides. War is *not* a video game and I now am reflecting about all the violent PS2 games I have played and how much desensitized I may have become after numerous hours of playing GTA3 and the many first person shooter games. Kind of depressing. K

1 0

lt-smash.us 'fraud' Re: War blogs from US soldier
by JASON NOLAN 29 Mar '03

29 Mar '03

>Message: 3 >Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 13:39:11 -0800 (PST) >From: "robert m. tynes" <rtynes(a)u.washington.edu> >To: air-l(a)aoir.org >Subject: [Air-l] Re: War blogs from US soldier >Reply-To: air-l(a)aoir.org > >Has this one been posted yet? ...a war blog from a US soldier... > >http://www.lt-smash.us/ > >-robert In preparation for an interview with CBC radio (Canada's NPR) I did some searching, and I found out that although CNN says that lt-smash is a popular blog of a solder who has been in the US for months, the blog is probably a fake. Running the Unix whois command shows that the blog was started after the war started (created March 21) and that... oh, here's the information: http://jasonnolan.net/archives/001916.html#001916 It may be real, but with all the well known warblogs that predate the war and are done by people who are less anonymous, I wonder. But then again, I !believe everything I read online ex officio.

2 1

lt-smash.us 'fraud' Re: War blogs from US soldier
by JASON NOLAN 29 Mar '03

29 Mar '03

>Message: 3 >Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2003 13:39:11 -0800 (PST) >From: "robert m. tynes" <rtynes(a)u.washington.edu> >To: air-l(a)aoir.org >Subject: [Air-l] Re: War blogs from US soldier >Reply-To: air-l(a)aoir.org > >Has this one been posted yet? ...a war blog from a US soldier... > >http://www.lt-smash.us/ > >-robert In preparation for an interview with CBC radio (Canada's NPR) I did some searching, and I found out that although CNN says that lt-smash is a popular blog of a solder who has been in the US for months, the blog is probably a fake. Running the Unix whois command shows that the blog was started after the war started (created March 21) and that... oh, here's the information: http://jasonnolan.net/archives/001916.html#001916 It may be real, but with all the well known warblogs that predate the war and are done by people who are less anonymous, I wonder. But then again, I !believe everything I read online ex officio. -- ------ Jason Nolan, PhD Knowledge Media Design Institute Bahen Centre for Information Technology University of Toronto --- mailto:jason@jasonnolan.net phone:416-946-8513 http://jasonnolan.net/

1 0

ICT & young protest movement in Berlin
by Frank Thomas 29 Mar '03

29 Mar '03

The authors of the following article published in German by DER SPIEGEL and translated in today's New York Times link the mobilisation of young Germans for the peace movement and their use of SMS and the Internet. I guess the real effect of these ICTs is on the speed of mobilisation. There already was a peace movement a couple of years before anyone dreamed of the Internet. Frank Thomas The Gulf War Generation March 25, 2003 By DER SPIEGEL Most of those involved in the peace movement are young people. A genuine and simple faith in the good is taking the place of ideology. ... Last Thursday, seven hours after the start of war in Iraq, 50,000 demonstrators surged out of the U-Bahn [subway] tunnels at Alexanderplatz and the Friedrichstrasse train station. By the time the police, who were taken by surprise, managed to block access to all vehicular traffic, the young peace marchers had already arrived at the Brandenburg Gate. ... The effects of ideological disarmament on the new protest culture vary. ... In Leipzig where 30,000 people are once again routinely coming to the Monday Demonstrations, Pastor Christian Führer had to explain to the newcomers that one does not make telephone calls or applaud in a House of God. ... Professional guidance and support is only requested from the organizers. ... The basic data can be accessed on their Internet Web pages - the rest is done through the demonstrators’ own means of communication. This new form of mass movement would be inconceivable without the Internet, cell phones, or SMS. And when like-minded people from Tokyo, Sydney, and Rome penetrate the Berlin youth scene via e-mail chain letters, you get the feeling they’re helping turn the political setscrews on an international level. ... STEFAN BERG, ALEXANDER KÜHN, CAROLINE SCHMIDT http://www.nytimes.com/2003/03/25/international/europe/25SPIEGEL.html?ex=10…

