|
Volume CXXXIII, Number 16 |
 |
Ambassador J.Lo?
PAT ROCKEFELLER
COLUMNIST
Yesterday marked the 11th anniversary of the first World Trade Center attack back in 1993, when a car bomb killed six people but failed to drop the towers. Americans, resilient but unwilling to presume the worst- that this wasn't an isolated attack but an early strike in an ongoing war- quickly and willfully put the event aside, neglecting to ask some important questions.
Eight and a half years later it seemed so obvious-so obvious we wondered how it could have happened at all. Many questions were asked, but the most interesting one, the one that encompassed the hurt and confusion of a mourning people, was, "Why do they hate us?"
Some thought it was a backlash against American cultural imperialism, or favoritism towards Israel, or historical support for dictators. Others felt that it came from the leaders of Muslim countries deflecting blame for their failed domestic policies and repressive governments onto the United States rather than instituting reforms at home. Others said it was Islam, which preached jihad against the infidels. President Bush suggested it was our very freedom that made them hate us. Some simply didn't care why- they just wanted to make sure it didn't happen again.
The United States went to war with Afghanistan and then with Iraq, but while the military took the front page with sweeping victories in both countries, other events were taking place behind the scenes. A campaign to win hearts and minds was being developed with the goal of preventing others from waging war on America and therefore provoking the need for armed response.
Public diplomacy, which was instrumental during the Cold War with programs like Radio Free Europe as well as cultural exchanges like Fulbright scholarships, got a fresh look after being largely abandoned in the 1990's. The goal of public diplomacy is to bypass normal diplomatic routes with the government of a foreign country and speak directly to its people with the hope of influencing them favorably.
The war on terror is spurred by ideas, rather than conquest or riches. Both the radical Islamists and the United States have a message that they wish to spread. Terror is the method of communication for al- Qaeda and the jihadists. It is incumbent upon the United States to come up with an effective countermeasure. At times, this countermeasure is dropping food aid from B-52s even as bombs are being dropped in other places. Sometimes it is creating a cultural center in Riyadh and teaching English to children in Iraq.
And sometimes it's Radio Sawa, which has been on the air since March of 2003. Sawa -"together" in Arabic-is a new program run by the BBG-the Broadcasting Board of Governors (the organization that runs all international government broadcasts). The brainchild of Norman Pattiz, founder of entertainment empire Westwood One, Radio Sawa plays a mixture of Western and Arabic pop music, interrupted twice an hour with news reports and analysis. Supporters say that this innovative manner of engaging listeners with music, coupled with a balanced news report, is a great way to engage a potentially hostile or at least disinterested audience. Detractors argue that building an audience means nothing if it cannot be proven through measurable gains that we are mitigating extremism as a result.
There also seems to be a legitimate concern about using pop music. Is J.Lo really the best ambassador to conservative Muslims when the United States is already accused of cultural imperialism? The target audience of Radio Sawa is 15-to-30 year-olds and polling data shows that in Jordan, listenership is 90 percent overall, with 43 percent saying they listen to Sawa primarily for the news. 39 percent say it is a more credible source than their local news station. Maybe pop music has a future in diplomacy after all.
Television is another medium being used for public diplomacy efforts. To compete with the likes of al-Jazeera and other Arabic language television stations, the United States launched al-Hurra (meaning "the Free One"). The question with both Radio Sawa and al-Hurra, however, is one of authorship. Who do the stations speak for? How will U.S. foreign policy influence the editors? Is the news "fair and balanced," to borrow a slogan, or is it simply propaganda?
Al-Hurra decided to tackle this question on the air. The Four Corners, one of the programs on the channel (think of CNN's Crossfire) addressed this. One contributor argued that the show was shooting to be the New York Times or the Washington Post of the Arab world with more objective and interesting news than al-Jazeera. Another contributor countered that it was irrelevant since nothing would change the fact that the United States also funded Israel.
Radio Sawa and al-Hurra face problems with acceptance and legitimacy, but the fact that al-Hurra was willing to air this debate-a debate that could undermine its viewership -goes a long way to proving its good intentions. Whether good intentions are enough has yet to be seen.
For information on sending a letter to the editor, please click here.
|
FastCounter by bCentral |