Author: Marwa Azab

  • Social media credibility and latest trends in news reporting

    Social media credibility and latest trends in news reporting

    The AUC kicked off the first-ever virtual session series at the Adham Center for Television and Digital Journalism, a conference call with professor Vince Gonzales, who is an investigative journalist, professor of professional practice at the University of South California, and coordinator of the University’s Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism’s masters degree programme in journalism. He spoke to students about credible news-making on social media. It was a great discussion titled “Critical News-Making for Social Media.” The session was moderated by professor Dr. Hussein Amin, director of the Kamal Adham Center for Television and Digital Journalism, and in the presence of guest of honour Mr. Brian A. Shott, press attaché at the US embassy.

    The interactive session discussed how to maintain credibility, standards, and traditions that make media organisations look great and how traditional media organizations, such as the New York Times and CNN, had to change in the presentation of themselves and in their tone of journalism.

    In understanding how to reach audiences, Professor Gonzales focused on how to maintain them and how to get them to deeper content, how to thread each piece of journalism through a complex maze of different sites and applications, which fundamentally changed the way newsrooms operate.

    He also explained that the essential nature of journalism has not changed and that it is still about reporting stories, about being balanced, and adding perspective and context to help explain the world. But now it is threaded through a system built for scale, speed, and revenue.

    Furthermore, highlighting the integration between the news business and social platforms, such as Facebook, Twitter, Snapchat, and Google and how those are significantly influencing the direction and practices of journalism.

    He also discussed researches that proved that people like to spend more time with longer articles on their cellphones rather than with shorter ones as they need context, perspective, and sources they can trust.

    Professor Gonzales emphasised and explained the central role of audience strategists and social platform editors at the United States. On the other hand, the strategy which should be followed by reporters in using social media is to understand the most common traps and knowing what to report to people through giving them the information they need—for example, not to tell them how to vote and for whom but telling them to go to the voting booth and be a responsible citizen.

    In his presentation, he also discussed targeting potential audiences and how to drive them to your broadcast, main site, or premier platform, as well as the importance of verification of what you see and read online as a fundamental step during the process of reporting, knowing when a short video can replace graphs and texts, and taking advantage of the thirst for news in breaking situations to reach new audiences.

    An open discussion between Professor Vince Gonzales and AUC scholars covered several issues regarding media illiteracy in Egypt and the United States.

    He explained the wide-spread belief regarding a strong political bias in the media with various notable newspapers having made endorsements of candidates in the 2016 US presidential elections and to some extent had a significant effect on shaping the voters’ views. There are organisations which now have political point of view, but 10 to 20 years ago these organisations were objective and not part of the political process. Nowadays, there is a shift in perceptions, political stances, and ways people operate in the media.

    He stressed that it’s perfectly acceptable to create separate accounts for personal and professional uses. Many professionals open two accounts within the same social media site, one for each purpose. However, be aware that just because your students or audiences are connected to you through a professional account only, there is still a chance they could find and view your personal account. Sometimes when reporting on professional account, you get a response from people on your personal one. Unfortunately, when merging both professional and personal social media accounts, the pros and cons need to be considered.

    Regarding the emergency law and the publishing of negative news, he said that the press’ watchdog role in monitoring the conduct of government officials is assumed to be vital for democracy. The effectiveness of this watchdog role is less clearly understood. The exact role of journalists is to examine the actions of the government and whether the government attacks them. The role of a journalist in case of emergency is not about attacking the government, but about preventing any violations or malpractices.

    On a question about how to balance and promote your story, or in other words your brand, professor Gonzales asserted that they teach their students in the public diplomacy and public relations community how to present the information in a way that make their audience do not feel that they are pushing a certain message on them, but presenting it in the form of a good story.

    Professor Gonzales replied to a question about the most creative way to cover the visit of President Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi to Washington, that organisations such as CNN would not like it to be a non-traditional coverage; however, if you are just covering what everybody else is covering, that is not news. For example, Jimmy Breslin, one of the most famous columnists, wrote his most famous story by literally stepping away from what his peers were covering. For example, when the media was focusing on president John F. Kennedy’s funeral, Breslin followed Clifton Pollard, the man who dug the assassinated leader’s grave at Arlington National Cemetery, and came out with a better story than anyone else who was just covering the news. He explained that as a journalist, you have to cover the story from a different perspective and find voices which other reporters are ignoring and what deeper reporting you can do to present a very different view to the public.

    Another question was raised by professor Dr. Hussein Amin on the use of visualisation in news reporting. Professor Gonzales explained that it is an important tool used in the US in which journalists are able to create their own interactive graphics and add visual components to their reports in order to engage users, to turn paragraphs into an interactive timeline with videos and photos. Some others use sound sites to augment their texts, by adding an audio for users to hear a longer version of the story.

    I encourage you to watch the video of this informative presentation and discussion about the credibility of different social media platforms and latest trends in journalism and news reporting.

  • Trump has a good chemistry with Al-Sisi, but what matters is the situation on the ground: Kamal Abou Okeal

    Trump has a good chemistry with Al-Sisi, but what matters is the situation on the ground: Kamal Abou Okeal

    As the world is closely watching the new policies of US president Donald Trump, there are several questions yet to be answered about how the new US administration will affect the rest of the world, particularly concerning the turmoil in the Middle East and the Israel-Palestinian peace process.

    Egypt, being an essential regional player, is also at the heart of international relations among superpowers, especially in light of its openness and cooperation with Russia.

    Daily News Egypt conducted an interview with Kamal Abou Okeal, member of the Egyptian Council for Foreign Affairs and a member of the German Council for Foreign Affairs (DGAP), to discuss the latest developments on Egypt’s foreign relations with Israel, Europe, the US, and Russia.

    Do you agree that the Egyptian-Israeli relations are “at their highest levels” in history?