1 0

Re: Denial of Service attack against al Jazeera
by Alexandra Samuel 28 Mar '03

28 Mar '03

A few points to keep in mind re: the downing of the Al Jazeera web site this week: 1) There were reportedly 2 different incidents. One was a loss of service that was probably due to a denial of service attack, but could conceivably be due to a traffic overload. If it was a denial of service attack, it could (and most likely was) the work of just one or two crackers. The other was a domain hijacking in which would-be visitors to Al Jazeera's web site were redirected to (over time) a few different sites, including ones featuring porn and pro-US slogans. 2) This kind of thing has become a totally standard part of international conflicts. Israelis and Palestinians, Indians and Pakistanis, and Chinese and US crackers have defaced and attacked each other's sites for years. Nobody should be very surprised to see Arab OR American sites attacked these days, and frankly, it's not worth reading too much into these kind of attacks. Experience with other conflicts suggests that this kind of activity is mostly undertaken by teens or young men (mostly men), working alone or in very small groups. It's hard to judge whether they speak for many Americans. 3) There's no reason to assume that the US government is behind these attacks, even if some people with .mil addresses were encouraging such behaviour (for which I'd want to see some hard evidence, anyhow). The only evidence of any government-backed hacking was some stuff against Falun Gong web sites, a few years ago, that might have been backed by China...and even that was sketchy. If anyone found real evidence that the US government was sponsoring this hacking it would be interesting, but surprising....As the reactions on this list indicate, it's not the most effective way of selling a message. These are certainly not the last such attacks we'll see as the war wears on. I think the most important thing to remember, and to underline for students and for the media, is that this is NOT "cyber-terrorism". It's more like cyber-graffiti. After all, nobody got physically injured or even endangered by the attacks on the Al Jazeera web site. Wish I could say the same for what's going on in the Iraqi desert... Alex -- Alexandra Samuel samuel(a)fas.harvard.edu http://www.alexandrasamuel.com

