Al Jazeera: Bias or just a Different Perspective?

  In the first article I read, "Fresh violence breaks out in Yemen," I can't say that there was what most people generally think of as bias; I would call it more of a perspective. I also wouldn't say that it had any more of a bias than American commercial networks either.

This particular article's "perspective," as I'm deciding to call it, was objective in the sense that it had attributed quotes and gathered facts to support the author's coverage. The ways in which the author used these quotes and facts - the light the writer shined on it - was in any case to show governmental mistreatment to the citizens of Yemen even though they were involved in the violence. The author writes with sympathy for the violence inflicted on the people; however, he or she does not leave out details about police being killed.

Everything that the reporter mentions in the article had fact with attributions attached to them. This is mainly why I believe that his or her coverage is objective. Total objectivity is essentially impossible. Like American media, it, too, has a side. With violent anti-government protests like this with high amounts of violence on all sides is hard not to have one worse off than another. My only problem with the reporters coverage is that there are a few unnamed sources, but it seemed that with such violent ongoing story as this people don’t want to stick their necks out.  

The Intolerance of Others Should be Tolerated

As Americans, it’s important that we value freedom of speech and are tolerant of the opinions of others. That being said, there’s a line. It’s hard to see where that line begins and ends, but when it’s crossed, it’s difficult to go back. Florida pastor, Terry Jones, crossed this line when he burned the Koran to honor troops fighting the war in Afghanistan. 

There’s a difference between being patriotic and being a bigot. Jones is in category bigot. I suppose it wasn’t a hate crime doing what he did, but it certainly bordered it. The author of the editorial to the New York Times responding to Jones’ act is right in saying that the outright intolerance displayed by this isn’t helping matters overseas. All its doing is making us, Americans, look like, well, narrow-minded jerks to put it mildly. 

It is important that we exercise our right to free speech responsibly. The media makes nearly everything that goes on a permanent record of our history. While it’s imperative to report on something like Jones’ case, media needs to cover it objectively. Free speech goes both ways, and it’s great others speak out to say Jones was wrong in burning the Koran and that he far from embodies Americans who support the war.

Our system as a democracy allows for more than one view in our media. The issue of Jones’ actions tends to blur things regarding free speech under the First Amendment. However, it’s hard to argue that he had no right to publicly express his feelings about the Koran and what his reasoning is behind what he believes it represents, be they based on hate, intolerance and ignorance.