    This is a very complex subject that has very deep roots and it is very important to understand the origin of the Egyptian-Israeli relationship. Here is a look at what you need to know about the Camp David Accords as I was an observer of the agreement that took place between former president Anwar El-Sadat, former Israeli prime minister Menachem Begin, and former president Jimmy Carter in Washington on 17 September 1978. Before the signing of the agreement, I received a call from the secretary of El-Sadat at the time, Fawzy Abo Hafez, who informed me that they would not come to an agreement with Israel as they are very hawkish and want an agreement on their own terms.

    However, El-Sadat insisted on certain terms. Egyptian expats in Washington were alarmed that we were prepared to make so many concessions to the Israelis. Each party saw worthiness in resolving the dispute through negotiations under an American umbrella, but the two sides still had fundamentally different approaches to peace.

    Suddenly, it was announced that the agreement was signed. Later, I was invited by the Egyptian ambassador in Washington to meet with El-Sadat together with some activists living in the US at that time. El-Sadat explained that he did not like the treaty and was not happy with most of its terms; however, that this agreement will give Egypt equality with Israel, meaning that if they will get a US dollar, we will get the same and if it will get an F16 or tanks, we in return will get the same. The agreement also guaranteed the complete withdrawal of Israeli armed forces and civilians from the Sinai Peninsula.

    When I met with Carter, I discussed with him if this treaty will allow for parity between Egypt and Israel vis-à-vis the US. He explained that this never happened because El-Sadat never broached the subject of parity. El-Sadat was a patriotic man, a man who fought and was a political activist. He did what he could do under very difficult and debatable circumstances because part of our country was occupied; however, in my opinion, this treaty set the stage for a negative image for us as it allowed Israel to become a superpower in the region.

    More recently, Israel considered former president Hosni Mubarak their biggest strategic asset. Now, they are making use of our security concerns and our fight against terrorist elements. There is a definite cooperation between Egypt and Israel which makes us able to increase the number of forces in Sinai, more than the treaty would allow because in many parts of the Sinai Peninsula, the Camp David Accords stipulate that Egypt is allowed a limited military presence, and closer to the border, Egypt is allowed to field police officers only.

    In order to have peace in the region, first we should have parity between Egypt and Israel. Egypt is a big country with a great history which goes back thousands of years. Unless Egypt has its natural state of power, there will never be real peace in the region. What kept peace in Europe for over fifty years is parity; they call it Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD). For example, the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) has enough destructive capabilities to destroy the nations under the Warsaw pact and vice versa. This balance of power is what kept the peace. In the Middle East, if we have a balance of power between the biggest countries, it will keep the peace and allow us to reach an agreement regarding the Palestinian issue.

    The Palestinians cannot negotiate with the Israeli side, because in order to have an equitable agreement, you have to have more or less equivalent power. Negotiations that take place between a very powerful party and another weak one, turn to be a dictation, and this is not a recipe for peace. A proper recipe for peace is equality.

    You were among the very few intellectuals in Egypt who predicted the victory of Donald Trump. Do you think he will change the long-standing US policies on major issues and crises in the region?

    I was able to predict this unexpected victory because I lived in the US for years and I know the mentality of American people and how they think. They like to have change. They voted for Barack Obama, a democratic black man who was the polar opposite to George W. Bush. In history, they voted for Nixon who was a crook, then for Carter, who was a man of purity. Now, Trump is different than Obama. He is a white businessperson, extremely rich, and speaks the language of the common and blue collar people.  Americans were upset with so many issues, such as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the faltering economy as companies moved their factories overseas. Trump was able to ride the wave of American discontent and win the race.

    In order to understand his attitude, we should wait and see how he will confront all major issues in the Middle East. His cabinet members make me a bit anxious; his secretary of state Rex Tillerson, who was the CEO of EXXON and a well-known businessperson, is practical and a pragmatist. He is also known to have a good relationship with Russia, which represents a positive signal for peace in the world. Tillerson is a neutral person regarding foreign policy and does not have much experience.

    On the other hand, Trump’s nomination of David Friedman as ambassador to Israel is very much worrying, because he is a proponent of settlement construction in the occupied Palestinian territories, not just theoretically but also practically. He spent $58,000 of his own money as donations to build new settlements there. Also, Trump promises to move the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, which is a position not accepted by anybody. Even though congress has often suggested and demanded this move on several occasions, it never took place because it is against international law as it is an occupied territory and it has to be negotiated.

    Turning to Egypt, Trump has a good chemistry with President Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi, but from my experience the personal relations are only part of the equation. What matters is the situation on the ground and what is good or beneficial for each country, so let’s wait and see. When we think about the US presidential administration and policies towards the Middle East, we have to be practical and pragmatic about how the world goes and evaluate what we can do and what we cannot. If Trump has good relations with us, then let’s hope for the best.

    What does the British-Gulf reconciliation indicate and how would it affect Egypt?

    I do not think there is a direct relationship. Britain next March will start negotiating the Brexit, exiting from the European Union (EU) which is expected to take two years. Britain is the second largest economy in the EU, Germany is number one.  Britain’s exit is hard as it will be considered a foreign country. They will be required to have visas, pay customs, and so on. Britain is going to have a transition that is not as they expected it to be. They thought it was going to be a soft exit which would allow them to metaphorically “have their cake and eat it,” meaning that they would retain the common market while restricting free movement from the EU. The main reason which made 52% of British people decide to leave the EU is the free movement of workers, the idea that if you are Polish or Hungarian, you can set up a shop in England or apply for a job in any British factory. This made British people upset because they think Eastern Europeans are taking their jobs.

    When the British discovered that they were going to lose lots of money, they had two options: either to be independent or rely on the facilities provided to them through the EU were they do most of their business. Independently, they have to play on two main parts in the world, the US and the Gulf. I expect that British prime minister Theresa May and Trump will be very close to each other. May went to the Gulf to maximise business ties with them, and to soften up the negative effect of their exit from the EU and this has nothing to do with Egypt.

    How do you evaluate Egyptian-British relations and the position of the members of the House of Commons adopted toward the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt? Do you think they will change their attitude?

