The Listening Post

On The Listening Post this week: The killing of former Yemeni president Ali Abdullah Saleh puts the media spotlight on Yemen. Plus, the Spanish talk shows that generate more heat than light. Covering Yemen and Saleh's death The assassination of former president of Yemen, Ali Abdullah Saleh was never going to be a straight-forward story to cover. On Saudi Arabian news outlets, Saleh's killing by Houthi rebels has been used as a justification to continuing the bombing campaign that has been ongoing since 2015. Meanwhile, pro-Houthi media have represented Saleh's savage end as a blow to Saudi efforts to overthrow them. We look at the shifts in regional coverage of Saleh's death and analyse how Western media have covered the war and the powers behind it. Contributors: Afrah Nasser, editor in chief, Sana'a Review Baraa Shiban, Yemen researcher, Reprieve As'ad Abukhalil, professor, Stanislaus State University Rami Khouri, journalism professor, American University of Beirut On our radar According to a Poynter Media Trust survey, nearly half of Americans believe the media fabricate stories about US president Donald Trump. Yet overall, it says, American trust in the media has increased since he came to office. Australia's competition watchdog has launched an investigation into whether digital giants, like Facebook and Google, are harming the ability of news outlets to fund themselves through online advertising. Tertulias: Talking heads on Spain's airwaves Ever since the banking crisis of 2008, Spain has been in a semi constant state of upheaval. A series of corruption scandals, inconclusive elections and, more recently, Catalonia's independence referendum have given rise to a wave of political talk shows - tertulias. We look at these programmes and how they've changed the way Spaniards talk politics. Contributors: Cesar Gonzalez Anton, head of news, La Sexta Marina Gonzalez Sanz, University of Seville Joan Lopez Alegre, Universidad Abat Oliva Ceu Xavier Graset, presenter, TV3 - Subscribe to our channel: http://aje.io/AJSubscribe - Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/AJEnglish - Find us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/aljazeera - Check our website: http://www.aljazeera.com/

The bombing of a mosque in Egypt's Sinai Peninsula that killed at least 305 people marked the deadliest attack in the country's modern history. President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi has promised to avenge the dead through the use of what he calls "brute force". He has reiterated that only he can guarantee Egypt's security and stability. His uncompromising tone was not unexpected, but some of the words he chose were new and worthy of note. "President Sisi used the term brute force, which is normally associated in Arabic with evil, with injustice rather than justice and upholding the law and preserving security," explains Mohannad Sabry, journalist and Sinai researcher. "And he said it very intensely as if the use of brute force over the past few years in Sinai has not contributed majorly to the worsening situation that we're seeing today." The Egyptian media landscape has turned into a burial ground for critical journalism. The US-based Committee to Protect Journalists says at least 26 reporters are behind bars in Egypt, making the country what it calls one of the "biggest prisons for journalists". Of the 180 countries the Paris-based Reporters Without Borders ranks in its annual press freedom Index, Egypt is 161st, below both Turkey and Russia, which is not easy. I doubt very much whether this kind of regime is going to allow for any access to independent journalism, whether in Sinai, or anywhere else in Egypt for that matter. Maha Azzam, head, Egyptian Revolutionary Council Unfettered journalism in print is rare. On the airwaves, it is virtually non-existent, an important factor in a country with a literacy rate of below 75 percent. Egyptian TV channels are littered with talk show hosts, many of whom owe their jobs to their loyalty to the Sisi government, and their flair for the dramatic. They blamed the Muslim Brotherhood for the attacks, as well as the governments in Qatar and Turkey, which they accuse of being sympathetic to the Muslim Brotherhood. "It's important to remember the role that television plays in a country where there is such a high rate of illiteracy," says Amr Khalifa, analyst and political columnist. "There are millions of Egyptians who are still illiterate. That's why you have somebody like Ahmed Moussa... because he's able to brainwash so many minds by virtue of oversimplifying the arguments." Access to northern Sinai is tightly controlled by authorities, so Egyptian journalists are often not allowed there - which the authorities insist is for their own safety. International journalists are locked out, too, but Cairo cannot stop them from broadcasting the images or relaying the facts as they understand them. When that happens, the foreign ministry or the state information service assail those news outlets - and often the countries they are based in. Meanwhile, the talking heads on Egyptian TV turn criticisms into talking points as if parroting the authorities' intolerance of real journalism, is a form of journalism. "There is only going to be one source, and that is the military source that's going to be provided through these very popular TV personalities," explains Maha Azzam, head of the Egyptian Revolutionary Council. "It's a matter of propagating a particular narrative. A narrative that says that the regime is pursuing a successful fight against terrorism. Despite the reality that we know that the escalation of violence has increased four-fold, or maybe even five-fold, since the military coup. And I doubt very much whether this kind of regime is going to allow for any access to independent journalism, whether in Sinai, or anywhere else in Egypt for that matter." Contributors: Mohannad Sabry, journalist and Sinai researcher and author of Sinai: Egypt's Linchpin, Gaza's Lifeline, Israel's Nightmare Amr Khalifa, analyst and political columnist Maha Azzam, head, Egyptian Revolutionary Council Hannah Elsisi, researcher, University of Oxford More from The Listening Post on: YouTube - http://aje.io/listeningpostYT Facebook - http://facebook.com/AJListeningPost Twitter - http://twitter.com/AJListeningPost Website - http://aljazeera.com/listeningpost

