Sam Husseini’s encounter with Prince Turki bin Faisal Al Saud makes me wonder once again–why do we call a person like Al Saud a “prince”?
Al Saud was the longtime chief of Saudi Arabia’s intelligence agency, and later served as ambassador to the United States and Britain. His grandfather, Abdul Aziz Al Saud, declared himself a king in 1926–which seems like kind of a late date to be latching on to the legitimacy implied by a once-upon-a-time title.
Saddam Hussein came to power in Iraq in 1968. If he had decided to call himself “King Saddam,” would U.S. media have gone along with it? Would they have talked about Prince Uday and Prince Qusay? As long as Hussein was allied with Washington, they probably would have.
Or imagine that the British military decided to overthrow the elected government and install Charles Windsor as the head of a military regime. Would news reports continue to use his current ceremonial title of “prince,” or would they acknowledge that an unelected ruler in the 21st century is generally referred to as a “dictator”?
Except, of course, in the Middle East.
The royalty of the usual middle east crown usually comes from the British — they used it to establish local control a region — in Arabia’s case, along with Quwait, it was secure control of world oil.
Why?
When you traffic in fairy tales, it’s only natural to include a prince or two, isn’t it?
Seriously Jim, this is why I can’t take FAIR seriously anymore.
Sam Husseni isn’t a journalist per se. He’s a shrill progressive who only wants his political beliefs validated. He claims to be asking hard questions but he engages in polemic windups and asks questions with his own political premises. And when he hear gets the answers he doesn’t want to hear, he badgers them like a child.
No journalism outlet or organization with any shred of integrity and knowledge of the journalism profession take people like Husseini seriously. He doesn’t even use these shallow journalism skills of his and apply them to people he does agree with. That would give at least some sort of shred of credibility. At least he’s being partial.
Prince Turki bin Faisal Al Saud is no saint. We knew that. But good journalism doesn’t bastardize the the profession and social justice issues. Hussein does that. Leave good investigative journalism to those who know what they’re doing. Rely on competent organizations like Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and other respected human rights and political organizations to present the real facts. As for journalism styles/respectability, follow the DART Center for Journalism and Trauma, Nieman Center for Journalism, ProPublica, the Project for Excellence in Journalism, and others who do their jobs better than Husseini ever will.
@ctrenta: Why can’t you take FAIR seriously anymore? Because nobody takes Sam Husseini seriously? Because various organizations do their jobs better than Husseini?
I assume you are trying to say that FAIR is not worth reading, and you must have some reason for such an indictment, but you have not expressed it. My view is that FAIR does a better job of identifying U.S. news media bias that any other organization, including those you mention.
In any case, the subject of this posting was not the opinions Husseini expresses as communications director of the Institute for Public Accuracy; it was the common practice of calling Turki bin Faisal Al Saud a prince, a title for which there is no historical justification.
I would assume that those with integrity and knowledge of the journalism profession would know enough to stay on point when commenting here and not use the site to pursue some sort of personal vendetta.
Thanks Roger B.
ctrenta appears to be deploying ‘ad hominem’ attacks against Husseini / FAIR and running interference for Turki bin Faisal Al Saud, for whatever reason.
I agree with Roger B. that ctrenta’s list of groups he terms “competent organizations” or “respected human rights and political organizations” do not necessarily surpass FAIR in media integrity and analysis. Indeed AI and HRW’s historic anti-socialist/-communist biases make me skeptical of them; and even so I don’t think they’ve been approving of the Saud monarchy-dictatorship.
Keep up the greatwork, Jim N. and crew. FAIR is one of the best.
The Saudi royal house at the time was in competition with the British allies the Hashimate rulers of Mecca, decendents of Mohammand which the Saudi were not. The British and French after WWI gave Jordan to one brother and Iraq to another who lost that throne. This is basic history of the area, the author needs to do more research.
Ctrenta
Dont buck the family of FAIR.A family that see’s everything through a certain prism.When you do ,you are quietly(or not so quietly )told to shut up.Some people actually do believe as Roger does that “FAIR does a better job of identifying news media bias than anyone else.Well yeah right wing bias maybe.As far as the left….not so much.Totally tone deaf.All that said they have a point this time.The house of Saud shares no love for us…or we them.We play nice with them for one reason.OIL!!!!!We must develop new technologies and drill baby drill, tapping our own resources to remove ourselves from the OPEC tit.Then we can honestly say….Ya know fella,I never liked you.Not even this much.
Roger, name one journalism organization worth the skin on their back that will support lifting Husseni’s suspension. Name one legitimate first amendment or free speech organization that will get behind him. Don’t expect Poynter, the Project for Excellence in Journalism, the Society for Professional Journalists, and others to get behind him. They’ve got more legitimate journalists to defend, not shrill activists posing as journalists. That’s what Husseini is. There’s a reason why they don’t support him and it has nothing to do with a “corporate media conspiracy.” That’s a pretty hollow and simplistic viewpoint.