    I do not think that Britain will change its attitude towards the Muslim Brotherhood. It has been this way for a very long time. Change is probably going to take place in the US. I do expect that Trump will take a much harsher stance towards all sources of political Islam including the Brotherhood. The British don’t change their opinions often. They are very conservative, and they have certain rules and regulations. Britain is changing and there will be fundamental changes later. The clashes taking place between May, who is a conservative, and Labour deputy leader Jeremy Corbyn, who is liberal and the leader of the opposition, is an example. There is a breakdown in the UK. Scotland is edging to leave together with Northern Ireland in order to stay in the EU. On the other hand, Germany did not want Britain to leave; however, they are very strict in making any concessions to the British.

    Why are hard-line right-wing parties making gains in Europe? How will this affect the Middle East in general?

    This is a very important question because the most far-right parties in Europe have increased in popularity during the past period. You have the Alternative für Deutschland in Germany, the UK Independence Party (UKIP) in Britain, and the National Front led by Marine Le Pen in France. All these far-right parties achieved electoral success along with the migrant crisis and unstable economic growth.

    Syria’s civil war has generated the worst humanitarian catastrophe of our time. Half the country’s pre-war population with more than 8 million people have been killed or forced to flee their homes. About 4 million stayed in Syria and the rest went to Jordan, Turkey, Egypt, and Europe.

    The far-right claim that Europe is facing a Muslim invasion; on the other hand, negative opinions about Muslims are much more common among European citizens in general. When I was in Germany, I realised that all the posters on the streets were bearing anti-migrant messages. The fears that the flow of refugees will lead to more terrorism and will affect the economy are considerably more pervasive among UKIP supporters and the National Front in France. There is a hidden feeling of Islamophobia, and I do not know who is feeding this notion. However, such feelings hinder democracy by not accepting one of its fundamental principles which is equality before law. The problem is that such hateful feelings may lead to violence against minorities.

    Are there any European intentions for financial aid or investment in Egypt?

    We should depend on ourselves rather than aid. The EU is the largest economy in the world, followed by the US and China. However, I still remember in the past when Egypt used to give Britain aid and assistance. After the first world war, Britain owed Egypt over $100m and after the second world war, Egypt was a creditor to the British with $5bn, which they never paid back.

    It could be beneficial if we negotiate easier terms for constructions of power stations such as the Manzala and Beni Suef stations, which will provide us with 4.8 MW of electricity and will cost around EUR 3m.

    What we really need from Europe is training for our workforce because they are experts in all fields such as mechanics, carpentry, etc. The most important thing we need is to receive appropriate vocational training, which will give the required technical knowledge and hands-on experience in different jobs, and they can provide us with this intensively.

    What about Egypt-Russia relations in 2017? Will they remain the same or will there be a breakthrough, especially after so many agreements have been signed between the two?

    Our relationship with Russia is not bad, plus there is chemistry between Al-Sisi and Russian president Vladimir Putin. I am optimistic about the return of Russian tourists soon. Russia knows our weight in the region; however, I am against the nuclear power plant because of its very high cost and its high risk such as slow leakages of radioactive material, long emergency shutdowns, and meltdown due to overheating. Unfortunately, nuclear power plants have a long record of industrial incidents and is never far away from the next nuclear catastrophe. That’s why I am not with this project; however, they may help us in many other things such as solar production, tourism, and wheat.

  • Trump will be easier for Egypt to deal with in regards to terrorism: Nabil Fahmy

    Trump will be easier for Egypt to deal with in regards to terrorism: Nabil Fahmy

    The success of diplomacy depends on effective negotiation. In international relations, it is possible to solve problems and diffuse tensions through negotiation. In an interview with Daily News Egypt, former foreign minister Nabil Fahmy shed light on the United States presidential race, Egypt as a regional power in the Middle East, recent disputes with Saudi Arabia and Turkey, the ties between Egypt and Iran, the country’s role in the Middle East peace process, the current situation in Libya, and the latest updates on the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD).

    What are the strengths and weaknesses of the Arab League?  And how do you evaluate Russian president Vladimir Putin’s statement in which he urged the league to fight terrorism, along with the efforts exerted to achieve political stability in Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, and other areas infused with tension?

    The Arab League, like any other international organisation, is a reflection of the political will of its members.  There is no question that the Arab world is going through a very difficult and turbulent time. Consequently, the effectiveness of the Arab League has also been diminished to a great degree.  Hopefully, we will move towards a new Arab consensus focusing not on the past, but rather on the future. Then, ultimately, the Arab League could become more effective. It simply cannot become effective if its members continue to look at issues from a narrow perspective and focus on battling over who is responsible for the failure or success of past issues. My point is that the Arab states and the Arab League have to be proactive in tackling regional issues. The Arab League needs institutional reform to deal with modern day problems. Rather than being merely reactive to events and agendas of external powers, the Arab countries should depend more on themselves regionally and look forwards, not backwards.

    Essentially, what I believe president Putin meant was that because terrorism is rampant in the Arab world, the Arabs or their organisation the Arab League, should be more active and invested in dealing with terrorist activities through security measures.

    I believe he also meant that cultural and intellectual efforts are necessary to change the minds and hearts of people in the region so they do not cooperate with terrorists, over and above dealing with terrorists through security measures. This can only be done by Arabs themselves.

    How do you evaluate Egypt’s relations with other states? Have there been any significant shifts or developments?  What is the image of Egypt abroad after the 30 June Uprising?

    Both the 30 June Uprising and the subsequent political roadmap set on 3 July 2013 were based on the 25 January Revolution. Both revolutions happened because people wanted more freedom. With regards to foreign policy, after 3 July, we wanted to guarantee that when we make decisions we are not overly dependent on one country or a group of countries internationally or regionally. We wanted to make sure we are the owners of our decisions and that we have more than one choice.

    That shift still characterises Egyptian foreign policy. We also emphasised that we needed to reposition ourselves around our natural centre of gravity: the Arab world and Africa in particular. That’s why our foreign policy during the past few years is pivoting more towards the Arab world and the rest of Africa.