A little more than a week ago, Robert Mugabe was forced to announce his resignation as president after keeping Zimbabwe, and the media there, under tight control for 37 years. The media landscape he inherited when he took office was tightly controlled by his predecessor, Ian Smith, and it reflected the interests of the country's white minority. Mugabe did not reverse Smith's media policies but he adopted many of them, ending hopes of a free press. Journalists covering protests, corruption and other stories challenging the government faced harassment, imprisonment and even assault by the authorities. The Rhodesian Broadcasting Corporation became the Zimbabwe Broadcasting Corporation, the ZBC. The Rhodesian Herald became the Herald, Zimbabwe's most widely circulated newspaper. Both proved dependably loyal until last month's coup. But if there was one issue that defined Mugabe's approach to the media, it was land reform. In the 1990s, expropriating and redistributing white-owned farmland among black Zimbabweans helped Mugabe shore up his waning popularity. And as foreign journalists began to report on the story, Mugabe found a way to use the framing of it by the western media, particularly the British media, to foster an "us" versus "them" narrative that would serve him for years to come. "The global media representation of the Zimbabwe crisis in the early 2000s was often presented as a racial conflict between white farmers and a Zana black government," explains Wendy Willems, assistant professor at the London School of Economics. "And this was kind of helpful to the Zimbabwean government in many ways because it allowed them to prove that Britain was mainly interested in Zimbabwe because of the white population." Political analyst Ibbo Mandaza Ibbo says "one would have expected a more balanced view of the land reform as part of the decolonisation process, but no, the media went wild, the British media in particular and they highlighted the atrocities against the whites more than those against the black workers on those farms, so it became a spectacle to put on the front page of British newspapers or the electronic media, the white was being battered or killed." Reports that white families were being kicked off their farms, often at gunpoint and without compensation, was a big news story. But Mugabe turned the international media fixation on that story against them, claiming they had a pro-colonial bias. Whether that was true or not, Mugabe exploited it by banning news outlets like the BBC, calling its journalists agents sent by Britain to destabilise Zimbabwe, knowing that anti-imperialist message would resonate with voters and help reinforce his leadership. "If the foreign press had adopted an even-handed approach, comprehensively looking at each and every aspect of that [land reform] programme, in order to present a fair and balanced dissemination of news, they would undermine the president of Zimbabwe, by removing the carpet from under his feet," says George Nyrota, former editor of the Daily News. Mugabe's relationship with the British media would become outwardly hostile but, in a way, symbiotic. He gave journalists an easy story to cover, the cliche of an archetypal African dictator. And they, in turn, provided him with an easy target by allowing him to dust off his old anti-imperialist credentials to combat the international media, a tactic that would help the Zimbabwean leader survive for 37 years. Until now. Contributors: Ibbo Mandaza, political analyst George Nyrota, former editor, Daily News Wendy Willems, assistant professor, London School of Economics More from The Listening Post on: YouTube - http://aje.io/listeningpostYT Facebook - http://facebook.com/AJListeningPost Twitter - http://twitter.com/AJListeningPost Website - http://aljazeera.com/listeningpost

