06 ISSUE I
DECEMBER 2024
DECEMBER 2024
You can bomb us but don’t ask us to love you
Al Jazeera’s reputation as a global TV news channel was forged in its coverage of the American invasion and
occupation of Iraq.
occupation of Iraq.
By Rebecca Snyder
Al Jazeera first broadcast in Arabic on November 1, 1996, from Doha, Qatar. It was the first 24-hour TV news channel in the Arab world not owned by any government, a region largely dominated by censorship and state-run media acting as propaganda arms. Al Jazeera Arabic quickly gained a reputation for offering a critical perspective on the media representation of the Arab world. The network and its journalists saw their role as promoting debate and awakening the “rigid societies” of the region.
When the US invaded Iraq in March 2003, Al Jazeera was primed to report on the invasion and subsequent occupation. From the outset, the network committed to showing the reality of the war on the ground and taking a critical stance on US military presence. The Iraq War marked the first time a Middle Eastern conflict was broadcast live into people's homes, an unprecedented development that played a crucial role in shaping regional opinion about the role of the US military in the region.
Arab audiences did not buy the US government’s logic for the invasion. “I don’t want this freedom. I don’t want this democracy,” Iraqis tell Al Jazeera journalists when interviewed. To counter this perception and coverage, the US military set up a media center at Central Command (Centcom), its regional headquarters in the Middle East, which happens to be down the road from Al Jazeera’s headquarters. The US army corralled European and American journalists there, feeding them stories. If they wanted to venture into Iraq, they had to “embed” with US military units.
The Egyptian-American filmmaker Jehane Noujaim was filming a documentary about Al Jazeera at the time. Noujaim sets up her cameras in Centcom. She quickly realized how interwoven US media is with the US political and military agenda. The result is “Control Room,” which first came out in 2004.
Even twenty years later, the media value of “Control Room” and Al Jazeera is obvious. While Western media often portrayed Iraqis and others from the MENA region as helpless victims of conflict, Al Jazeera presented Arabs as informed political actors with critiques of American imperialism. This approach faced significant pushback, with then-US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld calling the network “propagandists” and President George W. Bush labeling it “the mouthpiece of Osama bin Laden” (Rumsfeld claimed to have intelligence that Iraq had caused 9/11 and possessed weapons of mass destruction. Neither claim was proven to be factual at the time.). These defensive attempts to discredit Al Jazeera highlighted a media system deeply aligned with the American agenda and uncomfortable with any challenge to its vision of global politics, particularly in the Middle East.
“Control Room” showed images of people gathered to watch Al Jazeera's ongoing war coverage in cafes and in their houses. By capturing these discussions and debates, the film illustrated the frustration many Iraqis and other Arabs felt over American claims of bringing freedom and democracy to Iraq. As an Al Jazeera producer, Hassan Ibrahim told Noujaim, “You can bomb us, but don’t ask us to love you as well.”
However, the bulk of the film is taken up by debates among journalists and US military press officers – all stationed at Centcom – and in Al Jazeera’s studios about the role of the press, specifically the media coverage of the Iraq War. Through interviews with Al Jazeera correspondents, US press officers, and other figures within Centcom, Noujaim reveals the complex dynamics between those covering and those involved in managing the press strategy of the occupation. It becomes clear that most Western media news outlets repeat the US military’s version of events. The American journalists stationed at Centcom portrayed the US as a benevolent savior, expecting Iraqis to be grateful.
US military press officer Lieutenant Josh Rushing, who is one of the main characters, sharply criticized Al Jazeera for focusing on American military actions and Iraqi casualties, arguing that the network failed to show both sides of the conflict. At the same time, he acknowledged Al Jazeera's influence, claiming that the Muslim world was unaware of Saddam Hussein’s threatening nature because the network wasn't reporting on it.
However, as the film progressed, Rushing’s perspective shifted. At first, he likens Al Jazeera to the right-wing American TV news network Fox News, claiming both selectively present information to serve their respective agendas. Later, Lieutenant Rushing realized that, as an American soldier, his view of the atrocities of the war had been hypocritical. He had previously criticized Al Jazeera for broadcasting images of captured and killed American soldiers, leading to widespread condemnation and pressure for the network to withdraw the footage. In a critical moment of the film, Rushing reflects on why he had not been equally upset by images of dead Iraqis, recognizing that American war coverage was essentially propaganda designed to devalue Iraqi lives.
This realization highlighted what could happen if Americans were exposed to alternative perspectives. Media and imagery, Rushing came to understand, can impose hierarchies of worth and value in our minds. Western media has cultivated an “us versus them” mentality, limiting Americans’ ability to engage meaningfully with the rest of the world. When the language of moral superiority—such as the idea of bringing “freedom and democracy”—dominates the media narrative, it restricts Americans from critically assessing US military power or joining solidarity networks that challenge oppressive power systems.
One of the criticisms of Al Jazeera (even later when it began to broadcast in English) is that its coverage isn’t objective. “Control Room” highlights the impossibility of true objectivity and unbiased coverage of news. When a UK reporter criticized an Al Jazeera producer for lacking objectivity, she responded: “Are any US journalists objective about this war?” American journalists, she pointed out, were largely drawing their information from Centcom. Al Jazeera faced the most criticism for its supposed lack of objectivity, primarily because it was not overtly pro-war or pro-America. The Al Jazeera producer concluded that if true neutrality existed in war coverage, any network presenting information—regardless of whose side it favored—would be praised, rather than condemned, for not serving a specific agenda.
Similarly, the film demonstrated how military propaganda is spread when there is a system of embedded journalism. It is easy for the military to control the media and promote propaganda when journalists receive tailored information from within a military base-run media center or are only allowed in a war zone supervised by American military personnel.
What I appreciated most about Noujaim’s documentary style was her use of the camera as a passive observer or the idea of the fly-on-the-wall observer. She does not interject with commentary or pointed questioning; instead, she simply films conversations and debates among journalists and military personnel. As viewers, we are shown a perspective of an event or interaction and left to interpret it ourselves. Noujaim selectively presents what she believes serves the film’s broader agenda—illustrating how the bias of embedded journalism hinders Americans’ ability to engage with the world. As an American viewer, this approach made me more aware of how US media pushes agendas, justifies violence, and excludes alternative voices. The impact of this realization was heightened by her seemingly casual filming style, which made the critique feel more subtle yet powerful.
Rebecca Snyder is completing an MA in International Affairs at The New School.