520 |
|
|
|f The study investigated the subject of the triple attack by the United States, Britain, and France on Syria on April 14, 2018, after accusing the Syrian regime of using chemical weapons in "Douma" in Eastern Ghouta. This was investigated in Alhurra and Russia Today by analyzing news bulletins daily for a full month. A quantitative content analysis was conducted in addition to a qualitative analysis of it. The study also investigated the nature of comments written by users of the two channels' websites on Youtube to determine the public's orientations regarding the treatment by these two channels. The study relied on the theories of Framing Analysis and Agenda Building. The study's qualitative analysis results confirmed the results of the qualitative analyses of previous studies in terms of the direct and clear impact of the US policy on the Alhurra channel and Russia's policy on Russia Today. Both channels supported the foreign policy of the broadcasting country towards the Syrian crisis. Both channels were based on presenting the official political statements of state officials. The imbalance was evident in the presentation of the different positions in both channels, as each channel presented more which strengthened the official view of the country that broadcast it, while the focus was on the framework of "intervention" in the Alhurra, especially the idea of humanitarian intervention in the crisis, the framework of the "conspiracy" became apparent in relation to Russia Today. The two channels also reinforced the agenda-building theory of the two channels' interest in issues and topics that are the central point of each country's foreign policy interest, and this interest was reflected in the arrangement of presenting issues in the news bulletins of the two channels. For example, Al-Hurra TV paid extensive attention to the Syrian, Iranian, and Iraqi issues and devoted a special time-space and a special arrangement to them, as the Syrian issue topped the first order in terms of arranging the presentation of cases in bulletins in 60% of news bulletins, followed by the Iranian issue, especially the part related to Iran's influence on Israel security. Regarding Russia Today, the Syrian issue ranked first in terms of arranging cases in bulletins, with a rate of 43.3%, followed by the Iranian issue, especially concerning the focus on Iran's response to Israel's attacks. When it comes to the Syrian issue itself, the percentages of displaying sub-topics came in line with each channel's policy. Alhurra channel focused on the fight of the Syrian opposition forces supported by the United States against terrorist groups and their victory over them while highlighting the role of Washington's international coalition forces. On the other hand, Russia Today focused on the Syrian Arab Army's victories over terrorist groups. \nBy applying the agenda-building theory, it was also evident that some news appeared in the two channels about Iraq and Lebanon, because the parliamentary elections in the two countries coincided with the subject under study, in addition to the emergence of some terrorist incidents in some countries, which led the two channels to deal with them. Russia Today's interest in the Palestinian issue was evident compared to the Alhurra channel. While Russia Today focused on the Palestinian side and the brutal operations, it is subjected to by the Israeli army. Alhurra focused more on the Israeli side and its concerns about exposure to attacks from the Palestinian factions and Iran. And It largely ignored the attacks on the Palestinian side, which reflected the state's policy and its impact on building the channel's agenda and how it deals with issues.\nThe state’s policy was directly reflected with respect to the issue of the Syrian regime’s possession of chemical weapons. While the West accused the Alhurra of being used by the regime, Russia Today tried to present everything that proves that the use of chemical weapons is a fabricated charade by the West to be in Syria and justify the tripartite military strikes and the accomplishment of the great Middle East project. The qualitative analysis of the study confirmed the bias of both channels and that the indicators provided by the quantitative content analysis in some previous studies, especially with regard to the Alhurra channel, that the channel presents the different views of the different parties to the conflict in a greater proportion, is an indicator that becomes clear, especially in cases in which the United States does not have a direct hand in the conflict. However, it was somewhat evident in the balance. The qualitative analysis in those studies showed otherwise, and that American policy is the first driver of the channel, so the balance is pictorial in some previous studies, and the current study confirms this. The largest time-space in coverage is unique to Alhurra, which strengthens the Western viewpoint, especially the United States of America. It also became clear about Russia Today that what was explained by a few previous studies with the channel’s presentation of a greater percentage of balanced news differed with that of the qualitative analysis in the same studies that showed the channel’s bias towards Russia’s viewpoint.\nThe channel's policy was also reflected more clearly in the videos posted on both channels' Youtube. The videos posted on the two channels' YouTube showed greater and clearer bias. The vast majority of the videos were about presenting the official positions of both countries. The bias was also obvious in the titles accompanying these clips. The contents published on the two channels' website confirmed the theory of agenda building, which was also reached by Al-Rawi (2017b), with a strong link between the ideological agenda of the media organization "Russia Today" and the process of choosing the news that is written on its news site on the Internet.\nA remarkable difference appeared between the interaction ratio on the two channels, so Russia Today received millions of views per video clip, and one video clip received tens or hundreds of comments, while it became clear that the participation was not intense by commenting on the videos on the Alhurra channel site. It can be said that Russia Today, with what it publishes on its YouTube, is the most attractive to the Arab viewer, predominantly the Syrian, which was evident from the tone of the written comments and the basis of the issue. Russia Today's site also attracted the public, whether it is the anti-Syrian regime or pro-Syrian regime, so the channel's website was more like a battle site between the two factions, and doctrinal and ideological trends were reflected in the mutual responses. Likewise, both sites interact with different audiences with different orientations towards the Syrian crisis, so the nature of the channel site is not exclusive to the fact that there are more comments on it by a specific party, whether pro or anti- Syrian regime or the international and regional forces active in this conflict.\nThe two channels are tools of soft power and public diplomacy in the hands of the United States of America and Russia, each of them is trying to mobilize to strengthen its view of the ongoing conflict in the Arab region, and a means to achieve international ambitions and interests, and an attempt to highlight the party that is a global power that cannot be confronted.\nThis abstract translated by Dar AlMandumah Inc. 2021
|