Daily Star Stops Publishing

As long-time readers know, I am highly critical of the Daily Star, Lebanon's English-language daily newspaper.

The Star never seemed interested in addressing any of the major problems it faced. The management would come up with a quick-fix solution, which did nothing to solve any problems, and generally added more burden to the troubled paper.

It is with sadness, however, that I watch the Daily Star's troubles plunge it into bankruptcy and a cessation of publishing.

Despite its flaws, the Star provided a needed service. The dire need for a competent English-language paper was the main reason I so criticized the Star. No other Lebanese publication provides nearly as much to English-language audiences.

NOW Lebanon, Naharnet, and Ya Libnan are not newspapers.

NOW Lebanon does little reporting, and rarely follows up on a story. It does not break news (an exclusive interview does not count as breaking news). There is no diversity in the opinions found in NOW's pages, and there is far less content than that provided in the Star. Contrarily, Michael Young did a phenomenal job editing the Daily Star's opinions page. Diverse opinions were ubiquitous, and interesting articles originally published in other publications found their way to Lebanese audiences.

NOW provides interesting analysis long after an event occurs, but rarely has reporters covering beats and reporting from scenes of importance. Almost all of their stories can be written from the safe confines of an office, and are thus more analytical than journalistic.

NOW Extra provides a unique service, but is not comparable to the Daily Star's culture page, which regularly provided useful information and commentary.

NOW does not want to be a newspaper. It does not profit from its publication, and is arguing on behalf of a specific agenda, as noted by the "AGENDA" heading under which many articles appear on the main page.

NOW could be much better than it is, but it does not want to be a newspaper, and definitely not a "paper of record."

Naharnet provides a newswire service on events, but like all wire services, leaves readers with more questions about what happened and why. There is no analysis.

Ya Libnan survives by pilfering newspapers, magazines, and blogs of their content and repackaging it. It depends on the activities of other publications.

I'm sad to see you go, Daily Star. :(

Arabs and Israel

Robert Kaplan has an interesting article about Israel, Gaza, and Iran in the Atlantic. He argues:

Israel won its audacious military reputation during the age of Arab state armies. Because Arabs never believed in their own secular states, their armies were never very good in the first place, and thus Israel had no trouble impressing the world in its wars against them. But at the sub-state level of movements like Hamas or Hezbollah, the Arabs very much believe in their cause, and thus Israel has a real challenge on its hands.

He provocatively contends:

Iran has built its dominion on a combination of anti-western ideas and the dynamic wiliness of its intelligence operations (which, in turn, are a reflection of a civilization more developed and urbanized than that of the Arabs). Iran’s message of anti-Semitism and hatred toward the United States plays well across sectarian lines in the Sunni Arab world, which identifies its own fatigued, uninspiring, and detested rulers with the side of the U.S. and Israel. Sunni Arabs hate their own rulers, but despairing of changing their own lot, they channel that hatred toward us: thus the potency of the Iranian message. A nuclear weapon will only supply Iran with more prestige among the Arab lumpen faithful.

...

And yet the one place where Moslems are cynical about Iran is in Iran itself, where the regime relies on a narrow base of support amid a state that (despite its vast oil reserves) is in economic shambles. Thus, the supreme irony of the Middle East is that the place where anti-Americanism and anti-Semitism are least potent is in the Iranian heartland.

Also, see Max Boot's opinion piece about Gaza in the Wall Street Journal. He contends that Israel, being a liberal democracy, cannot crush its opponents, like the Russians, Syrians, and Burmese do. It simultaneously cannot tolerate attacks on its citizens from Gaza. Thus, the Israelis must fight a long-term war of attrition. Victory is not a possibility in the current calculus. Retaliatory measures will continue for a long time.