Konovalov
11-15-06, 10:31 AM
I had heard that al-Jazeera were going to launch a new channel today 15/11/06 and it is now confirmed though I have not had an opportunity to view it.
Interesting article here in the Times: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2454612,00.html
The early view of the Times is a positive one although the news stories themselves are not. From the article:
Then on to another Middle Eastern tragedy, Darfur. There was no siding with Sudan on this one: the reporter, Andrew Simmons, was as hard-hitting as the pictures of the refugees and the squalor, which seems far more telling than those seen on Western channels. He also had a good scoop — an interview with the rebel leader of the refugees.
And in summary:
I had no political quarrel with the coverage. Yes, it gave plenty of time to issues from and about the Middle East. That’s natural. It was pretty careful not to distort or to use loaded language. It was slick, fast-paced and thoroughly professional.
It will be intersting to compare al-Jazera English with the likes of Sky, CNN, BBC, and Fox. :yep:
Interesting article here in the Times: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2454612,00.html
The early view of the Times is a positive one although the news stories themselves are not. From the article:
Then on to another Middle Eastern tragedy, Darfur. There was no siding with Sudan on this one: the reporter, Andrew Simmons, was as hard-hitting as the pictures of the refugees and the squalor, which seems far more telling than those seen on Western channels. He also had a good scoop — an interview with the rebel leader of the refugees.
And in summary:
I had no political quarrel with the coverage. Yes, it gave plenty of time to issues from and about the Middle East. That’s natural. It was pretty careful not to distort or to use loaded language. It was slick, fast-paced and thoroughly professional.
It will be intersting to compare al-Jazera English with the likes of Sky, CNN, BBC, and Fox. :yep: