Arabicnews.com carried three stories this week from two different countries, but with one central theme - the lack of intellectual freedom in Arab lands. In Saudi Arabia, two columnists who proposed reform in the country suddenly found their work unpublishable; and in Syria, press freedoms for one newspaper lasted no more than one hour.
Hussein Shabakshi, a Saudi Arabian journalist, last week received notification from the newspaper that carried his weekly column, Okaz, that he can no longer write for the paper. The order, Arabicnews.com reports, came from the Saudi Ministry of Information. Shabakshi told the Arabic news website that “he thinks that the reason is the last article, in which he talked about his vision for the country.... of the day when the Saudis cast their votes and discuss human rights, [and a] woman's driving a car.”
A writer described as “reformer Islamist” by Arabicnews.com and a former judge, Abdul Aziz al-Qassem, was also prevented from seeing his views in print in a different Saudi paper. The mufti Abdul Aziz Abdullah al-Sheikh banned the publication of an interview with the writer, after he determined the views expressed therein to constitute “criticism of the Wahabbis.”
Meanwhile, just last week, much of the Arabic media was filled with fawning descriptions of measures implemented the Bashar al-Assad regime that were to have increased media freedoms and given Syrians “unimpeded access to all media and to various opinions.” (See http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=47123) For one newspaper, such new-found freedom was extremely short-lived.
As reported by Arabicnews.com, the “cynical” weekly al-Doumari was shut down on Monday evening at 10:00pm. The Syrian Ministry of Information had issued a permit for publication just one hour earlier.
The newspaper’s editors criticized the closure, Arabicnews reports, calling it “a violation of the law and in contradiction of the calls for reforms, which were behind the [staff] enthusiasm to complete this issue.” The recent issue of al-Doumari, the website notes, “dealt with the issue of reforming the Syrian media.” An unidentified “human rights society in Syria” decried the “continued monopoly of the mass media and the refusal to accept the views of others.”
Hussein Shabakshi, a Saudi Arabian journalist, last week received notification from the newspaper that carried his weekly column, Okaz, that he can no longer write for the paper. The order, Arabicnews.com reports, came from the Saudi Ministry of Information. Shabakshi told the Arabic news website that “he thinks that the reason is the last article, in which he talked about his vision for the country.... of the day when the Saudis cast their votes and discuss human rights, [and a] woman's driving a car.”
A writer described as “reformer Islamist” by Arabicnews.com and a former judge, Abdul Aziz al-Qassem, was also prevented from seeing his views in print in a different Saudi paper. The mufti Abdul Aziz Abdullah al-Sheikh banned the publication of an interview with the writer, after he determined the views expressed therein to constitute “criticism of the Wahabbis.”
Meanwhile, just last week, much of the Arabic media was filled with fawning descriptions of measures implemented the Bashar al-Assad regime that were to have increased media freedoms and given Syrians “unimpeded access to all media and to various opinions.” (See http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=47123) For one newspaper, such new-found freedom was extremely short-lived.
As reported by Arabicnews.com, the “cynical” weekly al-Doumari was shut down on Monday evening at 10:00pm. The Syrian Ministry of Information had issued a permit for publication just one hour earlier.
The newspaper’s editors criticized the closure, Arabicnews reports, calling it “a violation of the law and in contradiction of the calls for reforms, which were behind the [staff] enthusiasm to complete this issue.” The recent issue of al-Doumari, the website notes, “dealt with the issue of reforming the Syrian media.” An unidentified “human rights society in Syria” decried the “continued monopoly of the mass media and the refusal to accept the views of others.”