    Regarding our image, what happened in 2011 and 2013 were exceptional events. People around the world were not expecting the Egyptian people to express their political will. That’s why the reactions and events were not normal, particularly the reaction of the international community. Initially in 2011, there was exuberant support from the international community with far-reaching expectations of what could have been done. In 2013, there were reactions which were not completely rational, but half of the world was very supportive and the other half was cautious with some negativity as to what was happening. But we have gone beyond that and we have a fully elected parliament, president, and an established Constitution that should guide us in the future. It is time for Egypt to move on and become the intellectual pioneer it once was, especially with policymaking in terms of international relations and mostly in regional issues in the Middle East.

    You strongly rejected the statements made by US presidential candidate Donald Trump concerning Islam and Muslims. However, some argue that Trump’s statements regarding the Muslim Brotherhood show that there is some common ground between him and President Abdel Fattah Al-Sisi. Additionally, Trump’s adviser Walid Phares said that Trump’s position on the current leadership in Cairo was “very positive”. He believes the Brotherhood is a terrorist group and should be designated as such inside the US.  On the other hand, you mentioned that Hillary Clinton carefully chooses her words and is a “veteran politician”.  However, others point out that she voted for the war in Iraq, then became the face of foreign policy for an administration that first irresponsibly “ended” that war in such a way that paved the way for the rise of the Islamic State (IS). Could you clarify these viewpoints?

    It is important to clarify my comment related to what US Republican candidate Trump said about Muslims. He did not refer specifically to the Muslim Brotherhood, but to Muslims in general. That’s why I took offense to his comment. What his adviser then did was to further elaborate and explain Trump’s comment. I now know that he was in fact talking about violent people. Nevertheless, when you are in the public domain, you have to be careful with your words.

    On the other hand, what I said about Democratic candidate Clinton was not all positive. I said that she is a traditional politician and if you look at the political environment in the US today, the American constituency is actually quite angry with traditional politicians because they consider the decisions they make to be based on what is politically advantageous rather than on principles. This often leads to inconsistencies with regards to decision-making. I think Clinton is a much more astute professional, but she is very calculating. However, she did admit that she made a mistake [on Iraq]. There are positives and negatives on both sides.

    How do you expect US-Egyptian relations to develop after the elections? Who do you think will win the US presidential race?

    The international community is not completely comfortable with either choice. Some people assume that Trump will completely transform the American political system. I don’t think that’s an exaggeration, […] there will be significant changes. Others think that Clinton, with her experience, will do things the way they want in terms of foreign policy, which I doubt as well, considering her calculative nature.

    For US-Egyptian relations, the determining factor is not who will win the US presidential race, but rather the role Egypt plays in the Middle East. If Egypt continues to develop and energise its regional role, then the US administration, of whichever president, will deal with Egypt as a player in the region and they will look forwards, not backwards.

    I envisage that Trump will be more comforting in dealing with issues such as terrorism as far as it affects the US. At the same time, there are many other issues in the Middle East that Trump is much more of an isolationist on and will probably not engage the US in. However, the complexity of regional issues requires American support and activism. Issues like the Palestine-Israel conflict, other difficult conflicts in the Levant, terrorism, and dealing with nuclear proliferation cannot be dealt with without US support.

    It is very difficult to read Trump in the long-term because he is new to the political scene. On the other hand, we know Clinton’s inclination and what she does. It is easier to read her moves and decisions from one period to another. She will be led, to a great extent, by the American political establishment and institution and will be affected by traditional body politics in the American system. This has not always been favourable to the Arab countries. While with terrorism it may be easier to deal with Trump, there are numerous other issues, including the aforementioned, where his position is not clear. Thus, with regards to some of the issues, Clinton’s moves will be easier to predict even if they do not satisfy us—there is more predictability. The point here is who is more beneficial to Egypt, and this will be defined by what Egypt does, not who America elects.

    Regarding who will win, Trump has surprised us all by getting this far in the presidential race. Therefore, I cannot rule him out. There is a 6% difference in favour of Clinton, which reflects the degree of anger American people have for establishment politicians. However, I believe Clinton has a better chance of winning, but who knows—these elections have been full of surprises.

    Turning to the Egyptian-Saudi political dispute, Saudi Arabia accused Egypt of deviating from the Arab consensus regarding the Syrian issue by voting for the Russian draft proposal at the United Nations security council. Do you believe that it is a passing dispute or is our relationship with the Saudis going through a dark tunnel? Was Egypt right in its position regarding the Syrian issue?

    The media is exaggerating this issue. We are not in a dark tunnel. Yes, there are differences in opinion between Egypt and Saudi Arabia on how to manage the Syrian issue; however, there is no disagreement about the necessity to preserve the sovereignty of the Syrian state and trying to keep the country unified. There is, however, a difference in our views regarding tactics. This difference does not alarm me at all. A country which has a historically deep-rooted role in the Middle East, like Egypt, and a country as significant as Saudi Arabia should be able to manage differences in tactical approaches, as long as the difference does not affect strategic objectives. Our problem in the Arab world is that we tend to deny differences in opinion and when things become public, people exaggerate the differences. Differences in opinion between Egypt and Saudi Arabia are not new; they have existed for years. This relationship between Egypt and Saudi Arabia is too important for both sides to risk falling apart. The differences in opinions require quiet diplomacy between the leaders of both sides because the Arab world has more than enough problems than to allow this issue to fester.

    Egypt has the right to vote whichever way it wants on one resolution or another. I frankly do not accept the description that Saudi Arabia’s permanent representative to the United Nations in New York gave about the debacle. I find it completely inappropriate. I do not, however, believe that we can look at this in isolation; there have been a number of differences and complaints from both sides. There is a difference between Egypt and Saudi Arabia concerning how to manage the Syrian issue and we need to keep communication channels open.

    Nabil Fahmy
    Recently, Saudi oil company Aramco stated that they intend to cut petroleum exports to Egypt despite a five-year agreement between both countries. The Iraqi government showed its intention to provide Egypt with the needed oil and make up for the shortfall in the Egyptian market. How do you interpret that and what would be the consequences of such an agreement in relation to Saudi Arabia?

