Al Jazeera has been viewed in 55 million homes in a span of just three months. Reports of the channel have reverberated through the American society. Half a million people view Al Jazeera in the US every day. The channel has turned into the voice of the voiceless in the US, engaging in investigative journalism. There are ambitions to raise the number of viewers in America to 77 million, among others.
These were among the headlines of the Arabic language daily Al Sharq when it covered the press conference of the Acting Director-General of Al Jazeera network, Mustafa Sawaq, and the Executive Chairman of Al Jazeera America, Ehab Al Shihaby.
The question that arises is: Do these headlines express the realities on the ground? Why we did not read in the same report questions raised by journalists who attended the press conference and inquired whether these figures were true and where they had come from? Is it a journalist’s job is to attend a press conferences and listen to speakers passively and write what they hear without asking questions or making inquiries?
From what has been published in American newspapers about the channel, we can get a very different point of view.
For instance, the New York Post wrote on November 17 that the number of Americans who view Al Jazeera did not exceed 13,000. Other widely read and respected newspapers, such as the Huffington Post and The New York Times, mentioned the same figure. This means that the number of viewers of Al Jazeera is much lower than Current TV channel, which failed and was sold to Al Jazeera.
The Huffington Post and The New York Times have reported that the Current TV lost because the number of its viewers did not exceed 30,000.
In a report, The New York Times said: “Al Jazeera America’s initial ratings have been almost immeasurably low with fewer than 25,0000 viewers at any time”.
True, Al Jazeera America signed a contract with Warner Cable, the largest service provider in the US. It will help the channel enter more than 50 million American homes, instead of 40 million homes. Nevertheless, entering a home as part of a package of other channels does not mean that the channel will be viewed. An American website has said that only 0.0029 per cent of Americans who have Al Jazeera at home watch it.
I had hoped that one of the journalists attending the press conference would have asked the officials about the amount of money they have paid to Warner Cable to agree to include a channel that nobody views, to its package.
The New York Times quoted Al Shihaby as describing the deal with Warner Cable as a “win-win” agreement, during the conference. True, the channel stands to win from the deal by entering more than 50 million American homes, but what is the ‘win’ Warner Cable has receive through the deal?
Two things saddened me.
First, facts are not mentioned in press conferences. However, journalists who attended the press conference should have searched for these facts until they got them. Sorry, this was not done in the aforementioned conference.
Second, we do not always monitor the projects we fund. We also tend to provide unrealistic information about them and as much money we put, failure happens and then we start screaming and try to salvage what is remaining.
The former American vice-president Al Gore sold his Current TV because it had no viewers. Al Jazeera America, which we claimed stirred the America society, however, has even a weaker appeal than Current TV because Al Jazeera America’s viewers number only about 13,000 in a country with a population of 350 million.
More shocking still to me is Al Sharq’s report ‘Al Jazeera: The voice of the voiceless in America’. Is it reasonable, possible, in America? Can a foreign channel make such a claim in America?
I can only say that save Al Jazeera America before it is too late.
