complete media blockout

[gag order]

eoin, i think we can both agree that if the victims had been a jewish couple then it would make international headlines right? they say it was the “fanatical actions of a lone man, who was acting out of feelings of extreme xenophobia.” or perhaps he was acting out feelings influenced by media demonisation of muslims? i am certain that had the perpatrator been muslim then the story would have been allocated a slot in the middle pages here in the UK.

and as for kriss donald, who had gang affiliations making this story a poor comparison, it was in effect scum on scum violence therefore one cannot expect it to be covered internationally......

[Mu'awiya]

asalaam alaikum

Egyptian wearing hijabi killed in German court drama

By Daily News Egypt with additional reporting by AFP
First Published: July 3, 2009


CAIRO: A woman stabbed to death in a German court was an Egyptian who had sued her attacker after he insulted her for wearing the Islamic headscarf, local newspapers reported on Friday.

Marwa Aal-Sherbini, 32, who was killed in a court in Dresden on Wednesday, was the wife of Egyptian academic Elwi Ali Okaz who was also hurt in the incident and is now in critical condition in hospital, the state-owned Al-Akhbar reported.

Husband Okaz was in Germany on a scholarship through Menufiya University’s institute of Genetic Engineering. He is still unaware that his wife had died.

The attacker stabbed Sherbini “shortly before she was to give evidence in an appeal lodged by the man against a conviction for insulting her over wearing the hijab,” said the state-owned Egyptian Gazette.

The 28-year-old man, identified only as Axel W., was overpowered and was being investigated for manslaughter over the killing of the woman, a spokesman for the Dresden prosecutor’s office said.
Axel W. was previously found guilty and fined €2,800 in civil compensation for calling the victim a “terrorist” in August 2008 in a Dresden park because she was wearing a headscarf.

Magdi Al-Sayed, press officer at the German embassy in Cairo, said the case was isolated and did not reflect German attitude towards Muslims.
“It is a criminal act. It has nothing to do with persecution against Muslims,” Sayed told the Gazette.

The Minister of Higher Education Hani Helal has given orders that travel arrangements to Germany for the families of both victims be facilitated. –Daily News Egypt with additional reporting by AFP

[not] Surprisingly, this isn't in the german news.

[abuhannah]

complete media blockout

[Eoin]

Hi gag order,

eoin, i think we can both agree that if the victims had been a jewish couple then it would make international headlines right?

If for the sole reason that we are discussing Germany then yes that might make a small news section in the papers but only because of the historical context. I would not expect that a British Jew stabbed in the UK would make headlines or any other news in France or Belgium - which would be a fairer comparison given the whole Nazi thing.

they say it was the “fanatical actions of a lone man, who was acting out of feelings of extreme xenophobia.” or perhaps he was acting out feelings influenced by media demonisation of muslims?

Perhaps he was acting out feeling influenced by media demonisation, that's a seperate comment which is superfluous to what I'm saying. I've said that the fact this incident has not been internationally reported is not indicative of a media bias against Muslims. I'm relatively neutral on the question of whether there is a general media bias to present Muslims in a negative light vs whether the behaviour of (some) Muslims is enough to justify the the negative limelight. Whether there is or is not a general bias in the media however, is superfluous to this discussion. I'm sure we would both agree that if this had been a Vietnamese German - this incident would not have made the UK press. If it had been a German German this would not make the UK Press. There are (arguably) 195 countries on earth, I would imagine that of those 195 nationalities put in this same situation, 194 of them would not get mentioned in the British press. Only if it had been a British citizen would I expect it to make the UK papers.

and as for kriss donald, who had gang affiliations making this story a poor comparison, it was in effect scum on scum violence therefore one cannot expect it to be covered internationally......

You'd make a cracking social worker...

Regards,
Eoin

[Abu Najm Muhammad]

I'm relatively neutral on the question of whether there is a general media bias to present Muslims in a negative light vs whether the behaviour of (some) Muslims is enough to justify the the negative limelight.

I think your neutrality just went out the window with that comment- either you're very naive (which you have shown just the opposite up to now) or you have on blinders (which interestingly enough would be due to some kind of innate bias)...

But media bias is barely irrelevant in the discussion, in fact it is the entire discussion...

Can you tell me why the ETA has not been covered or investigated by the media- they can actually claim the last known terrorist attack in Europe...?

By the way Eoin, you'd make a crack spokesperson for the media outlets...

[abuhannah]

You'd make a cracking social worker...

Lord knows there needed and very few and far between...

[Abu Najm Muhammad]

Lord knows there needed and very few and far between...

I think he meant you would ruin people's lives akhee...

[Eoin]

Hi Abu Najm Muhammad,

A pleasure to speak to you again!

I think your neutrality just went out the window with that comment- either you're very naive (which you have shown just the opposite up to now) or you have on blinders (which interestingly enough would be due to some kind of innate bias)...

Perhaps I should embellish my opinion then. I had intended the section you quote to be a side-show as the original discussion was over a media blackout which I don't think could be regarded as a blackout. However you've made reference to the side-show so it's only fair that I either keep digging or salvage my reputation depending on how you receive my answer.

I'd like to first make clear what I mean by 'bias'. I don't doubt that Muslims are the section of society most scrutinised by the western media. I don't doubt that if one were to compile a statistical analysis of the risk to my personal safety from Islamist terrorism that it would be miniscule. If newspapers and the media attributed statistically accurate proportions of column inches or airtime to the actual risk presented by a particular threat then the news would be a very different experience to what it is. 90% of airtime would be consumed with lists of deaths due to diarrhea and heart disease. Road traffic accidents would come next followed by teenage suicides. Once every 20 years or so there would be a short piece about the IRA, ETA or Al Qaeda killing and injuring a statistically insignificant number of people. If this is the sense by which you mean that the media is biased then I endorse your opinion fully.

