Nael Jebril

For over a decade, Al Jazeera (Arabic) occupied an unprecedented position among Arab audiences and families. Its attractive and daring news coverage has inspired millions of Arabs, and led other news channels to follow suit by changing their reporting narrative and presentational style. However, in the aftermath of the Arab uprisings in 2011, the close adoption of the Arab uprisings in general, and the Egyptian one in particular, made the channel fall into the eye of the public storm through its extensive 24-hour coverage. This book assesses whether the channel systematically provided a platform for certain ideologies or ignored others, and if and how Al Jazeera's language had shifted after the 2011 Arab uprisings. It also explores the rationale behind adopting particular editorial principles featured in the analyses, and scrutinises the findings within the framework of media, religion and democratisation.

Political journalism is often under fire. Conventional wisdom and much scholarly research suggest that journalists are cynics and political pundits. Political news is void of substance and overly focused on strategy and persons. Citizens do not learn from the news, are politically cynical, and are dissatisfied with the media. This book challenges these assumptions, which are often based on single-country studies with limited empirical observations about the relation between news production, content, and journalism's effects. Based on interviews with journalists, a systematic content analysis of political news, and panel survey data in different countries, this book tests how different systems and media-politics relations condition the contents of political news. It shows how different content creates different effects and demonstrates that under the right circumstances citizens learn from political news, do not become cynical, and are satisfied with political journalism.

Political journalism is often under fire. Conventional wisdom and much scholarly research suggest that journalists are cynics and political pundits. Political news is void of substance and overly focused on strategy and persons. Citizens do not learn from the news, are politically cynical, and are dissatisfied with the media. This book challenges these assumptions, which are often based on single-country studies with limited empirical observations about the relation between news production, content, and journalism's effects. Based on interviews with journalists, a systematic content analysis of political news, and panel survey data in different countries, this book tests how different systems and media-politics relations condition the contents of political news. It shows how different content creates different effects and demonstrates that under the right circumstances citizens learn from political news, do not become cynical, and are satisfied with political journalism.