On The Listening Post this week: In the wake of the Sinai attack, is Egypt's media taking their cues directly from President el-Sisi's government? Plus, a look back through Robert Mugabe's media legacy. Sisi's narrative on Sinai The bombing of a mosque in Egypt's Sinai Peninsula marked the deadliest attack in the country's modern history. President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi has promised to avenge the dead through the use of what he calls "brute force." He has reiterated that only he can guarantee Egypt's security and stability. However, independent journalists have virtually no access to the region and an anti-terror law restricts reporters from publishing anything that contradicts the government's account. "There is only going to be one source, and that is the military source that's going to be provided through these very popular TV personalities," says Maha Azzam from the Egyptian Revolutionary Council. "It's a matter of propagating a particular narrative - a narrative that says that the regime is pursuing a successful fight against terrorism. Despite the reality that we know that the escalation of violence has increased four-fold, or maybe even five-fold, since the military coup. And I doubt very much whether this kind of regime is going to allow for any access to independent journalism, whether in Sinai, or anywhere else in Egypt for that matter," she says. We look at the coverage of the attack - a story that the Egyptian government of President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi wants told its own way. Contributors: Mohannad Sabry, journalist and Sinai researcher and author of Sinai: Egypt's Linchpin, Gaza's Lifeline, Israel's Nightmare Amr Khalifa, analyst and political columnist Maha Azzam, head, Egyptian Revolutionary Council Hannah Elsisi, researcher, University of Oxford On our radar Russian president Vladimir Putin has signed into law a new legislation allowing the Kremlin to list media outlets that receive funds from outside Russia as 'foreign agents'. US president Donald Trump takes to Twitter to accuse US broadcaster CNN International of producing fake news - providing convenient cover for the government in Libya. Zimbabwe: A look back through Mugabe's media legacy A little more than a week ago, Robert Mugabe was forced to announce his resignation as president after keeping Zimbabwe - and the media there - under tight control for 37 years. The media landscape he inherited when he took office was tightly controlled by his predecessor, Ian Smith, and it reflected the interests of the country's white minority. Mugabe did not reverse Smith's media policies but he adopted many of them, ending hopes of a free press. Journalists covering protests, corruption and other stories challenging the government faced harassment, imprisonment and even assault by the authorities. How will Zimbabwe's new president shape the media landscape? We look back at Mugabe's media legacy and the state of journalism in the country. Contributors: Ibbo Mandaza, political analyst George Nyrota, former editor, Daily News Wendy Willems, assistant professor, London School of Economics - Subscribe to our channel: http://aje.io/AJSubscribe - Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/AJEnglish - Find us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/aljazeera - Check our website: http://www.aljazeera.com/

In just two weeks, the new Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, Mohammed bin Salman has upended both the domestic and the regional balance of power with a series of moves that have left observers struggling to keep up. And as unprecedented as Lebanon's Saad Hariri's first televised appearance from Riyadh was - the prime minister of one country announcing his resignation from the capital of another, on a Saudi news channel - his second appearance in the news was somehow more compelling. It was in a 90-minute interview on Lebanon's Future TV, a channel Hariri happens to own. The interviewer was the only one of the channel's employees allowed into Saudi Arabia - with the crew and the equipment provided by the host country. During the interview, Hariri seemed leery of a man lingering in the background. "He [Hariri] appeared to be a broken man, a man stripped of his dignity," explains Rania Masri, an academic and writer. "A man who was truly pathetic, truly arousing pity. Not at all a symbol of a government of a sovereign country, but rather the symbol of a man who has been threatened. He was nervous, he was agitated, he was drawn to tears." Lebanon is a politically complex, factionalised country and the country's media landscape reflects that. But what makes this story even more complicated is the Iran angle. Saudi Arabia's regional power struggle with Iran is playing out in the devastating war on Yemen as well as in Lebanon, where the Saudis want to curtail the influence of Hezbollah, the political party and armed group backed by Iran. The same day Hariri hosted an adviser to Iran's Supreme Leader last week - a meeting the Iranians described as positive and constructive - the Lebanese prime minister found himself on a plane to Riyadh. "This was kind of like the peak of this media spectacle within this entire drama," says Habib Battah, editor, BeirutReport.com. "The only evidence that we have of our prime minister not being captive is the interview with a journalist who he employs on a TV station that he owns." Hariri landed in Riyadh just as the Saudi government launched what it called an anti-corruption drive. Hundreds were arrested, including more than a dozen royals and ministers of the state. Among those reportedly being held at the Ritz Carlton Hotel in Riyadh is Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, majority owner of the Rotana media company and a business partner of Rupert Murdoch's through 21st Century Fox and News Corporation, as well as Waleed Al Ibrahim, who owns MBC and Al Arabiya, a pan-Arab news channel based in Dubai. The two Saudi media tycoons, who control a wide network of Middle Eastern television channels, radio stations, music labels and digital entertainment assets from Morocco to Oman, were reportedly arrested for resisting the crown prince's repeated attempts over the past year to buy their companies. "That was one of the reasons that they tried the blockade against Qatar," according to David Hearst, editor for the Middle East Eye. "It was because of Al Jazeera's prominence in the media. They're very media minded, and they think, in a very old fashioned way, that the media can be bought. That's the classic Arab state way of thinking about the media. They don't think that the Arab world - and they've said so - is ready for free speech and they want to control it." Masri says, "I can see no other reason for their arrest other than a consolidation of power. We are talking about the wealth of billions of dollars held captive at the Ritz Carlton in Saudi Arabia. And the consolidation of financial power goes hand in hand with the consolidation of media power. Now, if it were really for corruption charges, why have they been arrested and placed in a hotel rather than arrested and had an open trial with clear evidence presented as to the alleged corruption charges?" By this past Thursday, the Financial Times was reporting that the hotel detainees could buy their freedom by surrendering up to 70 percent of their accumulated wealth - which makes the Saudi corruption crackdown look like a shakedown. Contributors: Rania Masri, academic and writer Habib Battah, editor, BeirutReport.com and Journalism Lecturer at the American University of Beirut As'ad Abukhalil, professor, California State University, Stanislaus David Hearst, editor, Middle East Eye More from The Listening Post on: YouTube - http://aje.io/listeningpostYT Facebook - http://facebook.com/AJListeningPost Twitter - http://twitter.com/AJListeningPost Website - http://aljazeera.com/listeningpost

