A most stupid guide to Arab media in the New York Times. It is full of either lies or inaccuracies:
AlJazeera does not call US troops "occupation forces" anymore. Aljazeera's staff are more likely Arab nationalists and "liberals" than Muslim fundamentalists. AlArabiyyah is not owned by Prince Al-Walid (who owns part of LBC among other media outlets), but by King Fahd's brother-in-law. Notice that he talks about "tolerance" of the US when he (the author of the silly article) means support for US wars and occupations. Support for US wars is now called "tolerance", as in, for example, "Bob "tolerated" Saddam's wars and invasions in the 1980s." Ash-Sharq Al-Awsat is NOT "the most influential" paper in the region. It has been dismissed for years for its crude championing of the House of Saud. I really do not believe that this ignorant writer actually reads those papers. Al-Hayat is NOT an "Arab nationalist" newspaper, and NEVER publishes criticisms of the Saudi royal family. AlHayat is NOT very popular in Lebanon; it sells behind AnNahar, As-Safir, Sada Al-Balad, among other Lebanese newspapers. It mostly sells (and not much) in...Saudi Arabia. AlAhram may outsell other newspaper only because of the population size of Egypt, and due to its subsidized price.