    I have been in foreign policy for almost 40 years. Even among Egypt’s best friends in the region, every once in a while, differences arise. You assume that with wise leadership in important countries, such differences do not become a frequent recurrence. It is out of the question that this debacle requires intense consultation between both sides and it should be a frank one. Again, I am not worried about the Egyptian-Saudi relations, provided that we talk to each other, but I do acknowledge that there are differences.

    In respect to other countries that want to provide us with support, we will appreciate that and this is a reflection of how important Egypt is to all of them. I have always suggested that even when our relations with our friends are excellent, let’s not become overly dependent on anyone or exaggerate agreements and be straightforward with each other.

    Iran and Egypt cut ties in the aftermath of the Islamic Revolution, given Iran’s opposition to Egypt and Israel signing the 1978 Camp David Accords, Cairo later hosting the deposed shah of Iran, and the Iranian government naming a street in Tehran after Khalid Islambouli, the man who assassinated former Egyptian president Anwar El-Sadat. Now, the Syrian crisis may be helping Iran and the Arab world leaders finally get closer—and perhaps even lead to their long sought-after reconciliation.

    I come from a professional background where diplomacy is an important communication tool between states. I always supported this idea even with regards to states that have or are in a conflict situation. The only condition is when the issue is legitimacy or recognition as there was for years between the Arabs and Israel. Diplomacy does not mean agreement. I have had very difficult meetings with counterparts and at the end we were still in disagreement; however, they were useful because they allowed each side to test and understand the other side.  The Iranian side has become more aggressive and they have much wider reach now than they did in the past; nevertheless, Iran is an important country in the region, so I urge them to provide some confidence-building measures, particularly to their neighbour states in the Arab Gulf area. In terms of Egypt-Iran relations, I can see areas of possible progress. At the same time, without any serious attempt by Iran to engage its Arab Gulf neighbours in a constructive sense, I do not expect this relationship to significantly change. This is because the security of the Arab Gulf states is a strategic interest.

    Moving to Palestinian affairs: it was announced by the Russian deputy foreign minister that Moscow is in contact with Israel and Palestine, negotiating on the details of the potential meeting between Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas in Moscow. What would be the role of Egypt in such a meeting?

    I do not believe that the present prime minister of Israel honestly believes in a two-state solution, so I do not see any basis for negotiations that may lead to a real result until Israel changes its stance. I am not optimistic about completing the negotiation in Moscow or in Paris or anywhere else without a prior agreement of a certain set of parameters.

    My suggestion is that wherever the negotiations will be held, we should agree before we start that the two sides, Palestine and Israel, want to reach an agreement that leads to two states based on the 1967 reality. Secondly, the negotiations should be done intensely and directly under the host of Russia, France, or Egypt, or a sum composition of the three and should have a timeframe, let’s assume 8-10 months, to occur. We were negotiating nearly half of the past 70 years without any progress. Thirdly, while negotiations are taking place, I suggest the security cooperation between Palestine and Israel continues, but Israel’s settlement activity has to completely stop. Fourthly, to give international recognition to these efforts, I suggest that all these points be put in a very simple short security council resolution announcing the negotiations. This means that you have preserved the two-state solution, provided a timeframe, created confidence-building measures, and given the international community’s blessing to the process. I am not optimistic about negotiating with the present Israeli government. Egypt will be supportive of the Palestinian cause and the two-state solution whenever and wherever the negotiation will take place.

    Nabil Fahmy

    Nearly four and half years after Libya’s leader Muammar Gaddafi was captured and killed by rebel forces during the civil war in 2011, Libya remains bitterly divided, making the country a prime breeding ground for terrorism. What’s your viewpoint on the situation in Libya?

    The situation in Libya is extremely dangerous, catastrophic in fact. In many respects, Libya is not a cohesive state; no one really knows who the authority is or who the players are. Egypt, of course, deals with General Haftar and the government of Serag at the same time. On the ground, those in control of the east are different from the south and west, so it is a constantly changing landscape. The first step towards moving Libya forward is to ensure the exercise of authority. To do that, one has to limit the flow of illegitimate weapons, limit money flows to extremists, and the spread of extremists across borders. My suggestion is that the United Nations, the Arab League, and the African Union create a joint force not to manage Libya, but to secure the borders between Libya, Tunisia, Algeria, Sub-Saharan Africa, and Egypt. These forces would only allow legitimate goods, services, and weapons to enter and leave the Libyan territory. This would help the authority in Libya to gain incrementally more control over the territory, and would then lead to a more serious engagement between those in the east and west to put together a coalition government.

    What is your assessment of Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and his foreign policy with Egypt and other countries in the region?

    President Erdoğan’s relations with Egypt are very cold because he believes that he has the right to enunciate what is right and wrong in Egyptian affairs. The reason he does this is that what happened in Egypt burst his bubble, so to speak. He was selling Turkey firstly as a bridge between the east and the rest of the world, then as a bridge between the world and moderate Islam, as he calls it. He couldn’t lead the Arab world so his argument turned out to be: “I will lead the Islamic world”. In other words, for him it was important to have political Islam dominate in the Arab world; otherwise, he does not have influence since Turkey is not an Arab country. Until he changes his basic point of departure—that he has the right to affect policy in our country—relations with the present Turkish government will not get any better. Besides that, Erdoğan and his party’s relations with Egypt are normal and acceptable; we do not have any fundamental problems with them. Egypt does not comment on domestic affairs in Turkey nor do we claim that we have the right to affect their policies. There should be confidence-building measures for any dialogue that takes place, whether between Iran and Saudi Arabia, or between Egypt and Turkey, that neither will interfere in the domestic affairs of one other.

    Why is it believed that foreign intervention in Arab affairs is one of the major reasons for the current crisis?

