Talk:Al Jazeera Media Network

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 1 April 2019 and 14 June 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Mehdi.okay (article contribs). This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 2 April 2020 and 20 June 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Yfujii1 (article contribs).

AT&T Lawsuit in 2003

Hello,

There is a claim that Al Jazeera tried to sue AT&T in 2003 but this claim is missing a source. Does anyone know where this claim came from? MSulka (talk) 17:39, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Ownership by state

It appears that QMC is owned by the state. I found one clear journalistic reference to that effect[1]: "Al Jazeera, owned by the state Qatar Media Corporation". However I can't find any official state documents that clarify who owns QMC. For example the MOFA link that's already in the article [2] is a government page which never actually says who owns QMC. There is no explicit statement that it is stated owned or controlled, but equally none to the opposite. I would appreciate it if anyone can provide more information. Sbwoodside (talk) 17:53, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Will we all almost know that State of Qatar owns Aljazeera but there is no official documents from Qatar government that describe what kind of link is between both parties. The MOFA webpage listed Aljazeera as a media station based in Qatar but not as a subsidiary of QMC, which I believe it looks more like a government agency that control media, not owning it. The NY times article contains a segment from a Wikileaks document that can be considered as an opinion, not a fact.

One more thing, I found a website run by Qatar News Agency and it lists all stations administrated by QMC for stream watching, and Aljazeera is not on the list.--A sanny (talk) 05:06, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Al Jazeera Media Network. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130707133146/http://www.aljazeera.com/ to http://aljazeera.com/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 08:40, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Al Jazeera Media Network. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130605161737/http://news.newamericamedia.org/news/view_article.html?article_id=f3d3ade3488a2bca1e957e754c4ebd08 to http://news.newamericamedia.org/news/view_article.html?article_id=f3d3ade3488a2bca1e957e754c4ebd08

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:29, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Al Jazeera Media Network. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/6DOQkfDdQ?url=http://www.aljazeerausannouncement.com/ to http://www.aljazeerausannouncement.com/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130131104610/http://rt.com/usa/news/al-jazeera-buys-current-tv-252/ to http://rt.com/usa/news/al-jazeera-buys-current-tv-252/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140222014722/http://advanced-television.info/2011/07/15/al-jazeera-restructures-ahead-of-expansion/ to http://advanced-television.info/2011/07/15/al-jazeera-restructures-ahead-of-expansion/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:54, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Improper synthesis to claim that Al Jazeera criticizes the Qatar regime

The editor 'Mo2010' has restored extremely poorly sourced text to the lead of this article which claims that Al Jazeera has "published content that has been critical of Qatar or has run counter to Qatari laws and norms." The sources are individual Al Jazeera articles that are cobbled together (which is WP:SYNTH. A close look at the articles also shows that Al Jazeera does not run negative reporting about Qatar, but rather frames the stories as "critics accuse Qatar" (which is not the same as Al Jazeera doing its own investigative reports into the Qatar regime). Snooganssnoogans (talk) 18:05, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

In order to sincerely invite participation from somebody on the TP, it's an undisputed good-practice to ping them by mentioning them or somehow else. I have done your job here, hopefully you shall mind it moving forward. —103.163.124.72 (talk) 13:24, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

All.. Right! I shall risk it (I'll bite). I just wish to point out 3 things that:

A) You seem to be confused over the nuances of an “authoritarian regime” vs a country which openly declares itself as a monarchy. Qatar is already recognised in more than enough of places as an "absolute monarchy" here on English Wikipedia in spite of whatever your like-minded editors' dated citations might be trying to introduce. Ergo, you seem to be confusing a country which openly declares itself a Monarchy and is widely-recognised as such with countries who declare themselves as “Democratic People's Republic..”, “People's Republic..” or at times, even simply “Republic..” with this one.

B) More to the topic, what's even more concerning is that you don't seem to accurately grasp what “negative reporting” is defined as, since you are seemingly confusing it with ‘original reportage’. And quite a lot of scholarly sources would vociferously differ from such an understanding.