1 0

Re: [Air-l] <nettime> Aljazeera VS. U.S (fwd)
by Andrew Herman 28 Mar '03

28 Mar '03

I would also say that the metaphor does injustice to the expereince of divorce as well. Andrew Herman, Ph. D. Visiting Associate Professor of Sociology College of the Holy Cross Worcester, MA 01610 (508) 793-2531 >>> mcforte(a)kacike.org 03/27/03 20:55 PM >>> Perhaps this is where the original author's comments on lack of information in the mass media become most pertinent, when someone can ask, apparently not disingenously either: "At that time, did the West have any idea what Saddam Hussein would become? Anybody who has ever had a divorce might realize the illogic that drives this particular argument." I believe that this slant has been rightly rubbished already. This is not some sci-fi Frankenstein tale: oops, we did it again. Of course they (past US administrations, and past Saddam buddies like Rumsfeld) knew what he would become, especially as they assisted and defended him when he did his worst, so let's not feign innocence. Comparing something on such a grand scale to a mere divorce does considerable injustice to the whole discussion, and is a very metaphor to say the least. Maximilian C. Forte ----- Original Message ----- From: "Randolph Kluver (Assoc Prof)" <TRKluver(a)ntu.edu.sg> To: <air-l(a)aoir.org> Sent: Friday, March 28, 2003 11:50 AM Subject: RE: [Air-l] <nettime> Aljazeera VS. U.S (fwd) There are a couple of very troubling omissions from this reporting about Al Jazeera. First, the article doesn't mention that Iraq also has shut down Al Jazeera before, for misusing Saddam Hussein's proper title. In fact, Al Jezeera has at one time or another been shut down by most Arab governments, and is consistently being shut down by one government or another, primarily over minor slights, but then allowed to reopen. I guess I also find it quite curious that Libya is referred to as an ally of the West. Maybe I missed that treaty signing. The other critical ommission is that Al Jazeera is a satellite channel, and thus it is impossible for one nation to "shut down" the satellite. Rather, what they do is to close the local news bureau for awhile, then after things calm down, reopen it. Al Jazeera operates under two rules, it cannot say anything against the Qatari government, nor the royal family. Other than this, it can say anything about anybody else. This has brought the government of Qatar under immense pressure at times from other Arab states for allowing it to attack their own governments. Moreover, as a satellite channel, Al Jazeera doesn't find its biggest audience among the lower socio-economic strata, who, of course, can't afford satellite receivers, but rather the middle and upper classes in the Arab world. It is inconceivable to me that Gatsby can wonder if Al Jazeera put Palestine "on the international agenda" when the network has only been broadcasting since 1996. Palestine has been on the international agenda much longer. Besides the omissions, gatsby's piece actually misrepresents Al Jazeera. Al Jazeera is not consistently known for its "in depth, high quality" reporting. It is known first and foremost for its focus on conflict and sensationalism, exemplified most recently by its broadcasting of the most gruesome pictures imaginable, including one with a US soldier with a bullet hole in his head (I did log on before it became victimized by hackers). If a US based satellite or cable channel broadcast such stuff, it would be loudly criticized by a host of liberals, and probably warrant attention from the FCC. Al Jazeera does indeed at times present intelligent discussions of controversial issues within the arabic world, and thus is a breath of fresh air, because it does bring taboo issues to the forefront. It also does have higher production values than many Arabic media, because much of its staff trained with outfits like CNN and BBC. However, the idea that it is some sort of honest voice of the Arab world is laughable. If Al Jazeera operated in the West, it would be treated with much more contempt by liberals, in a sense "murdochized." Not to defend US media, which I don't trust much myself, but when gatsby says the US press "NEVER mentions" that the US supported Saddam Hussein in the 80's, I wonder which planet he lives on. Certainly not the one I live on. Moreover, putting Saddam Hussein in place in the 80's in the midst of the cold war seemed a reasonable thing to do, much like supporting the Afghani mujahadeen against the Soviets did. It might be remembered that Iran overthrew the Shaw in 1979, and containing Islamic fundamentalism with a strong neighbor was reasonable. At that time, did the West have any idea what Saddam Hussein would become? Anybody who has ever had a divorce might realize the illogic that drives this particular argument. A. Randolph Kluver School of Communication and Information Nanyang Technological University 31 Nanyang Link Singapore, 637718 (65) 6790-5770 Fax (65) 6792-4329 > -----Original Message----- > From: robert m. tynes [mailto:rtynes@u.washington.edu] > Sent: Friday, March 28, 2003 5:01 AM > To: air-l(a)aoir.org > Subject: [Air-l] <nettime> Aljazeera VS. U.S (fwd) > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2003 08:59:42 -0800 (PST) > From: jay gatsby <principio_0(a)yahoo.com> > To: nettime <nettime-l(a)bbs.thing.net> > Subject: <nettime> Aljazeera VS. U.S > > AL JAZEERA VS. U.S. > > By Jay Gatsby (http://principia_ny.blogspot.com) > > > The 24-hour Arabic news network Al Jazirah has a very > intersting place in the scheme of current events in the > Middle East. Since 1996, Al Jazirah has become the most > popular Arab news network, with over 50 million viewers. It > has been highly acclaimed by journalists around the world for > its in-depth, quality reporting. Like all quality news > stations, however, it is controversial--particularly for > western governments and their Mid-East allies. Jordan, > kuwait, and Lybia, for example, have all banned Al Jazirah > journalists from their territories. > > Over and over, whenever we hear anything about a Bin > Laden tape or a statement by Saddam Hussein, in the American > news, Al Jazirah is the cited source. News about the war on > Afghanistan depends heavily on this channel, since the > Taliban doesn't allow western media crews into its territory > and Al Jazirah is one of only two Arab news networks that are > permitted access. As well, the network is particularly > reknowned for its reporting of humanitarian conditions > throughout the middle east--especially the plight of > Palestinians. I wouldn't be surprised if Al Jazirah had a lot > to do with putting Palestine on the international agenda. > > Unlike the U.S media, they seem to give some historical > context when reporting mid-east conflict. For example, they > always mention the fact that the U.S put Saddam Hussein in > power and supported him in the early 80's--things that are > absolutely NEVER mentioned in the American press. > > The network did not exist during the first Gulf > War.During the first 5 days of Gulf War II, however, Al > Jazirah has already presented a challenge to the > U.S: First by broadcasting Saddam Hussein's messages to the > Iraqi people; second, by broadcasting vivid pictures of the > Iraqi people who have been killed or injured by America's > "shock and awe" campaign; third, by showing footage of the > recent U.S and British prisoners of war, something about > which U.S and British officials want to press 'embarrassment' > charges; and fourth, by its coverage of the war on > Afghanistan.Thus, we are now witnessing a clash between Al > Jazirah and the U.S government. In fact, U.S secretary of > state Collin Powell sent a letter to the Qatar government, > requesting that it sensor Al Jazirah--to no avail. Within the > past few days, Al Jazeera has been banned from the NASDAQ and > from the New York Stock Exchange. > > Rumsfeld has talked about destroying all television and > radio communication in Iraq. In recent days, the military has > done just that, but Iraq has been able to restore its radio > and T.V transmissions after every bombardment. During the > opening stages of the war on Afghanistan, the U.S bombed an > Al Jazirah bureau in Kabul. U.S officials claimed that the > hit was 'unintended.' All of this has raised serious concerns > within the International Federation of > Journalists(http://www.ifj.org), which claims that the > attacks are a direct violation of the Geneva Convention and > has called for a U.N investigation of the destruction of > Iraqi television stations. > > Al Jazirah is based in Qatar and a shut-down of Iraqi > television will not prevent everyone else in the Middle east > --everyone else period--from knowing what is going on in > Iraq. Next to budgeting and finishing the war on terrorism, > Al Jazirah is just about the biggest problem the U.S has in > the middle east. > > Al Jazirah is available in the U.S through satellite T.V > and an English version is due to come out on cable soon. The > U.S government has recommended American businessmen to not > advertise on this channel. > > > --------------------------------- > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Platinum - Watch CBS' NCAA March Madness, live on your desktop! > > # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without > permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net > criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural > politics of the nets # more info: majordomo(a)bbs.thing.net > and "info nettime-l" in the msg body # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime(a)bbs.thing.net _______________________________________________ Air-l mailing list Air-l(a)aoir.org http://www.aoir.org/mailman/listinfo/air-l _______________________________________________ Air-l mailing list Air-l(a)aoir.org http://www.aoir.org/mailman/listinfo/air-l _______________________________________________ Air-l mailing list Air-l(a)aoir.org http://www.aoir.org/mailman/listinfo/air-l

