The Shake-Up at Al Jazeera: Motion or Real Movement?

Is the shake-up at Al Jazeera mere motion or does it entail real movement away from the media network’s role as a vehicle for pro-Hamas propaganda?

Eyebrows around Washington were raised when a recent piece in the U.S. government-funded Alhurra hyped personnel and purported editorial changes at Qatar-owned Al Jazeera.

The appointment of Qatari ruling family member Sheikh Nasser bin Faisal Al Thani as director general of the Al Jazeera Media Network was not the only change in personnel, though many of the others were reassignments of existing staff.

Al Jazeera, headquartered in Doha and with 70 bureaus worldwide, has long been regarded as the soft power tool used by the Qatari royal family to amplify the narratives of the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) and Islamists. Hamas is an offshoot of the Brotherhood’s in Gaza and the West Bank.

The Muslim Brotherhood’s goal is to promote an Islamic revival and counter perceived Western secular influences. The Brotherhood’s foundational motto — which proclaims that “dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope” — reflects an aspiration to conform all aspects of life under Islamic Sharia law, with the ultimate goal of extending it to state governance.

While critics of Al Jazeera have noted its anti-Western bent, the media conglomerate has come under particular scrutiny for not merely platforming Hamas through an ostensibly legitimate news lens but rather for falsely promoting the designated terrorist group as the protector of the Palestinians, even as it massacred nearly 1,200 Israelis, including babies, teens, and the elderly.

If credible changes are afoot at Al Jazeera, that would indeed mark a new day. But are personnel changes indicative of systemic editorial changes?

“Qatari political analysts have become more prominent on air, replacing a newsroom that has traditionally been dominated by the Muslim Brotherhood or commentators prone to fiery, populist rhetoric that often-invited ridicule,” claimed Alhurra.

Al Jazeera’s opinion section “will be subject to more direct and precise monitoring,” and content “will from now on be crafted with greater care under strict supervision,” Alhurra said, citing an Israeli news source. 

No specific editorial directives have been publicly identified, leaving to speculation any commitment to change. Will Al Jazeera’s coverage “from now on” present Hamas as a terrorist organization whose stated goal is, along with that of its Islamic Republic of Iran patron, to annihilate Israel? Will it no longer falsely refer to hostages abducted by Hamas as “convicted prisoners?”

Changes at Al Jazeera are not organic but rather are apparently part of a tangled web of formal and informal deals currently unfolding. Led by President Donald Trump, the deals include the return of 45 Israeli and three other hostages kidnapped by Hamas from Israel on October 7, 2023; the withdrawal of the Israel Defense Forces to negotiated positions in Gaza; releasing 250 life-term Palestinians accused of involvement in some of the most heinous terrorist attacks against Israel; and the release of 1,700 Gazans detained since Hamas’s October massacre, along with the remains of some 390 slain Gazans. President Trump also signed an executive order that provides security guarantees to Qatar. Discussion on weapons sales to Turkey and settling a long case against a Turkish bank are part of the mix, too.

The well-connected Arab affairs analyst Ehud Yaari explained that changes at Al Jazeera are “apparently part of understandings between [Qatar] and the United States, under which Al Jazeera will reduce the amount of incitement it spreads throughout the Middle East.”

The scope of Al Jazeera’s incitement is not small. It is systemic as is its entanglement with Hamas throughout the Al Jazeera ecosystem.

On the morning of October 7, Al Jazeera exclusively broadcast Hamas military commander Mohammed Deif as Hamas terrorists infiltrated Israel and carried out the ensuing massacre. As noted by MEMRI, Deif “declared the launch of Operation Al-Aqsa Flood and warned that this was just the first strike of the operation. He incited all Palestinians to join the war, using all means in their possession – guns, knives, Molotov cocktails, and vehicles.”

A reported six Al Jazeera journalists simultaneously held positions in Hamas’s militant forces and participated in the October 7 massacre. An additional alleged Al Jazeera contributor held three hostages in his home, which was uncovered after the IDF rescued the Israelis. The network has denied the allegations, but photographic and documentary evidence are compelling. It’s hard to imagine American or international networks not taking decisive action should similar allegations surface against their reporters.

Far from merely broadcasting developments, Al Jazeera reportedly agreed to comply with Hamas’s directives on how to cover cases like a failed rocket launch by censoring details that tarnished the image of the U.S.-designated terrorist group.

