Where is the truth in the battle for Syria’s narrative?

This is a propaganda war, a diplomat in Damascus told the BBC’s Paul Danahar, “you can’t take anyone at face value now”.

SNIPERPHOTO AGENCY | Demotix

The war of words over the Syrian revolution has been brutal, and for some, fatal. Revolutionaries and Assadists have tried desperately to control the narrative, with Bashar Al-Assad admitting on Russian TV that he was losing the propaganda battle.

From the beginning of this uprising reporters have feared that the regime was targetting journalists — they were set up as legitimate targets as soon as the government accused some of being part of the international conspiracy against Syria. The regime arrested and threatened journalists from Al Jazeera, which it believes is supporting the uprising. Before its Damascus bureau was shut, there were regular pro-regime demonstrations outside and staff faced regular harassment in attempts to silence them. Syrian authorities barred members of the station from entering the city of Daraa, where the uprising began on 15 March last year. Officials also pressured Syrian employees of the station to quit, and told journalists that they could not appear on air or communicate with Al-Jazeera’s headquarters in Qatar.

And now there is evidence that some Free Syrian Army [FSA] fighters may also be trying to get journalists killed to score points in the media battle.

Earlier this month, Alex Thomson, chief correspondent at the UK’s Channel 4 News, accused four fighters (two armed) of forcing his convoy into onto a blocked road in the middle of “no-man’s land” near the city of Al-Qasyr, where the regime was shooting. He speculated that the FSA wanted to land Assad with an international diplomatic incident, similar to that which followed the killing of Marie Colvin in Homs. Thomson’s team had a lucky escape.

The day after Thomson made his accusation, a Qatari member of the now disbanded Arab League monitoring mission, Nawaf Al Thani, accused the FSA of leading him into a trap to be killed in the city Zabadani, which is close to the Syrian-Lebanon border. That day, Al Thani was travelling with CNN reporter Nic Robertson who also reported on the incident, but didn’t blame the FSA.
Despite Al Thani’s support for the British reporter’s claims, some revolutionary activists were outraged, accusing Thompson of exaggerating the story for career gain. As the chorus of anger grew, Thompson stood by his story, saying that he merely reports reality.
Of course, the Assadists are milking this for all it’s worth. Iran’s Arabic-language state broadcaster Al-Alam (and its sister station Press TV) ran Thompson’s accusations, although I can’t quite remember them discussing his reporting of the graphic Houla massacre, where he suggested that the government had been lying.

Both the revolutionaries and the Assadists are reporting half-truths, often picking and choosing the stories or accusations favourable to their version of events. That is understandable. What is unforgivable is the way that some broadcasters and publishers have bought the opposition or regime line wholesale and uncritically.

“There’s almost no one condemning the regime, for example, whilst simultaneously questioning the dominant opposition narrative,” complains Jillian C York. “Those who dare search for truth are immediately labelled as being on one side or the other.”

That search for the truth has been hampered by the Syrian government’s refusal to allow international journalists into the country during most of the uprising. Reporters were forced to choose between YouTube videos uploaded by activists, or the regime’s increasingly ludicrous propaganda. The revolutionaries’ strategy was far more sophisticated, immediate and effective. A senior Western official told the BBC World News Editor that their tactics were “brilliant,” if sometimes misleading.

But is that surprising? The revolutionaries have an agenda. Citizen journalists are not supplying the international media with footage to further their own careers – they are doing it to tell the world about the horrors taking place on their doorstep. When they use mobile phones to film demonstrations, they put themselves in the firing line – they are active participants in the revolution, not outsiders looking in.

With an official ban on journalist visas in place, handfuls of brave reporters have managed to sneak across the border to report on the massacres that the government did not want them to see. The revolutionaries are often desperate for a voice, and have escorted journalists into the country and protected them once they were in the war zone, often at considerable risk to themselves.

Journalists — reporters sneaking across the border, and brave citizen journalists living under siege — are at the heart of this story. They are Bashar Al-Assad’s greatest fear. His father crushed the uprising in Hama in 1982 because the world was not watching. Back then, news of the killing of at least 10,000 people did not reach the outside world for weeks.

This time, things are very different, and it is the reason that Syrians are being threatened with death for simply daring to tell the world what is happening.

The regime knows it can still outgun its opponents on the battlefield. But on screen, it has already lost the war.