    I am not a fan of conspiracy theories. For me, the problems in the Middle East are caused by two main reasons. The first one I call managing change deficit: Arabs have a tendency to look at change as a threat or try to deny change, even though it is a natural consequence. Trying to deny what’s happening, especially when you have a demographic in which more than 56% of the population is below 25 years of age, combined with an extremely rapid technological revolution in communication, creates static governments rather than flexible ones. They end up being less efficient and always reactive, rather than proactive.

    Secondly, for generations, almost all of the Arab countries have tended to depend on foreign powers for their national security, whether as political allies or military support. As a result, governments have been weak in their own domestic capacity with regards to national security issues. This is what is called national security deficit. When you have a national security deficit, other regional players, such as Iran, Israel, and Turkey, suddenly become more adventurous because they know you cannot compete with them in terms of national security capacity and you also bring those countries from beyond the region that you also depend on into the regional playing field. This makes everything more complicated. The Syrian situation is a case of that point.

    As a result, you have the whole region, and even beyond, trying to define identity, and international agendas are super-imposed on regional agendas which are consequently imposed on domestic agendas.  At the most recent meeting in Lausanne regarding the Syrian issue, the members attending were the US, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, and Jordan. The Syrians were not present. We are talking about an issue in which the owners of the problem are not there; this is only one example. If you depend on all these people and you have all of these imbalances, it is natural, but not justified, that there will be interference. We need to be a catalyst for change ourselves and preserve our own national security. However, this will take time. I am not calling for isolation, but serious projection towards the future, more dependence on ourselves, and regional cooperation with each other.

    Meanwhile, we are facing many other challenges that are threatening our country’s stability, such as the GERD.

    The GERD is important for Ethiopia because of its huge potential in hydropower production. However, we have very little knowledge of the possibly disastrous environmental and economic consequences and of course water management consequences, which is of paramount importance to Egypt since it has no other significant water resources.

    French firms are currently conducting two studies regarding the possible impacts of the dam. While Egypt, Ethiopia, and Sudan are waiting for the results from the studies, the dam will operate and start its first filling process in 2017, regardless of the reports’ recommendations. The question is what will we do if the studies show significant impact on the countries downstream? Will we request that Ethiopia demolish the dam? Will we be able to modify the structure of an existing dam? Or is Ethiopia just wasting time on purpose? Actually, I am worried about this particular issue, because I have not seen any concrete messages from Ethiopia regarding water management principles, and there should be a clear vision for this crucial issue.

  • Reaching an independent media: an interview with Hussein Amin

    Reaching an independent media: an interview with Hussein Amin

    The press and the media in Egypt have come under widespread scrutiny in recent times, against a backdrop of press institutions increasingly coming under attack.  More and more, media professionals have been accused of not conveying news and information to the public in a professional manner, and of not publishing accurate, credible opinions.

    These criticisms have been levelled equally by the state, and by citizens and observer groups, albeit for very different reasons. Meanwhile, calls abound for a unified regulatory and legal framework to meet international standards of journalistic practice.

    Hussein Amin, a professor of Journalism and Mass Communication and director of the Kamal Adham Centre for Television and Digital Journalism at the American University in Cairo, highlights the most pertinent issues regarding the media environment in Egypt and the current state of the Egyptian political arena.

    What is your evaluation of the national press and its coverage?  Are they objective, credible or just following the government agenda?

    I cannot assess the Egyptian press or the trends of the press as a whole.  The Egyptian press is very diverse, whereby one can find state/governmental media, partisan/opposition media, and independent and private media.

    However, since Egypt is a developing nation, it operates under an authoritarian press system, as do many countries in the developing world. This system has several prescriptions and protocols when informing citizens or broadcasting a president’s agenda.  When we talk about the authoritarian media system, it means working in a semi-free condition.  It is completely different from working in a libertarian media system which is a free environment based on the frame of reference that has long-since been established and recognised in the profession.

    Egypt is currently surrounded by many Arab nations in peril following the Arab Spring. Libya, Syria, Iraq and Yemen are going through civil wars or experiencing political unrest, as well as facing chaos and bias in the media. Certain limitations should be enforced when it comes to issues related to national security. There is continued debate by media scholars and journalists about restrictions on the press in Egypt.

    Egypt’s State Information Service released a statement to journalists:Media coverage has steered away from objectivity and neutrality” which has led to “a distorted image that is very far from the facts.” What is your opinion on this statement?

    First, allow me to disagree that a network like Al Jazeera may distort the picture or image of Egypt.  It never happened and will not happen.  We may consider it an opinion as they think that our media is not objective.  There is no such thing as 100% objectivity or neutrality. There is an obvious point I would like to add. In any times of crises and since one main function of the media is to inform and there is one popular communication  theory which is agenda setting, in any country passing through a transitional stage, its press will experience some restrictions.

    Many people say that nowadays, the state of the media is similar to that of the Mubarak era when there was no free press. What is your opinion?

    I will admit that former president Hosni Mubarak did many things wrong, that is why there was a revolution. But let me remind you that he is the man who introduced satellite broadcasting to Egypt. NileSat was born in 1998, Al Jazeera began in 1996 and joined Nile Sat which Mubarak created in the first place. In 2003, Mubarak was the one who called for free internet usage and a diverse platform.  At the time, many officials were calling for a single internet provider for the entire country, but Mubarak declined this monopoly over internet usage.

    The authoritarian press system has been applied in the majority of developing nations. We cannot blame those working in the press; they are simply following the system.  These countries channel their media to cover events or functions. They are considered transitional democracies and their media has not yet achieved the liberty that many more developed countries possess.

    However, following the terrorist attack in Brussels and Paris, European media outlets are looking into specific limited censoring of the media. Governments are also calling for emergency laws and measures regarding the media.  This does not mean that their media will function like ours, but terrorism has become a variable that interferes with freedom of expression.

    Do you believe the foreign media is misrepresenting Egypt, and how?

    The issue of negative portrayal is not limited to Egypt.  Western media outlets have a strong and powerful influence over other global media.  There is distinctive lack of pan-Arab media or agencies, similarly with African countries, that are powerful or effective enough to compete with Western media or to challenge their news agencies. Western media is now considered the global media. This misperception is influencing the entire world.  Their media is growing into more cultural industries and we do not see ourselves in this global culture yet.  Many Western scholars addressed these issues in their writing.

