Although even Muslim or Arab ownership does not guarantee freedom of expression, as the IslamOnline debacle clearly illustrates.

“Actually, the analogy between Nasr’s tweet and the State Department statement is a false one – the former is a news professional while the latter is a political entity. Many news organizations have policies that discourage journalists (especially those covering politics) from openly displaying their political views.”

First of all, it is patently absurd to say that an expression of sadness and consolation at someone’s death is a “political view”. To believe it is, is the actual political view. Second, Octavia Nasr expressing regret at someone’s death on Twitter makes her a “compromised” journalist…yet, Worlf Blitzer, who is CNN’s chief news anchor, being a former senior editor for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) is NOT compromising?

Then you state: “[B]ut before we allege a double standard in this particular case, it may be helpful to consider whether or not Nasr violated CNN’s policy.” Yet, immediately thereafter state: “if there is one; I personally don’t know”.

So I should dismiss the clear and evident double standard out of consideration for a mythical policy that neither of us even knows exists? No thank you, my friend. Thank you for sharing your thoughts and comments.

It really reminds us what the realities are especially in areas that get too close to controversies.

JazakAllah khayr for the article. The Andropov case, in particular, was interesting.

Actually, the analogy between Nasr’s tweet and the State Department statement is a false one – the former is a news professional while the latter is a political entity. Many news organizations have policies that discourage journalists (especially those covering politics) from openly displaying their political views. This does not imply that they cannot hold any views (indeed it would be difficult to expect otherwise) but simply that they should not make a public declaration of the same, so as to not compromise neutrality in the slightest (even if it’s perceived neutrality in the eyes of the reader/listener/viewer).

Undoubtedly, there are double standards in place within media (especially as far as news coverage is concerned), but before we allege a double standard in this particular case, it may be helpful to consider whether or not Nasr violated CNN’s policy. We may not agree with the policy (if there is one; I personally don’t know), but if she did in fact violate it, is it really a double standard for them to follow this course of action?

Just something to consider. Wa Allahu ‘alam.

Something similar happened to the British Ambassador to Lebanon:

Britain has moved to quash a row over its Middle East policy by taking down a controversial blog post by its ambassador in Beirut praising the late Ayatollah Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah, a staunchly anti-American cleric who was a mentor for Lebanon’s militant Hezbollah movement.
Frances Guy had commented in her blog – on the Foreign Office website – that Fadlallah’s death was sad news, calling the religious leader a decent man and saying “the world needs more men like him”.

Full article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jul/09/foreign-office-blog-lebanon-hezbollah-fadlallah

Beautiful article, jazakAllahu khairan. The country is truly at a contentious point right now. If it doesn’t already exist, there should be a documentary showing the embrace of Islam and Muslim achievement in early American history. For example, I visited Yale University last weekend and was presently surprised to see the relief etched into the library with the first words of Quran relieved to the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wassalam. The library at Yale was built in 1931!