Taped Differences/
18
the relationship as continuing where it counts – out in the field where the day-to-day
concerns of newsgathering outweigh executive diplomacy. “It is beneficial to both sides,
as with any affiliate relations,” he says. “We can’t be everywhere at all times. That’s why
it’s always good to have an affiliate.”
47
In fact, Fenton says, the relationship clearly has
benefitted both organizations. First Al-Jazeera provided CNN with feeds when the
Taliban held control of Kabul and Kandahar. Later, when the Northern Alliance overtook
those cities, “Jazeera left Afghanistan for security reasons. The Arabs were not looked
upon with favor by the Northern Alliance, so they relied on us for material and live
shots.”
48
Discussion and Conclusions
By analyzing contexts and assumptions of risks, this study finds that the
contrasting decisions on the bin Laden tape by Al-Jazeera and CNN were in line with the
political, economic, and professional interests of both news organizations. Rather than
reflecting contrasting purposes as transnational media players, the choices reveal the very
different positions of security and status between the networks. One is the common
symbol of Western corporate media influence. The other ranks as a candidate still relying
on domestic political favor to become the first Arab organization to achieve, in its own
words, professional respect as an autonomous media network on a transnational level.
The fact that both networks have maintained the affiliation under a period of
duress suggests that both recognize their differences are situational. Should the two
networks find themselves in direct competition, however, assumptions – and the game
47
Fenton, 2002.
48
Ibid.
Convention