    Negative images of the Middle East and its peoples are prolific in Western media.  This has never been questioned or challenged from our side.  Recently, the internet has enabled new levels of interactivity by which we can debate and exchange our views with Western individuals and friends.

    Egypt is famous across the Arab world for its cultural products, TV shows, films and music. When companies such as CNN, America Online and Time Warner merged together to create a global platform, they become very powerful.  Conversely, the tools we started using 20 years ago, such as Nile TV, are now suffering tremendously and need to be restructured to be able to deliver globally.

    To counter this, we need consolidate our news agencies and merge Arab transnational and international networks, not to compete and win global audiences from Western networks, but to compete reasonably by delivering real messages to the rest of the world.  Arab people have a legacy of wonderful history, a strong language, traditions, and values in addition to an incredible market.  If the 22 Arab nations come together—not as governments, but as businesses, NGOs, and civil societies—this will change the balance.

    What are the key elements of a free press in a democratic society?

    In a democratic society, the press must inform, educate and entertain with no restrictions.  Censorship should not exist, but regulations do so the media can grow and enhance the growth of the society.  If the press is only allowed function in a restricted environment, the progress of any society is limited and the cultural growth is capped.  Almost all constitutions have articles about freedom of expression, freedom of the press, and press regulators.  The struggle for a free press and freedom of expression as well as national security will forever be an ongoing struggle.

    What changes need to be made to ensure that the Press Syndicate can, in the future, operate free of government control?

    In the new National Media Council, there is an immediate need for a media syndicate, but it should be independent.  The Press Syndicate is, to some extent, independent but its affiliation with the government is due to our authoritarian media system.  We are calling for fewer restrictions on the syndicate by the government.  In Egypt, which is transitioning to become a democratic state, we are seeing new media dynamics with the rise of online outlets and social media being used as a viable source.  A new syndicate needs to be instated for the new media, bloggers for example. More platforms mean greater development, less monopoly of the press, and better services for journalists.

    How are newspapers in Europe and the US different in their approaches to reporting about politics, compared to Egyptian ones?

    In Europe, they have different media systems. For example, countries like Denmark, Sweden and Norway have a social responsibility media system which it is different than the libertarian system applied elsewhere in Europe and the United States.

    When you go into particulars, the press is mainly affiliated with the centre, and some tend to the left-wing and others to the right.  Everybody has a different view regarding a particular issue, so outlets, as a whole, cover political news based on this broad range of ideology.  This results in a big pool of information which is well rounded and ready for consumption.

    Their media outlets can be private, independent, pro-government, critical of the government, or influenced by the army or the church.  In this sense, you have a wealth of information because there is a history of media reporting and competition to deliver the best product to the consumer. The immediacy of the information happens in a blink, you do not have to ask for it as it is already there.  In our country, people are trying their best to battle restrictions, and poor performance resulting in a product that is not revealing the best information. Accordingly, Egyptian reporting is difficult to consume.

    As a professor of Journalism and Mass Communication, what is your evaluation of the level of professionalism of some TV presenters?

    I do not have to be a professor of mass communication to make a judgment; it is very obvious and apparent.  This multiplicity of channels came about very quickly in absence of any regulator. You would not see this kind of performance in the United States or in Europe.  Although, they are libertarians, enjoying their freedom and claiming it, their presenters cannot commit such violations or else they will be penalised and sued.

    There is an expression: you cannot scream “fire” in a movie theatre.  I hope that when we create a regulatory body, there will be codes to prevent such violations and make our presenters perform in accordance with the standards of their profession.

    Is the State Information Service’s (SIS) programme to address foreign media coverage of Egypt effective?

    Of course it is not effective enough. This agency has a relatively good reputation and history but their budget is not sufficient for their programme. I think Egypt’s soft powers, public diplomacy and cultural diplomacy need the SIS to act together with proper financing to be able to create events and line up media tools which will encourage Egyptians abroad to share positive things about Egypt with others.  This can be achieved by activating the Cairo Press Club to communicate with foreign correspondents.

    Reports of torture and brutality by Egyptian security forces have escalated in recent months, provoking debates in several countries in Europe about how to deal with Egypt, such as the European Parliament recommendation pertaining to the case of Giulio Regeni. What is your opinion of these accusations of violations?

    Concerning the case of Regeni, there should be critical investigation to study the motive behind this incident.  This investigation should be shared with the world.  Such incidents will affect all foreigners living in Egypt. The European Parliament has the right to do what they want, but we also have the right to respond and carefully refute everything stated.  But first we should look, examine and answer any accusations.

    Human rights are violated everywhere in the world. I am not trying to compare and contrast, but assuming there are violations, is this justifiable or not? There are times, in any nation, when stability is lacking, when there are threats to everyone, when people couldn’t leave our homes due to risk of violence.

    Normally, in such situations, security forces suffer and the human rights take a backseat.  I am not justifying violence, but before taking a side, we have to look at the bigger picture. Firstly, we have to call for more interaction and empathy regarding our security forces.  Secondly, we have to think about our position as the oldest country in the world, where one third of the world’s monuments are located, and the tourists who come to visit us.  Our status has been severely damaged by acts of terror.

    Accordingly, law enforcement should be supported to prevent terrorism. In such a fast-changing environment, the role of the security forces is to keep foreigners in our country safe and secure.  If I were a decision maker, I would take more severe measures to try to prevent anyone from harming Egypt.  People who criticise will only understand if they walk a day in a leader’s shoes.

    What is your opinion of the Red Sea islands’ transfer of sovereignty to Saudi Arabia? 

    I think that the Egyptian media in general did not handle the matter professionally nor approach it neutrally. The cabinet announcing the islands’ transfer of sovereignty to Saudi Arabia came as a surprise to most Egyptians. The media did not take into account that Egypt’s long-standing guardianship of the islands created a misperception among Egyptians that Egypt owns the two islands and gifted them to Saudi Arabia. If the media had introduced the matter to the public before the transfer, the mass confusion that followed the announcement and triggered demonstrations would not have been as issue. As we all know, the main function of the media is to inform and educate. This did not happen in this case.