For the sake of clarity I'm going to describe the above sort of bias as "statistically unreflective bias" as the news media does not accurately report on anything according to the actual risk it represents. As the risk of an Islamist radical blowing me up is miniscule then I agree wholeheartedly that the media continually demonstrates statistically unreflective bias. However it doesn't reserve this treatment for Muslims. For example swine flu makes the news every other day but the actual risk the virus poses is miniscule compared to the affect of conventional influenza on the elderly or diarrhea on the very young. In another thread somebody made the perfectly valid point that the media spent significantly more time discussing the death of Michael Jackson that it did the deaths of many Iraqi's in the same day - or I would add the number of NATO troops.

What I said was:

I'm relatively neutral on the question of whether there is a general media bias to present Muslims in a negative light vs whether the behaviour of (some) Muslims is enough to justify the the negative limelight.

I stand by that statement so long as I'm not taken to define 'bias' as I did above. I'm of the opinion though that neither of us are really discussing a statistically unreflective bias, it's something more than that. Before going further I'd like to make a plea from personal anecdote. (For all it's worth - if anything)

My name is Eoin - pronounced Owen. It's an Irish name and comes from my mother who is herself an Irish emigrant to Scotland. Back in the 1980's when I was quite young I was later told that my aunt had brought me over a teddy bear from Ireland which had been blown up in a controlled explosion by the police who had some sort of inkling that the IRA were trying to sneak explosives into the UK via childrens toys. Suspicion of the Irish was such that my mum would try to stay quiet in the supermarket to avoid people hearing her accent, if they had heard it at that stage there is no doubt she would have been jeered and called a terrorist. Newspapers headlines would comment when criminals were found guilty that, "Killer had Irish Great-Grandmother." Irish people were painted by the press as being lazy and stupid. Opinion columnists wrote such slurs as, "Ireland should be towed off into the Atlantic and sunk if they can't solve their problems."

I think if we compare the mainstream British media today to the mainstream British media in the 1980's that Muslims do not get nearly as raw a deal as the Irish did in the 80's in terms of raw spite and hatred. I'm going to clarify what I mean by that as I don't expect it to be a popular sentiment. In the 1980's there was no internet, there were no Youtube video's, there was no ability to read and share a vast number of articles about the Irish online from a multitude of different sources. There were violent anti-Irish skinhead groups sorts but they did not and could not organise in the way that they can do now with anti-Islam hate sites. A direct comparison of the overall situation is therefore not possible because circumstances are different. However what I think I can justify saying is that the tabloid press had more of a field day at the Irish's expense in the 1980's than they are having on Muslims today. The Sun couldn't lead with the headline, "Murderer had Muslim great-grandmother" because that would be socially unacceptable now. The Mail on Sunday couldn't say that Iraq should be towed out to sea and sunk because the Muslim people there are too ignorant to sort out their problems.

I think what's different is the multitude of different sources that Muslims have to contend with. The chances are that in 1985 you bought one newspaper and watched one or two news channels and that was your fill, you weren't subjected to internet forums on which you could read any and all negative commentary directed towards you for the past 10 years at the click of a button.

None of this of course is in direct conflict with your position that the western media is currently biased against Muslims. The point I'm seeking to make is that statistically speaking the media (western or otherwise) is by definition biased on every topic it has ever or will ever deal with. What I want to convey is that the current focus on Muslims is by no means an exception to the media world, you are just another example of how the irrational side of human nature deals with a threat to personal or group safety. To repeat my statement again:

I'm relatively neutral on the question of whether there is a general media bias to present Muslims in a negative light vs whether the behaviour of (some) Muslims is enough to justify the the negative limelight.

I stand by that because there are Muslim radicals who patently are a threat to me and other British people. I was at Glasgow airport the week before some nutjobs tried to blow it up. If they had been successful they would've killed hundreds of people and that could have been me or my family and friends. It would be mad to think that in an age of 24 hour news that reporters wouldn't go out of their way to try and cover what ideology drove these men to this act, or to the acts that were successful in killing and maiming.

Let me be absolutely clear on one point though before I finish. I am not suggesting for a moment that I think that an overall good can come from the media focusing attentions so heavily on one group in society. The vast majority of Muslims abhor these acts of terror and are no doubt upset by the implication of this focus. However there are enough Muslims in the UK who do not condemn these acts of terror or actually support them (I'm hoping I don't need to direct you to the actual threads on this forum) that I am forced to remain neutral as to whether I can call the medias response unjustified.

Can you tell me why the ETA has not been covered or investigated by the media- they can actually claim the last known terrorist attack in Europe...?

My answer to that would go along the lines of that they are covered in great detail by the Spanish media, much as the IRA in the British/Irish media or Baader Meinhof in the German media. Muslim radicalists transcend national borders in their attacks and are therefore subject to scrutiny in all these places. ETA are not really a risk to anybody outwith Spain and therefore a practical irrelevance compared to the tiny but genuine risk presented by Muslim radicals.

By the way Eoin, you'd make a crack spokesperson for the media outlets...

Hehe thanks. I'll quote you as a reference if my career develops that direction!

Kind regards,
Eoin

[Abu Najm Muhammad]

Once again, touché...

[abuhannah]

I think he meant you would ruin people's lives akhee...

at least we would keep it real....