The United Nations has called what is happening on Manus Island a humanitarian emergency. Since the Australian government closed its controversial Papua New Guinea-based offshore immigration detention centre on October 31, over 400 men are refusing to leave. They have gone nearly three weeks without water, food, electricity and medical supplies, and they claim that the facilities they are forced to move to lack adequate security to protect them from attacks by the local community. Yet, this hasn't become the media spectacle one might expect - only two reporters have been there to cover the story. "The Australian government has tried very hard to shape the narrative about what is happening on Manus and Nauru, and it's done so very effectively, because it's so hard for journalists to be able to go there and to tell the stories of what is happening," says Elaine Pearson, director, HRW Australia. Media access to Manus and Nauru has been tightly controlled since the camps reopened in 2012 - and the Australian government is playing a blame game with the PNG and Nauruan authorities as to who is responsible. But journalists say they have no doubt Australia is pulling the strings. Photojournalist Matthew Abbott tried to go to Manus Island last week, but was refused entry. A year earlier, he published a story on Manus locals brutally attacking two refugees. When he tried to enter Papua New Guinea in the visa on arrival line the immigration officer said "are you involved with publishing disruptive material from Manus Island? That's when I knew that there was no way I was getting to Papua New Guinea," says Abbott. According to Buzzfeed Australia's senior reporter Paul Farrell, "there are real reasons to believe that there is a blacklist for Australian journalists. Australia certainly has a long history of stifling reporting on immigration detention centres." Journalists have come to rely on reports from refugees and whisteblowers to find out what is going on inside the detention centres. For years, phones have been refugees' lifelines - the only way to inform the world about their plight. They have shared stories of physical abuse, lack of medical facilities, mental stress, and in one case even murder at the hands of the security guards. Amir Taghinia, one of the few who made it out of Manus set up 'Manus Alert', a public channel on the cloud-based app Telegram to which he and his fellow refugees upload footage and their stories. It quickly became one of journalists' main sources of information. "If I didn't smuggle that phone inside the centre, and I couldn't get internet on that small, old smartphone, I wouldn't be in here," says Taghinia, who spent four years on Manus but is now in Canada. "I did everything with that small phone ... I think right now around 600 people are on that channel and the majority of them are Australians and journalists." Yet, despite sources such as Manus Alert, journalists are increasingly steering away from this story. Not least because Australian audiences have grown increasingly apathetic. Reporting on Manus and Nauru no longer gets the clicks, the likes, that too often drives the media's agenda. Typically, the images Australians are seeing are distant and limited. Taken from afar, they lack the faces and personal stories that tend to affect audiences. They fail to capture what's happening up close. And the few outlets the authorities in Canberra have allowed into the camp: The Australian newspaper and Sky - both owned by Rupert Murdoch's News Corp - and Channel 9, are known for sticking to the government's line. "I think privileged access is given to certain media and certain outlets that portray Australian policies in a certain light, the reporting that they've done has been very superficial," explains Pearson. "It's barely scratched the surface, it focused a lot on things like the physical facilities that the refugees and asylum seekers are living in, the physical standard of the accommodation, and saying that well, you know they're living in nice houses, this is all being paid for by the Australian government so therefore you it's a life all good on Nauru." More from The Listening Post on: YouTube - http://aje.io/listeningpostYT Facebook - http://facebook.com/AJListeningPost Twitter - http://twitter.com/AJListeningPost Website - http://aljazeera.com/listeningpost

