Two takes on Egypt, but only one shown on American television; Al Jazeera English vs. Russia Today

[pampango]

http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/egypt/110210/russia-today-al-jazeera-english

Anyone getting their information about Egypt from Russia Today would have learned that the United States orchestrated the uprising, the Muslim Brotherhood was formed by MI6 and opposition leader Mohamed El Baradei was a Free Mason.

Five years since its launch, the English-language channel has become home to fringe ideas and rabid anti-American rhetoric. At the same time, Qatar-based Al Jazeera English has proved itself indispensable, in a time of decreasing television budgets, to the coverage of global stories such as the Egypt uprising — bringing non-stop live coverage as the events unfolded and holding interviews with those most relevant to the story.

Another difference between the two? Russia Today is widely carried by major U.S. cable providers such as TimeWarner. Al Jazeera is not.

There’s been an incredible amount of interest in Al Jazeera English from around the world, and the U.S. in particular,” said Al Jazeera spokesman Osama Saeed, noting that nearly half of the channel’s website visits have come from the United States. As the channel began live-streaming the events on Tahrir Square and around Egypt, site traffic skyrocketed by 2,500 percent. The channel has launched a campaign, including an online petition and taking out full-page ads in major newspapers, to get on the air in the United States.

They would have seen a report called “Color Me Revolution” on Jan. 28, four days after Egyptian protesters first took to the street demanding a change in government. Rather than delving into Egyptians’ complaints about their government — or the state’s reaction — RT instead compared the uprising to failed uprisings in post-Soviet states such as Georgia and Ukraine. “Ultimately all aspirations came to nothing,” the reporter says. “Those false dawns and bitter lessons are far from the minds of those clamoring for change in North Africa,” he adds, before cutting to commentary from the editor of a Venezuelan state-run newspaper.

[DCKit]

1. Is that their official stance, or the opinion of an interview subject?

I know woo-woo when I see it, and those statements are orbiting Jupiter.

On the other hand, the twin tidbits about how Karl Rove is "advising" the Swiss PM and how Assange's persecutor handed over asylum seekers to the CIA for rendition and torture, ring true.

It's unfortunate that, unlike Faux, you can't simply discount everything they say. But you also have to admit, the wingnuts they interview are a lot more fun than those on Faux.