Sakhr Al-Makhadhi is a British-Arab journalist who has lived and worked in Damascus. sakhr.co.uk

Azerbaijan: Photojournalist released

On the evening of 13 June, Azerbaijani photojournalist Mehman Huseynov was released after being detained the previous day. He was arrested after being accused of insulting policemen and charged with “hooliganism”, a regular tactic used by Azerbaijani authorities to silence critical voices in the country. Huseynov’s arrest, together with the sentencing of Anar Bayramli on 11 June and the arrest of other political activists, has widely been seen as part of a renewed clampdown on freedom of expression following the Eurovision Song Contest on 26 May. The charges against Huseynov remain.

To sign Index on Censorship’s petition to support free expression in Azerbaijan, click here

Atheists appeal Mohammed cartoon conviction

On 28 May Monatir Appeal Court is expected to issue a verdict in the case of two atheist friends Jabeur Mejri and Ghazi Beji. In March a primary court sentenced  the two to a seven-and-a-half year jail term over the publishing of prophet Mohammedd cartoons.

Defense lawyers chose only to appeal on behalf of Jabeur Mejri, since Ghazi Beji has fled the country. “We would lose appeal if we defend him [Ghazi Beji] in absentia”, said Bochra Bel Haj Hmida, a defense lawyer, and a human rights activist.

To convict the two friends, Mahdia Primary Court employed Article 121 (3) of the Tunisian Penal Code, which states the following:

“The distribution, putting up for sale, public display, or possession, with the intent to distribute, sell, display for the purpose of propaganda, tracts, bulletins, and fliers, whether of foreign origin or not, that are liable to cause harm to the public order or public morals is prohibited.”

Anyone who violates this law risks a fine of 120 TND (76USD) to 1200 TND (760 USD), and a jail term of six months to five years.

Article 121 (3), adopted on 3 May 2001 as a way to tighten control over press freedom, was repeatedly used during the post Ben Ali era.

The controversial law earned Jabeur Mejri and Ghazi Beji a five-year jail term, and a 1200TND (760USD) fine for publishing content liable to “disturb public order”, and six months for “moral transgression”. The court also sentenced them to two more years in prison for “insulting others via public communication networks”.

The Court of First Instance of Tunis also used this law to fine both Nessma TV boss Nabil Karoui over the broadcast of French-Iranian film Persepolis, and Nasreddine Ben Saida, the general director of the Arabic-language daily newspaper Attounissia over the publishing of a front page photo of a Real Madrid footballer with his naked girlfriend.

“As lawyers and activists we are volunteering to defend Mejri, and Beji. This is our tool to combat abusive laws adopted during the Ben Ali regime. But it is the job of the legislative branch, that is the national constituent assembly, to amend such laws,” explained Mrs Bel Haj Hmida.

TV boss ordered to pay fine over Persepolis broadcast

The Court of First Instance of Tunis today ordered Nabil Karoui, boss of Nessma TV, to pay a fine of 2,400 Tunisian Dinars (961 GBP) over the broadcast of the French-Iranian animated film Persepolis.

Karoui was found guilty of “disturbing public order”, and of “attacking proper morals” but the court dismissed the charge of “attacking religious symbols”. Nadia Jalel, whose association dubbed the film into Tunisian dialect, and Hedi Boughnim, Nessma Program Director were also convicted and fined.

Persepolis-God

Shot from French-Iranian film, Persepolis

The film aired few weeks before elections in October 2011 which bought the moderate Islamist Ennahda party to power. It angered hardline Islamists and sparked violent protests. Karoui’s house and Nessma TV headquarters were attacked by ultra-conservative protesters who considered the film “blasphemous” because it contains a scene where God is depicted. Seculars Tunisians viewed the trial as a test of freedom of speech.

The verdict was issued as World Press Freedom Day was celebrated in Tunis. Naceur Aouini, Karoui’s defence lawyer described the verdict as “political par excellence”, saying “the Tunisian judiciary is not independent”. He told AFP: “This verdict is an affront to the freedom of the press. We hoped for a straightforward acquittal on this World Press Freedom Day.”

Aouini told Express FM that the defence will appeal, and will continue fighting “for the Tunisians’ right to freedom of speech, and to an independent judiciary”.

Faouzi Ben Mrad, another lawyer defending Karoui, described the verdict was “alarming”.

“I feel ashamed because we have provided the court with all documents, and legal texts that prove that Karoui, and the two other defendants did not commit any crime that requires punishment…it’s a sad day”.


SUPPORT INDEX'S WORK