On The Listening Post this week, Saudi Arabia's Middle East power play as seen across the region's media. Plus, the lock-down facing journalists trying to cover refugees on Manus Island. Lebanon's PM and Saudi Arabia's power play In just two weeks, the new Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, Mohammed bin Salman has upended both the domestic and the regional balance of power with a series of moves that have left observers struggling to keep up. Regional media have reported the resignation of the Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri, the arrest of dozens of princes and businessmen and the threat of regional conflict through the political positions that they bring to the mix. International media have also shown their colours by selectively seeing what they want to see in the new prince. Contributors: Rania Masri, academic and writer Habib Battah, editor, BeirutReport.com and journalism lecturer at the American University of Beirut As'ad Abukhalil, professor, California State University, Stanislaus David Hearst, editor, Middle East Eye On our radar Zimbabwe's army seizes the state broadcaster as it moves to take control of the country's succession. Julian Assange trolls Trump Jr while defending WikiLeaks' journalism. Venezuela's new media law raises heckles from press freedom activists. Covering Manus Island Last year, Papua New Guinea's Supreme Court ruled that Australia's imprisonment of asylum seekers on the islands of Manus and Nauru was illegal and ordered the closure of the camps. Unfortunately, the story attracted little attention since Australia's offshore "processing centres" for asylum seekers have operated largely under a shroud of secrecy. Journalists trying to report on conditions at the prisons have been blocked at every turn by the governments involved. Eighteen months since that court ruling, the camps are now closed but the refugees are refusing to leave fearing attacks by local people. The Listening Post's Johanna Hoes returns to the story of the refugees on Manus Island and Nauru. Contributors: Elaine Pearson, director, HRW Australia Paul Farrell, senior reporter, Buzzfeed Australia Matthew Abbott, documentary photographer Amir Taghinia, former Manus refugee Behrouz Boochani, refugee - Subscribe to our channel: http://aje.io/AJSubscribe - Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/AJEnglish - Find us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/aljazeera - Check our website: http://www.aljazeera.com/

A look at the challenges of environmental reporting and why the coverage seldom matches the urgency of the problem. More from The Listening Post on: YouTube - http://aje.io/listeningpostYT Facebook - http://facebook.com/AJListeningPost Twitter - http://twitter.com/AJListeningPost Website - http://aljazeera.com/listeningpost

With temperatures and sea levels rising alarmingly, putting 2,000 of the country's islands and 42 million households at risk of drowning by 2050, one would expect environmental news to top the agenda in Indonesia. But when you look at mainstream media there, it is hard to find stories that go beyond catastrophes like forest fires or mudslides, examining who and what is behind them. In 2015, huge fires swept through Indonesia's rainforests. About 2.6 million hectares of forest (an area roughly the size of Rwanda) was set aflame to clear space for palm oil plantations. The fires produced - in just three weeks - more greenhouse gases than Germany does in an entire year. Forest fires have become an annual occurrence in Indonesia, and still, the country's media seldom devote the column inches and airtime needed to explore the causes behind them. "It is easier for journalists to cover sports or the economy, because they have scores and numbers," explains Harry Surjadi, head of the Indonesian Society of Environmental Journalists. "Those stories are much easier to write than environmental stories, where journalists have to understand biology, ecology, waste and chemistry." When they do cover forest fires or the effects of mining, they leave out "subjects like 'water poisoned due to toxic waste or air pollution' because they don't know enough about those subjects", points out Merah Ismail, campaign manager for JATAM NGO, a mining advocacy network. Crucial to how Indonesia's news outlets cover the environment - and its destruction - is the shape of the media landscape. Most of the country's TV channels and radio stations are owned by conglomerates, many of which have big stakes in agribusiness and mining companies. "Media owners are often connected to owners of extractive industry companies, like mining or palm oil, which are among the greatest contributors to deforestation, environmental damage and air pollution," says Sapariah Saturi, senior editor for Mongabay-Indonesia. In September 2015, Indonesian President Joko Widodo announced that the country would cut the growth of greenhouse gas emissions by 29 percent in 2030. The announcement was covered across Indonesia's news outlets, but, since then, there's been little follow up on what progress there has been or whether there is a plan at all to achieve this target. What little media debate and coverage there are, of efforts to protect Indonesia's rainforests, are often framed in terms of a stark choice - between the economy and the environment. "I have learned that only when the media care and do good reporting on the environment can there be any influence on policy to protect it," says Surjadi. "So, unless there are more journalists writing about green issues, climate change will not be stopped." With the lines between journalism and activism blurred, we look at how the Indonesian media toes the line between the need for economic development and environmental sustainability. Contributors: Harry Surjadi, head, Indonesian Society of Environmental Journalists Sapariah Saturi, senior editor, Mongabay-Indonesia Merah Ismail, campaign manager, JATAM NGO (Mining Advocacy Network) Indoarto Priadi, managing director, TVOne More from The Listening Post on: YouTube - http://aje.io/listeningpostYT Facebook - http://facebook.com/AJListeningPost Twitter - http://twitter.com/AJListeningPost Website - http://aljazeera.com/listeningpost