2 1

Fw: Internet Has Its Own Brand of War Censorship (by Mark Glaser)
by meiwu＠umac.mo 28 Mar '03

28 Mar '03

http://www.ojr.org/ojr/glaser/1048784333.php

2 1

Anybody from Russia here?
by a-matwyshyn＠law.northwestern.edu 28 Mar '03

28 Mar '03

Pavel, Internet/e-commerce law may be outside the scope of your research, but a nice site in Russian with good links to commentary, precedent and laws on IT regulation issues is http://www.russianlaw.net/law/law.htm. best, Andrea M. Matwyshyn Adjunct Professor of Law Northwestern University a-matwyshyn(a)law.northwestern.edu

1 0

why just Aljazeera?
by Gina Neff 28 Mar '03

28 Mar '03

I agree with Randolph: While Al Jazeera certainly has more name recognition in the English speaking West, there are more reliable and interesting sources in English for news from Arabic language sources. Al Hayat, the pan-Arab expat paper published in London now has an English language site. http://english.daralhayat.com/ Al Ahram, the English language Egyptian weekly is also online http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/ Both have high quality reporting and opinionated columnists without the blood and gore of Fox-news-esque Al Jazeera. Al Ahram, for example has recently run columns by Azmi Bishara, the Palestinian member of the Israeli Knesset who has been indicted for his political views, a column by Chomsky, and a round table with Edward Said. CNN pointed to the so-called "bias" in the Arab press by criticizing an Al Hayat editorial cartoon that dared to suggest that American democracy might not be all its cracked up to be (it shows, of all heretical things, The Statue of Liberty hitchhiking out of New York with the words "human rights" written on her tablet). For my time, both are more interesting than the sensationalism of Al Jazeera, and both present an pan-arabist, non-fundamentalist take on the Iraqi conflict. Gina

1 0

Re: [Air-l] Re: Denial of Service attack against al Jazeera
by meiwu＠umac.mo 28 Mar '03

28 Mar '03

It has two English sites 1. http://www.aljazeerah.info (it's OK from my part of the world--HK) 2. http://www.aljazeerah.us (it's not working) WM

1 0