Dear Sirs and Madams,
I basically like Al-Jazeera. I think it performs a valuable service by offering a novel perspective on world and regional events in journalistically responsible ways. I have even volunteered to ‘pitch’ for it when it was carried on KPFT radio in Houston.
That’s why I feel compelled to write and tell you how disappointed when I was I heard excerpts of the 4-DVD set of “Al Nakba”, which apparently was produced by Al-Jazeera.
The parts I heard did not strike me as having any factual errors based on my knowledge as an American Jew (and kudos to you for that), and of course reasonable people can have disagreements on how to interpret events which are historically accurate. My unhappiness with what I heard has to do with that difficult concept, ‘tone’.
It is my nature to be emotionally attuned to musical background scoring, and it was hard to avoid the sense that whenever the documentary touched on anything which might be considered ‘anti-Palestinian’ (Zionism, prominent early Israeli founders, British Rule, the Ottoman Empire, etc.), the music changed to something truly ominous; the kind of music that might be scored when talking about the early American Mafia or the days of Nazi Germany. That struck me as a bit over the top.
Film music is a subtly manipulative thing. It’s an artistic choice, and I think it’s potentially most despicable in political or news content because to most people it’s essentially subliminal; it effects people’s perception on levels and in ways that they do not even recognize., and the producers of this documentary knew exactly what they were doing and what they were implying with their scoring choices.
On radio, my motto is that, “People are entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts.” Facts can be annoying and inconvenient things. The producers of this documentary are entitled to express the facts any way they wish. That’s the concept of free speech. I am extremely disappointed, however, that Al-Jazeera -– a news source I’ve come to respect and even rely upon in some ways -– would place its imprimatur on such an obviously biased and manipulative production, representing itself as historical journalism.
I like to think that I’m sophisticated enough that I can usually tell the difference between factual news that disappoints (like American use of waterboarding) versus ‘news’ in which facts and propaganda are so inextricably mixed as to be inseparable, thereby making the whole of it informationally worthless (e.g., Fox News). There are news channels like China’s CCTV-America, which seems pretty reliable until you get to Chinese domestic news, when ‘spin’ becomes a bit more obvious; but because it’s obvious, it’s actually mildly amusing as well as somewhat informative.
I have come to expect better of Al-Jazeera America. I will now have to pay renewed attention to what I hear on Al-Jazeera outside America. I don’t much like the idea that a news organization reports events one way in the US, and a totally other way elsewhere.
Which is it to be, Al-Jazeera? Will you reports facts the same everywhere, or will you pander to your local and regional audiences’ biases in a shameless effort to gain overall ‘popularity’?
I’ll wait and see.
Sincerely,
Mike Honig
_______________________________________________________________
“For the great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie ¾ deliberate, contrived, and dishonest ¾ but the myth ¾ persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic. Too often we hold fast to the clichés of our forebears. We subject all facts to a prefabricated set of interpretations. We enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.” ~ John F. Kennedy, Commencement Address at Yale University, Pub. Papers 470, 471 (June 11, 1962).
________________________________________________________________
My first knowledge of the israeli-palestinian conflict Came from this documentary and i must say i can identify with this post with regards to the choice of music. However,this Issue is far too complex to be reduced to production details. P.s please what is the title of the music score?
LikeLike
As a TV/Movie score aficionado, I’ll answer your last question first. According to IMDB.com (Al-Nakba (2008)), sadly, there is no ‘crew’ listing, so musical score is not credited. In such cases, the music is usually drawn from music libraries and attribution typically is not given.
As to your main comment, I don’t disagree. And based on the portions I saw, the history isn’t essentially wrong. For balance, however, you should also look up the roots of Zionism, and the treatment of Jews over the centuries which led up to it. Just type “Zionism” into Google.
The reason that I picked on the musical choices is that music in a film is, for most people, subliminal. It’s the same reason I object to background scoring in political commercials and news programs. The music makes an editorial or political statement that goes beyond words, yet is not truly quotable, and impacts viewers’ perceptions in ways of which they are usually unaware.
For pure entertainment, I love musical scoring and wish that most of it was better. Since before I was 5 years old, I remember walking out of movie theaters or finishing TV shows and humming the main themes. So, being so aware of the background cues and music, I’m particularly sensitive to what I recognize as very subtle emotional manipulation.
I hope I have not rambled too much, and have given you at least an adequate response to your comments.
Thanks for writing.
Mike
It’s not so different from the musical background you experience in supermarkets or other stores. It is intended to make you relaxed so that you will stay and shop more. (There’s nothing that will get you out of a store faster than an absence of background shopping music.)
LikeLike