On The Listening Post this week we bring you a special show on climate change and the news coverage that seldom matches the scale and the urgency of the problem. This year, once again, extreme weather events - hurricanes, floods, wildfires - have provided the news media with the opportunity to address a planet-sized elephant in the room: climate change. But once the storm has passed, the media too moves on. The latest round of global climate talks is happening right now in Germany but the media attention has been sparse. Earlier this year, climate change came second in an international public survey of global threats and yet journalists still regularly fall short. The Listening Post's Will Yong asks why. Contributors: Lisa Hymas, Media Matters for America Nicholas Beuret, University of Lancaster Martin Lukacs, environment writer, The Guardian Amantha Perera, journalist Jenni Monet, journalist and filmmaker Indonesia: The media and the environment One country with a major stake in the climate change story is Indonesia. Many of the country’s islands will end up underwater if sea levels continue to rise at the current rate. Despite the clear and present threat, mainstream media coverage of environmental issues rarely goes beyond reporting forest fires or mudslides. Critics blame media groups for their close relationships with agribusiness and mining companies who are among the worst environmental offenders. Mainstream journalists also find it hard to report on these issues because of political corruption and NGOs have stepped in to fill the information gap as a result. The Listening Post's Meenakshi Ravi reports. Contributors: Harry Surjadi, head, Indonesian Society of Environmental Journalists Sapariah Saturi, senior editor, Mongabay-Indonesia Merah Ismail, campaign manager, JATAM NGO (Mining Advocacy Network) Indoarto Priadi, managing director, TVOne More from The Listening Post on: YouTube - http://aje.io/listeningpostYT Facebook - http://facebook.com/AJListeningPost Twitter - http://twitter.com/AJListeningPost Website - http://aljazeera.com/listeningpost