Qatar’s longtime claim that Al Jazeera is editorially independent of the emirate has been met with skepticism, especially from those in the Middle East most affected by its coverage.

Even as Hamas tortures those who cross or criticize it, brave Gazans in recent months marched in the dusty streets of Gaza, chanting “barra, barra, barra, Hamas,” meaning “out, out, out, Hamas.” Protesters called on Al Jazeera reporters by name to broadcast their protests, but the network declined to do so.

Ahmad Fouad Alkhatib, a Palestinian who has lost 33 family members in the Gaza war, plainly explained why in a post on X. “Aljazeera’s fake ‘journalists’ & mercenaries are working overtime trying to serve their Islamist overlords & save Hamas from collapse! Never forget that Aljazeera is the media arm of Hamas; Aljazeera=Hamas. But the people of Gaza finally see through both. There’s no going back,” Alkhatib, a scholar at the Atlantic Council, wrote.

The protestors are reflecting the view that for years, Qatar’s goal, projected through Al Jazeera, is to prop up Hamas as the guardian of Palestinians, while many Gazans hold it responsible for squandering billions in international humanitarian aid and reconstruction dollars. Rather than using it to improve the lives of Palestinians, Hamas has built for itself an estimated 400 miles of underground tunnels in the 140-square-mile strip.

Al Jazeera boasts that it trains journalists around the world through in-person and online programs. One example that is emblematic of an ecosystem-wide problem earning the channel rebuke: Muhammad Khamaiseh, the Al Jazeera instructor who specializes in “journalism ethics,” himself has a record of media bias, hatred, and discrimination.

Khamaiseh, an editor at the Department of Media Initiatives at the Al Jazeera Media Institute, is a member of the Al Jazeera Journalism Review’s editorial team and oversees its Research Fellowship Program. He has used social media to spread hate against Jews. “Jews have been known for centuries to be cunning thinkers, and currently, the entire global economic system is under their control,” he posted on his X account in August 2018, six months after he started working at Al Jazeera, amplifying a hateful canard against an entire faith population. Does Al Jazeera’s standard bearer meet its journalistic standards?

If Qatar’s purported shift is to be more than a temporary, superficial notch on a checklist, if it is to achieve the peace President Trump envisioned, policymakers must look under the hood. They must ensure changes are system wide.

The Qatari government’s own posture on October 7 is representative of why many believe the petro-emirate collaborates with Hamas, not merely plays host to its leaders. Rather than using its dominion to hold Hamas accountable for its invasion and atrocities on October 7, the Qatari government, in a statement of moral inversion, blamed Israel. “The Ministry of Foreign Affairs holds Israel solely responsible for the ongoing escalation due to its ongoing violations of the rights of the Palestinian people,” its statement read that day.

Al Jazeera has been banned by the Palestinian Authority, Israel, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Jordan. Some of the bans have since been lifted.

Al Jazeera has had a smattering of posts that are being used as examples of change, though in average Western media, they’d hardly get noticed. One such instance is a former Egyptian assistant foreign minister quoted in an analysis piece about the unfolding deal, “It’s up to Hamas … to reinvent itself, not as an armed resistance movement, but as a resistance movement.”

If Al Jazeera is to be a force for good, it needs to rethink its promotion of Hamas’s brand of terrorism not only in its English and Arabic channels but also in its broadcasts and digital products in French, Spanish, Chinese, and other languages.

It also needs to telegraph to its 3,000 employees in 60 countries throughout its news and non-news platforms that this moment in history calls for new policies.

When it was launched in 1996, Al Jazeera changed the way the largely state-controlled Middle East media reported news. Its style of viewer engagement replaced the “press release journalism” that was too commonplace in the region. Today, it leverages the most sophisticated technology to reach a global audience.

Even with its reach, it suffers from a reputation for playing double games. The arsonist and the firefighter. The one who poisons the well and then offers the antidote. The one who starts the riot and then calls for peace.

Qatar has the chance to shake things up and to favorably impact the shifting sands in the Middle East. It’s too soon to tell if the changes to date are just motion or indeed real movement. Let’s hope over time it proves to be the latter. The jury is still out.

Toby Dershowitz is senior advisor at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), a non-partisan research institute focusing on national security and foreign policy. Follow her on X @tobydersh.