Evolving Media and the Middle East

The power of media to control the image, perception, and understanding of the world is nothing new. But today the Internet provides an unprecedented tool for media manipulation. A far too often victim of this media control is the Islamic world.

Words like "extremism", "terrorism", and "fundamentalism" are all thrown and carry weight when used to describe the Islamic world. But our western negative perceptions of the Middle East and Islam are not divorced from the history. The "Afghan Girl" story is a perfect example of this and one that we discussed today in my English class.
(Nat Geo)


In the '80s, the popular magazine, the National Geographic released a story about the "Afghan Girl" that garnered national attention during a time when the world was shifting its attention to the country of Afghanistan. Now again we see these emerging trends as the world looks to countries like Iraq and Syria midst the turmoil stirred up by the expansion of ISIL and the Assad regime.

It is a much different story this time around though, with the Internet we get a portrayal of the Middle East that focuses almost entirely on negativity, violence, and instability. So how are we able to correct this image? I suppose it would require the Internet collectively shifting to focus on other more positive stories. This is important because the attitude of the Internet determines the attitude of much of the world, especially the West.

Additionally, we need to realize the stereotypes that we perpetuate across media about the rest of the world. Often times, foreign issues, especially those regarding Middle Eastern nations, are complicated but reduced to a very bare-bones explanation by Western media.

The CIA Torture Report

Last week's release of the CIA torture report was expected to cause massive backlash and outcry. The report included hundreds and hundreds of pages detailing tactics employed by the CIA post 9/11 as a means of torture. These methods included water boarding, sleep deprivation, hosing, rectal insertions, and more. Republican representative Mike Rogers had even been quoted saying, "our own intelligence community has assessed that this will cause violence and death" commenting on the release of the report and prior to the release U.S. facilities abroad were put on high alert.

So I suppose the question remains of what did happen? There obviously was a response to the report though it may not have been in the way predicted by the intelligence community. This was a story that took shape on the Internet and social media in a lot of different ways.

For one, the Twitterverse exploded with trending hash tags like #TortureReport. People, as they now often do, took to their keyboards in protest of what they didn't like. Additionally, dozens and dozens of articles and stories were published online that disseminated and concentrated the broad depth information from the released report into manageable lists. I've recently seen a bunch of varying "top 10" lists about the report. Even international sources like the Russia Times made their own list. These articles mainly made the report a more accessible story than upon its release. For the general public, sifting through hundreds of pages of CIA excerpts isn't something of interest. Luckily, the Internet has created an age of summaries and SparkNotes. You no longer have to read the book to know the story and the same practice applies to here to the CIA torture report.

Other large news sources from around the world also picked up the story of the CIA torture report and condemned the U.S. for its actions.

(Photos from USA Today)
 

Ultimately, we are likely just lucky that the backlash and response wasn't more turbulent or violent in nature. But the unraveling of this story is important. The acknowledgements made by the government were not an easy move to make and in our current age being given transparent information is rather a rarity. The U.S. for the last week has been subject to severe criticism but I think senator John McCain said it best when he stated that the "question isn't about our enemies; it's about us. It's about who we were, who we are and who we aspire to be. It's about how we represent ourselves to the world." 

The Internet and ISIL

I think Stephen Colbert hit the nail on the head, as he usually does, when he commented on how certain stories dominate our news cycle. Here’s the link to what I’m talking about, http://thecolbertreport.cc.com/videos/e50viy/intro---10-8-14. He talks about, “the latest in the war against ISIS, then to cheer you up the latest on Ebola. Colbert is satirizing America’s obsession with certain stories that are negative and sensationalized in the media.

ISIL and Ebola. What makes these topics different than others as to deserve them so much coverage over the past several months? I want take this opportunity to explore these stories. In this post I want to explore ISIL and how and why it became such a media wildfire. In another post, I hope to discuss Ebola as well. 

But beginning with ISIL, this terrorist organization caught national attention in August with the brutal decapitation of American journalist, James Foley. To make matters worse, they published a video of this act that proliferated through the Internet. In doing so, this is an organization that has actively sought the attention of the Internet and media. 

On November 16, 2014, ISIL published yet another video message, depicting the beheading of American hostage Peter Kassig, also known as Abdul-Rahman Kassig (here is a link to a story on Kassig http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/11/16/peter-kassig-islamic-state-claims-beheading-syria/19128067/). This makes five westerners who have been beheaded on video messages. 

These examples are to prove something: ISIL is a media monster. From twitter campaigns, to video messages of killings, to recordings from its leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi that threaten the U.S. and its allies, it is clear that ISIL is set apart by its ability to use social media and the Internet as a new medium to install terror. They even built a downloadable Android app. 