This week, three of US President Donald Trump's former advisers were charged with federal crimes, including tax evasion, conspiracy against the US, and lying to the FBI about contacts with alleged Russia middlemen. The White House has denied this and Trump described the investigation as a "witch-hunt". While US news outlets covered the indictments in Washington and the possible impact on Donald Trump's presidency, Fox's coverage differed. As its competitors focused on the news, Fox downplayed it, directing its attention to Hillary Clinton, questioning the integrity of the chief investigator Robert Mueller, even making time for stories about emojis and Halloween candies. Fox looked at the Russian angle in the story and basically concluded: "There's nothing to see here". Fox was quite flagrantly echoing the same line coming out of the White House - a blend of diversion, distraction and denial - blurring the line between truth and falsehood, the apparent end game being to help the president take back control of the narrative. "Not only did they spend a good amount of time downplaying the allegations that Mueller had made, but they also found time to discuss any number of other stories," explains Mark Gertz, senior fellow, Media Matters for America. "From hamburger emojis to Halloween candy. This is what Fox News does. This was a more embarrassing case, but it is what the channel typically does and always has." Other Rupert Murdoch-owned media outlets that haven't always been on the Trump bandwagon seem to be climbing on board. Eight months ago, the Wall Street Journal published an editorial questioning the president's credibility, calling Trump "his own worst political enemy" and saying of his obsession with so-called fake news - that "if he doesn't show more respect for the truth most Americans may conclude he's a fake president." Something has clearly changed. Just prior to the indictments being made public, the journal published pro-Trump editorials, including one questioning the credibility of chief investigator Robert Mueller, calling for his resignation. "Donald Trump and his allies realised that firing Robert Mueller would result in real drastic consequences for Trump. So, the next best thing is to try to disqualify Robert Mueller," says Washington Post reporter Erik Wemple. Much of what pro-Trump elements in the US media have produced on this story - their obsession with Hillary Clinton included - seems designed to sow uncertainty in the minds of Americans on a story that was already complicated. And journalists from other outlets, in their zeal to get to the bottom of the story, may have unwittingly done the same thing, by conflating one story with another. The charges against Trump's one-time campaign manager, Paul Manafort - for money laundering and fraud - all relate to overseas transactions that occurred before he was hired by Trump in 2016. Another campaign aide charged, George Papadopoulos, tried to set up a meeting between Trump and Vladimir Putin - but it never happened. It is not clear whether either case has anything to do with the other Russia angle out there - the allegations, as yet unproven, that the Kremlin somehow colluded with the Trump campaign during last year's election. "This goal of proving collusion as kind of an overarching theme of the media, in some ways, it plays into the right-wing media's own narrative," says Reed Richardson, Fair Media Watch contributor. With each passing political story, American journalism seems to grow more polarised. And media consumers, because it's never been easier to hunker down in the comfort of their own echo chambers, rarely venture out to a place - a news outlet - where their beliefs might actually be challenged. "Conservatives have spent decades building a parallel news apparatus in order to ensure that conservatives have an entirely different set of facts than those that everybody else gets. And what that means is that you have a large group of people that are being fundamentally and deliberately confused about what is going on in the country. That's pretty dangerous and it could be moving us in a fairly scary direction," says Gertz. More from The Listening Post on: YouTube - http://aje.io/listeningpostYT Facebook - http://facebook.com/AJListeningPost Twitter - http://twitter.com/AJListeningPost Website - http://aljazeera.com/listeningpost

For nearly 10 consecutive years, media watchdog group Reporters Without Borders has ranked Eritrea at the bottom of its annual index on press freedom. This year, it rose by one place above North Korea. After a 30-year war of independence with Ethiopia, President Isaias Afwerki, who has now been in power for 26 years, chose not to hold elections but keep the country on a war footing. In 2001, he shut down all privately-owned news outlets and began expelling foreign correspondents until none were left in the country. All that remained was state media, news outlets that toe the government line. "So there is only one government newspaper, one TV station, one radio station all run by the state," says Abraham Zere, executive director of Pen Eritrea. "The media basically portrays the country as if it's progressing, whereas everybody knows that the country is regressing again." With only state media operating on the inside, Eritreans rely on news outlets based outside of the country. Radio Erena is perhaps the most prominent. Based in France, the channel beams into the country via satellite and provides one of the only sources of information in Eritrea that isn't state-controlled. It was set up in 2009 by a group of exiled journalists who used to work for state media. Now, from the safety of France, they can report on issues like the constitution, national service and immigration. The channel also provides a lifeline to those fleeing Eritrea. The UN estimates that about 5,000 Eritreans flee the country every month. For many, Radio Erena is their primary source of information and can mean the difference between life and death. They face different challenges along the way, so Radio Erena tries to produce coverage that will help them at every stage. "We put them [refugees] in three different categories," explains Biniam Simon, editor-in-chief, Radio Erena. "For those who are inside the refugee camps, we try to explain the hardship, the danger they face if they try to cross to European countries. For those who reach their destinations, we try to give them information on how to integrate and try to live a new life. For those who are on the road, they do face the biggest challenge - a lot of terrible things happen." When Radio Erena was getting started in 2009, a disturbing trend was developing along one of the main escape routes out of Eritrea. In the Sudanese and Egyptian deserts, refugees were being kidnapped by human traffickers and held for ransom. They would be given a mobile phone to call relatives and beg for money. Families that did not pay would have to listen to their loved ones being tortured repeatedly as the human traffickers tried to extort their ransom. Meron Estefanos, a human rights activist and journalist at Radio Erena, was one of the only journalists covering the story, so the victims, and those trying to free them, started calling her for help. She became a go between: as a journalist, Estefanos would shine a light on individual cases and as an activist, she would help raise the money to pay their ransoms. Which raises the ongoing debate over whether or not to pay ransoms, but in this case it's hard to argue. "The man that just called me said that his two children got kidnapped in Sudan and he is being asked for $10,000," says Estafanos. "And this is a newly arrived refugee himself and he has no money. So I was trying to convince him it's ok, call my friend, I'll send you her number. She will help you." What sets the Eritrean refugee story apart is that they are not fleeing a war, but the by-product of a war. Mandatory national service was introduced to rebuild the country after Eritrea's war with Ethiopia. The terms are meant to be 18 months, but according to Amnesty International, national service can be indefinite, often lasting decades - turning it into a form of forced labour. The government denies this, but most Eritrean refugees say that's why they fled the country. Two years ago the EU quadrupled its foreign aid to Eritrea to $237m to keep refugees out of Europe. The money came with the vague provison that Eritrea would improve its track record on human rights. More from The Listening Post on: YouTube - http://aje.io/listeningpostYT Facebook - http://facebook.com/AJListeningPost Twitter - http://twitter.com/AJListeningPost Website - http://aljazeera.com/listeningpost

