PDA

View Full Version : Al Jazeera English Blacked Out Across Most Of U.S.



Ponce
2nd February 2011, 09:35 AM
We don't want to give the goys any ideas......do we now?============================================== ==========


Al Jazeera English Blacked Out Across Most Of U.S.
Posted on 31 January 2011 by Emperor


Al Jazeera English Blacked Out Across Most Of U.S.
WASHINGTON – Canadian television viewers looking for the most thorough and in-depth coverage of the uprising in Egypt have the option of tuning into Al Jazeera English, whose on-the-ground coverage of the turmoil is unmatched by any other outlet. American viewers, meanwhile, have little choice but to wait until one of the U.S. cable-company-approved networks broadcasts footage from AJE, which the company makes publicly available. What they can’t do is watch the network directly.

Other than in a handful of pockets across the U.S. – including Ohio, Vermont and Washington, D.C. – cable carriers do not give viewers the choice of watching Al Jazeera. That corporate censorship comes as American diplomats harshly criticize the Egyptian government for blocking Internet communication inside the country and as Egypt attempts to block Al Jazeera from broadcasting.

The result of the Al Jazeera English blackout in the United States has been a surge in traffic to the media outlet’s website, where footage can be seen streaming live. The last 24 hours have seen a two-and-a-half thousand percent increase in web traffic, Tony Burman, head of North American strategies for Al Jazeera English, told HuffPost. Sixty percent of that traffic, he said, has come from the United States.

Al Jazeera English launched in the fall of 2006, opening a large bureau on K Street in downtown Washington, but has made little progress in persuading cable companies to offer the channel to its customers.

The objections from the cable companies have come for both political and commercial reasons, said Burman, the former editor-in-chief of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. “In 2006, pre-Obama, the experience was a challenging one. Essentially this was a period when a lot of negative stereotypes were associated with Al Jazeera. The effort was a difficult one,” he said, citing the Bush administration’s public hostility to the network.

“There was reluctance from these companies to embark in a direction that would perhaps be opposed by the Bush administration. I think that’s changed. I think if anything the Obama administration has indicated to Al Jazeera that it sees us as part of the solution, not part of the problem,” Burman said.

Cable companies are also worried, said Burman, that they will lose more subscribers than they will gain by granting access to Al Jazeera. The Canadian experience, he said, should put those fears to rest. In Canada, national regulators can require cable companies to provide certain channels and Al Jazeera ran a successful campaign to encourage Canadians to push the government to intervene. There has been extremely little negative reaction over the past year as Canadians have been able to view the channel and decide for themselves. “We had a completely different process and result here in Canada — a grassroots campaign that was overwhelmingly successful,” said Avi Lewis, the former host of Al Jazeera’s Frontline USA. (He now freelances for Al Jazeera while working on a documentary project with his wife, Naomi Klein.)

Media critics have begun to push for Al Jazeera’s inclusion. “It is downright un-American to still refuse to carry it,” wrote Jeff Jarvis on Sunday. “Vital, world-changing news is occurring in the Middle East and no one-not the xenophobic or celebrity-obsessed or cut-to-the-bone American media-can bring the perspective, insight, and on-the-scene reporting Al Jazeera English can.”

Al Jazeera follows a public broadcasting model similar to the BBC, CBC and NPR and is largely funded by the government of Qatar, which Burman said takes a completely hands-off approach to content. Al Jazeera is the scourge of authoritarian governments around the Middle East, which attempt to block it. The network, however, covers much more than the Middle East, and now has more bureaus in Latin America than CNN and the BBC, said Burman. “As proud as we are of our Middle Eastern coverage, we are in other places in the world that are never, never seen on television in American homes,” he said.

Burman said that he will use the experience with the Tunisia and Egyptian uprisings in upcoming meetings with cable providers as the network continues its push. Comcast did not respond to requests for comment.

“Why in the most vibrant democracy in the world, where engagement and knowledge of the world is probably the most important, why it’s not available is one of these things that would take a PhD scholar to understand,” Burman said.

http://www.loonwatch.com/2011/01/al-jazeera-english-blacked-out-across-most-of-u-s/

mick silver
2nd February 2011, 09:37 AM
http://english.aljazeera.net/watch_now/

Ponce
2nd February 2011, 10:02 AM
I know Mick........I keep it in the background to listen to while surfing the WWW.

Ash_Williams
2nd February 2011, 10:39 AM
Cable companies survive on their customer's laziness and unwillingness to adapt... much like video rental stores.

Quad
2nd February 2011, 03:25 PM
I’ve noticed that European (and lately, Canadian) television viewers are often given a slightly a broader exposure to world events, particularly those in the Middle East.

Being vain and effeminate, they naturally interpret this as a reflection of their superiority and sophistication.

In reality, I think it’s simply because, having been largely disarmed, they no longer pose any real or imagined threat to the global powers that be.

On the other hand, if Middle America, with all those guns, were to ever awaken? Well, that could still get ugly. Hence all the gaudy Limbaugh-esque, Fox News propaganda, and pervasive “soft” censorship.

