Earlier this month in Dubai, UAE, the 8th Arab Media Forum was held, drawing a diverse and high profile crowd to debate the ongoing advancement of satellite and digital media in the Arabic world. Attending the event were journalists and media companies from throughout the Middle East, like Al Arabiya and Al Jazeera, and those from the outside, including the BBC, France 24 and Russia Today. Also attending were government and religious officials from several Arab countries.
One hot topic at the forum was the continued emergence of popular religious programming where TV personalities issue edicts known as “fatwas.” Fatwas are historically known as interpretations of Islamic law issued by religious scholars known as “muftis” who wield legal authority. Individuals looking for both spiritual and practical advice will ask a mufti for a fatwa, and the mufti will tell him or her what the law is and what what the best course of action is. Fatwas are generally not considered binding law unless there is consensus among muftis, although they are still quite influential. Often, however, there are disagreements about the correct interpretation of any given law.
More recently, Fatwas have grown beyond mere advisory statements and have become a vehicle for threats or condemnation. Examples include the death sentence issued upon Salmon Rushdie by Ayatolla Ruhollah Khomeini. Osama bin Laden issued fatwas in 1996 and 1998 calling for all Muslims to kill American civilians and military personnel as long as the United States backed Israel. A somewhat less damning example involves the issuing of a death fatwa on Mickey Mouse in September of 2008.
Islamic religious and government leaders lambast the programming as distorting traditional religious values to sway those easily influenced by their messages, including the poor, uneducated, children and adolescents. They claim that the TV personalities are not qualified to issue religious edicts, and by so doing cause more harm than good. While most concerns are about the powerful force media plays in diluting and popularizing Islam and Arabic traditional culture, there are also concerns that some programs serve to recruit extremists and suicide bombers.
The problem faced by Arab governments is that the content is being aired by unregulated, privatized satellite broadcasting companies. Unlike ”terrestrial” broadcasting, which uses the airwaves close to the earth and is regulated by the Arabic governments, satellite television is somewhat unregulated in its content, and is not limited by sovereign boundaries. Currently, over 80 satellite channels in the Arab world are “religious channels” where TV personalities issue fatwas. (In total, more than 500 satellite channels currently are available throughout the Arab world, some of them coming from the West.) Some of the media channels, like Al-Jazeera of Qatar, are both privately and publicly owned. Many of them, however, are owned by wealthy individuals who bear no allegiance to any particular country other than their own.
TV fatwas are just one aspect of a larger problem that private satellite TV companies pose to Arabic nations. In addition to religious programming, satellite broadcasters are airing content like soap operas, sporting events, risque images, and programming from the West. (Ironically, TV fatwas from satellite channels are being issued against Arabic soap operas broadcast on other satellite channels). Some satellite channels also are known for their critical news coverage of several prominent Arab governments. In 2008, the Arab League of States, (which consists of 22 Arab nations) adopted a charter entitled ”Principles for Organizing Satellite Radio and TV Broadcasting in the Arab Region,”which was supposed to crack down on the critical news coverage generated through satellite programming. Co-sponsored by Egypt and Saudi Arabia, the two countries whose governments were most critiqued, only Qatar (home to Al Jazeera) and Lebanon, refused to sign the charter.
The 2008 charter is seen by the media and international watchdog organizations as an attempt to suppress critical news coverage. It authorizes signatory countries to “withdraw, freeze or not renew the work permits of media which break the regulations,” stipulating that satellite channels “should not damage social harmony, national unity, public order or traditional values.” Additionally, programming should also “conform with the religious and ethical values of Arab society and take account of its family structure,” and channels should “refrain from broadcasting anything which calls into question God, the monotheistic religions, the prophets, sects or symbols of the various religious communities.” While collective actions by the league are often non-binding on individual states, for legal matters involving the media, culture and religion, actions taken by the League are often seen as binding. Notably, in 2008 and 2009, there were several reports from Egypt of satellite companies being fined or raided by government officials for airing content that was critical of the Egyptian government.
The difficulty of TV fatwas is not that they are critical of Arabic governments per se, but that they threaten to undermine the viability of traditional Islamic practices. To the extent that religion supports the government in these countries, messages which are not in accord with a national agenda seem to threaten Arabic governments. This of course is a concern to both political and religious leaders, and at the 2009 Arab Media Forum there were several clerics who were quite vocal in criticizing TV fatwas. Several media companies counter that in fact their muftis are qualified for their responsibilities, and that their content is actually beneficial rather than harmful to reinforcing religious values. One thing is for sure, religious programming has become very popular. Individuals who cannot read, can watch and understand the television, and given the low costs of installing satellites, satellite broadcasts are reaching millions of viewers and turning very lucrative profits.
As a response to TV fatwas, the government of United Arab Emirates opened the first official Fatwa center in August 2008 where all fatwa inquiries in the UAE are to be directed. This center was to become the sole source of fatwa edicts in what was seen as the first attempt to standardize and nationalize fatwas. In the past, questions would be directed to Muftis in local Mosques located in towns and villages. Often fatwas would vary from Mufti to Mufti and depending on the answer one sought, he or she might choose one mufti over another. The Fatwa center in the UAE, changes this dynamic quite significantly by requiring a national standard, and also helps to mitigate the influence of satellite TV fatwas.
Satellite broadcasters present Arabic governments with a difficult problem. They are a major, if not the major, force that threatens to change traditional Arabic culture. To the extent that Arabic governments confirm and enhance their power through traditional religious and cultural norms, they are affected. Regulation, however, requires joint effort on the part of Arab bodies like the Arab League or Gulf Cooperation Council. While individual governments like Egypt or Saudi Arabia can enforce the laws within their own states, they are less capable of acting in other states and therefore must rely on agreements like the 2008 Arab League Charter. When there is cultural and political uniformity amongst these states, regulatory action might be possible; however, whenever differences arise, regulation becomes much more difficult. (For more on this see “Instant Nationalism” by Khalil Rinnawi, and “Satellite Realms” by Naomi Sakr.) This is a topic of enormous complexity and political intrigue which cannot be properly explored here. There is no doubt, however, that transnational broadcasting will continue to be a dynamic and changing force in the Arab world. Stay tuned!