On The Listening Post this week: As the heat is turned up on US President Trump and his associates, Fox News' role as the president's media mouthpiece becomes clearer. Plus, media strangled in Eritrea. The Fox approach to bad news: Deflect, divert, distract The special investigation into the Trump campaign's alleged collusion with Russia has delivered its first indictments. This week, three of his former advisers were charged with federal crimes, including tax evasion, conspiracy against the US, and lying to the FBI about contacts with alleged middlemen for Russia. We look at the polarised coverage and conservative media's attempts to sidestep the story. Contributors: Matt Gertz, senior fellow, Media Matters for America Erik Wemple, media reporter, The Washington Post Reed Richardson, contributor, Fair Media Watch David Lawler, deputy newsdesk editor, Axios On our radar •Kurdish media under fire in Iraq, with one journalist murdered and two channels forced off the air. •Myanmar arrests foreign journalists working for Turkey's state-owned broadcaster TRT for attempting to bring a drone into the country without a license. •In Russia, newspaper Novaya Gazeta plans to arm its reporters to protect them from attacks. Reporting Eritrea from the outside Freedom of the press is virtually non-existent in Eritrea with state-run media the only news outlets available within its borders. As a consequence, Eritreans have come to rely on a news outlet operating in exile from France, Radio Erena. The station also offers a lifeline to the 5000 Eritrean refugees who risk kidnapping and death fleeing the country every month. The Listening Post's Nic Muirhead reports on Radio Erena, the Eritrean news outlet on the outside, trying to make a difference. Contributors: Meron Estefanos, host, 'Voices of Eritrean Refugees,' Radio Erena Abraham Zere, executive director, Pen Eritrea Biniam Simon, editor-in-chief, Radio Erena More from The Listening Post on: YouTube - http://aje.io/listeningpostYT Facebook - http://facebook.com/AJListeningPost Twitter - http://twitter.com/AJListeningPost Website - http://aljazeera.com/listeningpost

More than three years ago, the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant group (ISIL, which is also known as ISIS) captured the Syrian city of Raqqa and declared it the capital of its "caliphate". Images that emerged from the city, of atrocities used as propaganda, have been some of the most gruesome and distressing media output to emerge from a war that continues to cause untold suffering. When the Syrian Democratic Forces finally rolled into al-Naim Square, Western journalists travelling with them told a story of triumph and liberation. The story that gets told, however, depends on who is telling it. Contributors: Lina Khatib, head of the Middle East and North Africa programme, Chatham House Omar Al Ghazzi, assistant professor of Media, LSE AbdAlaziz Alhamza, cofounder, Raqqa is Being Slaughtered Silently Christa Salamandra, professor of anthropology, The City University of New York Bassam Haddad, co-editor, Jadaliyya More from The Listening Post on: YouTube - http://aje.io/listeningpostYT Facebook - http://facebook.com/AJListeningPost Twitter - http://twitter.com/AJListeningPost Website - http://aljazeera.com/listeningpost

Over a million Syrians have fled to Lebanon since the war began but their reception across the border has grown increasingly hostile. Pick up a Lebanese newspaper or turn on the TV and you think conclude that problems that have dogged Lebanon for years such as electricity cuts, a lack of jobs and chronic pollution all began with the arrival of the refugees. The toxic rhetoric often starts at the political level but since almost every news outlet in Lebanon has some kind of political affiliation the rhetoric often finds its way in the reporting. Contributors: Ayman Mhanna, executive director, Samir Kassir Foundation Kareem Chehayeb, journalist Diana Moukalled, TV producer and columnist Walid Abboud, editor-in-chief, MTV More from The Listening Post on: YouTube - http://aje.io/listeningpostYT Facebook - http://facebook.com/AJListeningPost Twitter - http://twitter.com/AJListeningPost Website - http://aljazeera.com/listeningpost