C) I see that given the negative connotations of ‘authoritarian’ and moreover, ‘regime’ in the globe dominated by Uncle Sam's pop-culture exports [on an international-scale] — while your edits and entries here on this TP certainly have WP:RGW all over them but that's somewhat besides-the-point.. Only if you weren't so focused on removing virtually every single statement from the lead which is perceived as favourable to the subject, thereby bungling quite some of the wikitext in the process. I tried to fix few and flagged the rest for others. And while you commendably left virtually all of the citations intact, this ended-up creating an even more jumbled cluster of citations than what I recall previously. And needles to spell-out that some of those citations do indicate that your conclusion over AJMN's coverage on Qatar, as an international pubcaster (spelling-out: a news-publisher with globalist cognition), doesn't seem to hold-up. Nevermind my own original-research, including but not limited to some 300+ (at the very least) pages long independently-produced dossier commissioned by them for Facebook covering every verifiable badmouthing of Qatar[is] they shone light on, over the years, including some original output. But since I don't want to engage in those keenly-observed edit-war.. I meant 'Wikicircuses', you are free to edit the lead to suit your worldview as much as you please. Just don't forget that others who don't share it may point-out the problems with it from time-to-time. Thanks for reading. —103.163.124.72 (talk) 05:15, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

RfC: No freedom of the press in Qatar

Should the lead state that there is no freedom of the press in Qatar (where the Al Jazeera Media Network is based)? Snooganssnoogans (talk) 14:15, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Survey

• Yes. It's clearly pertinent context to understand the relationship between Al Jazeera and the Qatari government. Qatar is an authoritarian regime that funds the Al Jazeera network. To note, like RS do when they write about Al Jazeera[3], that there is no freedom of the press in Qatar, we would clarify to readers the context in which Al Jazeera covers the politics in Qatar. The lead already notes that "critics say" Al Jazeera doesn't report negatively on the Qatari government. A single sentence noting there is no press freedom in Qatar would put that criticism into clearer context. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 14:18, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
• Not quite. The NYT article says: "For a country that brought the world Al Jazeera, it is notoriously secretive, with no real freedom of press at home." Obviously, "no real freedom" is not the same as "no freedom". We should be precise here. Also, since the article only touches on the freedom of the press in passing, it would be better to use different sources which address the subject more directly, e.g. [4] [5] [6] (all three mention Al Jazeera). — Chrisahn (talk) 19:49, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
• Yes. On balance, yes its important to note the restrictions of freedom of press in Qatar, and its affect on Al Jazeera. Deathlibrarian (talk) 03:39, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
• Not fair. Notwithstanding that the discussion-starter never quotes anything directly in spite of failing to note the same, as evident by the fact that they did the very same in immediately-preceding section on this very talk page, lest we forget: AJMN is an international news pubcaster. And as an international news publisher, I reiterate that they've globalist cognition to set their news-agenda every waking-moment. Nevermind that shoehorning it in the lede when it would be absent without any overall context from the rest of the mainspace stringently contravenes WP:LEAD anyways. Only those who are enlightened (in a non-conspiratorial way) enough about international broadcasting of both news and non-news are best equipped to answer this "survey". From instance, even "Chrisahn" here, who at least partly disagreed and admirably did their original-research to cobble citations, missed the mark. My own original-research confirms that while pro-Assange RSF/RWB is a good source, but focusing specifically on Qatar, the one-and-only Qatari news outlet they mention, Doha News, is transparently-obsolete as it has already resumed its operations not long after its blocking not just per my own original-research, but even the vociferously-critical, mostly web-search reliant WaPo zine article which contradicts the RSF's dossier. Apparently all without Chrisahn's recognition hitherto. And the point of Uncle Sam-funded Freedom House's own reliability doesn't even arise, since once again: Chrisahn ends-up misrepresenting that they mention AJMN anymore than in the passing in their Q&A style dossier, at the very least. And this, is why it is grossly unfair. I mean, having witnessed the discussion-starter's editing first hand, I would rather have them trigger an RfC over AJE's reliability as a source (a pre-existing perennial independently-reliable source after multiple RfCs in past several years already) than this needless zeal to shoehorn lame-citations with poor interpretations [to boot] for shoehorning in the lead, with such haste (to go one better). And don't get me started on the systemic bias of RS cited for legitimising this immortal-canard (if not an ‘urban-legend’, given many revel in attacking the subject for myriad of reasons) of conflating the Cabinet of Qatar with the subject. Only I realise how much it took to curb my temptation by citing all of the well-educated, verifiable [to the greater degree] examples on systemic "weak-spots" over the journalistic-integrity of AJMN's English-language peers, few of whom have been used as a citation here, in order to underscore that their “...criticism in clearer context..” can be shoehorned in those articles' lead sections and yes, why leave out even Wikipedia and Wikimedia Foundation overall? All of this is to drive home the ludricrousness behind this highly-motivated folly. —103.163.124.72 (talk) 08:30, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
• No (conditional). The article cited is a passing reference. If you can provide a better reference proving that AlJazeera's work is in any way influenced by the non-existence of freedom of speech in Qatar then add it. Otherwise, Not in the lead, as this is not an article about freedoms in Qatar. The lead should always be short and concise sticking to the article's main topic. ---CX Zoom(^he/_him) (^{let's talk}|_contribs) 10:29, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
• No (conditional) as per User:CX Zoom ¡Ayvind! (talk)