  • Tourists’ security and safety is most important factor in any stable tourism industry, says JWT Egypt CEO

    Tourists’ security and safety is most important factor in any stable tourism industry, says JWT Egypt CEO

    The security and safety of tourists is the most important factor in any stable tourism industry. In November, several countries issued warnings against travelling to Egypt following the Russian plane crash in October 2015. The government has been trying to convince these countries, including Russia and the UK, to cancel such warnings after security measures were enhanced at Egyptian airports.

    Germany, one of the main markets for Egypt’s tourism industry, updated its travel advice following the Hurghada attack to recommend that its citizens do not visit the resort town. The number of tourists visiting Egypt in November 2015 dropped by 37.8% compared to the same month in 2014, according to Egypt’s Central Agency for Public Mobilisation and Statistics (CAPMAS).

    In an interview at J. Walter Thompson, the agency recently appointed to take charge of promoting tourism in Egypt and to show the world how Egypt’s safety measures are among the best in the world, Egypt CEO and Chief Strategy Officer MENA Amal El Masri discussed major incidents. They represent a setback to Egypt’s efforts to save its tourism industry in 2016. El-Masri has led the strategy on several communication projects assigned by the GOE, including the Egypt Economic Development Conference (EEDC) and Egypt Tourism. During her appointment, the agency has grown to become the leading agency in Egypt and the most creatively awarded.

    What were the consequences of Russian plane crash on the tourism industry in Egypt and what is the agency’s main challenge after this incident?

    Since tourism is vulnerable, it is always subject to any unexpected change or “crisis”. A pre-event agenda to be able to face the crisis is vital since we can take an immediate view of the situation and make accurate decisions. Our biggest challenge is the negative view of safety and security in Egypt and the region as a whole. I believe that changing this negative perception must be a priority at this stage since the current view of the situation in Egypt is not good, so we must work on that.

    What was the outcome of the World Travel Market in London in November?

    Unfortunately, the advertising campaign, which we were planning to start at the London tourism exhibition on 1 November, was cancelled due to the Russian plane crash. Even so, we did participate in the international forum with other promotional procedures such as public relations and trade activities.  This exhibition is the most prominent of the international tourism industry and international forums.   This exhibition is a platform to connect with various visitors within tourism and the international travel industry, in addition to an opportunity to meet tourism bodies and travel agencies, and contract deals with them.

    JWT is conducting different market and audience research to examine tourists’ demographic profiles, purpose of travel, and destination choice related characteristics, affected factors, decision-making, attitudes to and satisfaction with travel and destination choice. Social media influences several components of tourists’ behaviour such as awareness, information acquisition, opinions, and attitudes.

    In a time when social media is evolving very quickly, what are your creative and innovative ideas?  How do you use and leverage the right tools to reach a western audience for example?

    The agency is focusing on integrated marketing communication through different channels such as digital marketing, social media, and public relations. Meanwhile, the most-used technique is strategic public relations, since it has greater credibility than other marketing tools. Images are formed and created by public relations through print media, word of mouth, and the stance of our target audience. After the Russian plane crash, most of our planned activities and campaigns for the winter season were halted, even the paid ones. We worked on public relations from just 1 November until the end of January 2016. The agency is trying to approach our Arab neighbours since they are less affected by the unstable climate in Egypt.

    JWT team keeps a close eye on social media and uses a new technique, “sentiments towards Egypt”, to measure emotional responses such as opinions, feelings, satisfaction ratings, the quality of shares, comments, re-tweets, replies, ratings, conversations, as well as the quality of engagement over time. This will help us determine if our social and content marketing initiatives are driving the actions that we planned for, while also giving us hard cues for adapting our strategy, in the event that our touch points are not resonating with our target tourist.

    The agency offices are located globally and are working 24 hours a day to monitor social media and conduct different types of audience research. They use online analytics to obtain details to plan better approaches based on demographics and viours.

    Western media reported “the Sinai crash shattered Egypt’s tourism dream”.  What is your feedback concerning the international media reports on Egypt?

    The plane crash was damaging but international media worked to amplify that damage. Egyptian tourism has survived several significant setbacks in the past. I believe we should stay flexible during these times to handle the situation and to regain traction.

    The only way to change the international perception is a collective contribution of entities such as media, social media, governments, foreign affairs advisors, airlines, etc to develop an aligned plan for handling such incidents.

    What about the meeting with organisers of the world largest travel agencies, planned before the Russian plane incident?

    This month, we hosted top representatives of travel trade to see how to develop a better image of Egyptian touristic destinations.

    In February, we resumed our campaign in Europe, except for the UK and Russia, since flights to Egypt are halted there. We are concentrating on other countries such as Germany, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Czech Republic.

    What is the government’s role and did you ask them for any kind of contribution to assist the agency in its endeavours?

    Security should be tangible, especially by tourists. This certainly reflects on the overall security of the country and, thus should take the highest priority in the governmental agenda. The government should endeavour to make tourists feel genuinely safe. The agency is working closely with the Ministry of Tourism and coordinating with the Egyptian Tourism Authority, regarding their efforts to restore security in Egypt as a major step to revive tourism.

    What are your expectations for the future of tourism in Egypt? Are there any plans to raise prices in the tourism market, especially as one third of world’s monuments are located here?

    Until things calm down, we cannot predict the future of tourism here and in the region as a whole. I believe that now is not the right time to raise prices or fees. We are planning to focus on the market to bring us the highest volume represented in the number of tourists visiting Egypt in a short period of time.

    We are also considering our competition in the region such as Turkey and Dubai since they attract a huge number of tourists. For historical tourism, Egypt has no competition owing to its unique historical tourism but Turkey still has a variety of historical sites and seaside resorts. However, we are working on targeting premium travellers to raise our value in the future.