There are only two regions on Earth with populations that might stand as potential impediments to globalism – The Middle East, and Middle America. Both are cleverly pitted against each other, and both are under direct assault--armed in the first instance, economic and cultural in the second.

Libertytree
2nd February 2011, 03:36 PM
What it boils down to is that the OP was full of shit, no matter the source, Al Jazeera has been accessible all day long. Just more unsubstantiated fear mongering from Mr TP.

Gangsta99
2nd February 2011, 03:58 PM
Since I work for a major cable company we have been discussing this week carrying this channel.

This source of info is full of misinformation. Al Jazeera doesn't allow cable providers to rebroadcast their networks at no cost, just like any other network we have to reach an agreement with them paying them X to carry it.

The company I am with has no intention of trying to carry the channel or pay them shit for it. Why would we, our customers would rather watch tractors and Nascar than a TV channel from the Middle East. :)

zizou963
16th February 2011, 02:22 AM
for people who like watch al jazeera englich hd or al jazeera live channel
there are some links

http://www.tvandradios.com/al-jazeera-english-hd/

http://www.tvandradios.com/al-jazeera-live-tv-hd/

http://www.tvandradios.com/al-jazeera-live-tv

freespirit
16th February 2011, 09:05 AM
In reality, I think it’s simply because, having been largely disarmed, they no longer pose any real or imagined threat to the global powers that be.




with high end estimations of 11,000,000 firearms in canada, you consider that to be largely disarmed?

and those are only the guns they know about...

Canada

Low Range Estimates

= 2,400,000 firearms owners

= 7,200,000 firearms

Medium Range Estimates

= 3,100,000 firearms owners

= 9,000,000 firearms

High Range Estimates

= 3,800,000 firearms owners

= 11,000,000 firearms

SOURCE: Memorandum of Agreement Respecting the Federal-Provincial Financial Agreement Addressing the Administration of the Firearms Act and Regulations Between The Government of Canada and The Government of the Province of Ontario – APPENDIX ‘A’ SERVICE DELIVERY MODELS, DISCUSSION PAPER (Version #2a) Overview, Analysis & Development of a Baseline Model, Operations Transition Planning, Canadian Firearms Centre, May 19, 1998. NOTE: This Agreement with Ontario was signed by Justice Minister Anne McLellan on December 2, 1999 and by Ontario Solicitor General David Tsubouchi on September 14, 2000



http://www.garrybreitkreuz.com/publications/GunsinCanada.htm

freespirit
16th February 2011, 09:47 AM
after a little further research online, (to me the numbers seemed a little low) i found the following...



The National Firearms Association Estimate of the Number of Firearms and Owners in Canada

The National Firearms Association has come to conclusion there are approximately 7 million owners with 21 million firearms. Our figures were calculated using three different methods.

1. There were 1,221,179 restricted firearms in the RCMP registration database FRAS in December 1993. The unrestricted to restricted firearms ratio is at least 20:1. Conservatively that means 24.4 million unrestricted plus 1.2 million restricted firearms. Allowing for errors in the RCMP's FRAS registration system, we strike off 220,000 registered firearms as non-existent, reducing the total to 21 million firearms with 7 million owners.

2. The government's own estimate in December 1976, published as part of its gun control campaign was 6 million owners with 18 million firearms. During hearings on the Campbell bill, officials from the Ministry of Justice testified that the long-term average net annual importation was 190,000 firearms. Therefore, adding 190,000 firearms per year to the 1976 total of 18 million, we get 21.6 million firearms as of December 1993. Subtract 610,000 firearms as an allowance for firearms destroyed, dismantled or worn out and we arrive back at the 21 million figure with 7 million owners.

3. Restricted firearms ownership increased from 861,000 in December 1984 to 1.22 million in December 1993. This is an increase of 41.7% over nine years. Those figures are solid because they are taken from the Annual Report on the Commissioner of the RCMP. The NFA estimates that the 1976 figure for total firearms owned, 18 million increased to 21 million by 1993, representing a total increase of only 16.6% in 17 years. This, obviously, is a very conservative estimate.

None of the above estimates include any figures for illegally imported firearms, which are known to have increased sharply each time restrictive, costly, and/or vague legislation has made legal firearm ownership more complicated, expensive and/or more risky.

Coalition for Gun Control Estimates of the Number of Firearms and Owners in Canada

You may wonder where the CFGC arrives at their very low estimates of the number of firearms and firearms owners in Canada? The CFGC estimates of 2 million owners with 6 million firearms are based on a telephone poll where an anonymous caller requested information about firearms. This poll is wildly inaccurate because many people will simply not admit to an anonymous voice on the phone that they own firearms and how many they own.

Interestingly enough, the CFGC numbers agree that the average firearms owner has three firearms, which is a constant in most countries where citizens are free enough to own firearms.


-----doesn't seem largely disarmed to me.
sorry for the derail, ponce...

don't underestimate us canadians, quad...lol