Above, we mentioned ISIL’s proficiency at using video messages. ISIL’s twitter strategy is also similarly frightening. For one, supporters that download the organization’s app instantly retweet any message sent out by ISIL giving the appearance of broad support. Additionally, the organization often tweets using popular hashtag such as #Worldcup. Thus, by following global Twitter trends ISIL is able to shoot out their message to more and more screens (here is a link explaining ISIL’s social media strategy further http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/06/isis-iraq-twitter-social-media-strategy/372856/#disqus_thread).

 This is how ISIL captured global attention. In the U.S., this combined with our fascination of gruesome imagery is what made ISIL into a story that gained so much attention. At this point I think it is important to take a moment to realize the impact that the Internet has had on this story. There are literally international terrorists using the Internet as a tool for their propaganda. This proves to be another example of the far reaching implications of the Internet and how it is changing our modern day world. 

The New Debate over Net Neutrality

The degree to which your Internet Service Provider or ISP controls your networking is probably more than you realize. The term Net Neutrality is the principle that your ISPs should enable access to all content and applications regardless of the source, and without favoring or blocking particular products or websites.

To understand the actions of these ISPs I think it helps to use a highway analogy. Companies like AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, or other cable companies provide Internet access but often times partition this access into fast lanes and slower lanes. So when you try to download content from sources like Netflix or Hulu these ISPs get to determine how fast these services reach you.

The National Urban League President Marc Morial is just one of the many that have  expressed his opposition to new Net Neutrality proposals made by the FCC (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/craig-aaron/why-is-the-national-urban_b_6066884.html -- here is a link to a Huffington Post blog on the matter). The problem is that allowing ISPs to control coverage and internet speeds allows for discriminatory practices. This is a new era of discrimination: online discrimination.

Why does this matter? It matters for one reason because companies like Netflix are actually competitors of companies like Comcast battling for the viewership of their audience. Secondly, certain companies can pay these ISPs so that their service reaches you faster.

The impact to the individual is the dreaded......loading screen and obviously because slow connection times turn off consumers from products. But the broader impact however is that these practices, while determined legal by the FCC, are disadvantageous to the interests of smaller companies who cannot afford to pay the Internet tolls of these cable companies.

The Internet in all its wonder is amazing because it is a platform for self expression unlike any seen before in history. The reason this all works though is because of the freedom and accessibility of the Internet. But when the Internet is no longer free and accessible it is no longer what it is meant to be.

The Huffington Post blog also discusses how the loss of real Net Neutrality will make it harder for colored communities and marginalized groups to express themselves. These tend to the be smaller content producers that can't compete in a world dominated by cable companies and their interests.

Yet, at the same time there are organizations such as the National Urban League that works in a close philanthropic relationship with large ISPs. So, now the debate gets even murkier when there are certain civil rights groups that oppose possible Net Neutrality rules.

In the larger picture of things, it seems that individuals like Morial support the idea of open Internet as a concept but still want to empower ISPs to control and discriminate online. This is simply a solution that won't work. Reducing ISPs to “common carriers” meaning they have to serve the public indiscriminately is the only way to ensure a future of real Net Neutrality.

Here is also a video that also helps understand Net Neutrality -- http://youtu.be/2psly3euy78.

Welcome

Welcome to a new corner of the internet. My name is Nish and this blog is my project to understand our relationship to the internet.  To explore how this global network that ties together millions of computers and billions of people changes our lives.

Whether it’s Facebook nation, the Twitterverse, the blogosphere, or something else, the internet is everywhere and we all have our niches in it. But what I find most interesting is that when you break it down the internet is nothing.

By that my I mean that the internet is just digital space between computers. It isn’t real. It isn’t something you can touch or feel. Yet with our computer screens we’re given a tiny portal into the internet.  But this window of ours is so miniscule and at any given point we are only looking at a fraction of a fraction of the internet. Thus, we never realize the impact it has on us as individuals and as a society.

We are all just internetuals living in a world that thanks to the Internet is smaller than ever. Nothing is distant from us. We can search for pictures of the moon, or recipes for South Asian cuisine, or music from that indie band out in California without ever having to leave our keyboards. At the same time this new age has sparked riots and movements. It has raised awareness for so many issues and given a voice to so many people. Anyone these days can just hop on the internet and make a blog (like me) and start posting about whatever they want. The point is that there is real power to internet even though it may not be real itself.

This is where this blog comes in. This is my medium to come to terms with how the internet influences reality and I hope some of you web surfers out there will join me on this journey to explore and understand the impact of the internet.