This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 AMMAN 004555 
 
SIPDIS 
 
NEA FOR A/S BURNS, DAS SATTERFIELD; NEA/PD FOR QUINN 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 05/27/2010 
TAGS: PA PREL KPAO IO
SUBJECT: JORDANIAN PRESS: WHEN IN A PICKLE, PRAISE THE KING 
AND BASH THE U.S. 
 
 
Classified By: Ambassador Gnehm for reason 1.5 (b) (d) 
 
¶1.  (C) Summary.  Given the anti-American sentiment on the 
street and the recent events of Abu Ghreib prison and the 
violence in Rafah, the Jordanian news media have not missed 
an opportunity over the past month to attack not only U.S. 
policy, but American institutions and society in general. 
The volume and intensity of this strident anti-Americanism in 
the government-dominated media contrasts with the close 
strategic and economic ties between Jordan's leadership and 
the USG.  Opinion polls already show an overwhelmingly 
negative impression of America's role in the region regarding 
issues such as Palestine and Iraq.  The GOJ's apparent 
acquiescence in the negative press on the U.S., especially 
given the King's frequent trips to Washington and the 
high-profile U.S. development assistance and Jordanian-US 
cooperation in Iraq, seems only to pour oil on the flames. 
End Summary. 
 
America: The Bad, the Ugly, and the Even Uglier 
 
¶2. (C) The perceived U.S. failure to curb Israeli violence 
against the Palestinians or America's purported designs 
against Iraqi oil and sovereignty have long been staples of 
the negative picture presented by Jordan's major Arabic 
dailies.  But increasingly, columnists and editorialists are 
attributing these allegedly anti-Arab policies to American 
history, culture and religious extremism.  A growing number 
of media commentators link what they describe as the American 
plot to impose hegemony over a fragmented Arab world with 
what they call the genocide against Native Americans, slavery 
and racism, and the perceived violence of American culture. 
Springing out of this fertile ground, according to the 
self-styled analysts of American history, is the 
Zionist-inspired stereotyping of Islam and Muslims. 
 
Don't Argue with Popular Passions 
 
¶3. (C) Almost completely lacking is any effort to balance 
this picture of an American nemesis.  One of our contacts, 
the head of a prestigious social research institute, claimed 
that he spoke out on this issue to a gathering of local 
journalists.  "The U.S. (in response to Abu Ghreib abuses) 
just put its top brass on trial.  Their Generals were getting 
their stars melted down, but you (the Jordanian journalists) 
said nothing about this,"  he told his colleagues.  Our 
contact quoted a member of an oversight group at Jordan TV as 
complaining over the lack of critical discussion of local 
issues in a televised mock parliament made up of university 
students.  "I'm more anti-Israel and anti-US than any of 
you," she said.  "But is there nothing else to talk about 
except Zionism and Imperialism?" 
 
A Free and Outspoken Media -- When it Comes to the U.S. and 
Israel 
 
¶4. (C) Post has noticed a correlation between the pitch and 
placement of Anti-American rhetoric in the press and the 
presence or absence of reporting on domestic scandals, which 
occasionally do make it into the local press.  Recent 
articles and editorials about the alleged corruption of 
former Prime Minister Abu Ragheb, generated by allegations 
against him among members of the reconstituted Jordanian 
parliament, for example, abruptly disappeared, unresolved, 
after a week.  They were replaced by above-the-fold 
sensationalism about the latest US "outrages" in Iraq.  The 
bulk of press reporting on Iraq consists of wire service 
reports and photos, with locally written -- and usually 
highly negative -- headlines and subheads.  Photo selection 
also reflects an inclination towards highlighting chaos and 
civilian carnage. 
 
When in Doubt, Just Praise the King 
 
¶5. (C) Meanwhile, coverage of the King and Queen has reached 
new heights of fawning overkill, with an above-the-fold space 
reserved daily for the King, frequent multi-page spreads of 
paid congratulatory ads and occasional supplements for 
special occasions, displaying the King and Queen in heroic 
poses, such as the recent Independence Day celebration, or 
the King's birthday.   Naturally, any pronouncement, meeting 
or travel by the monarch is ipso facto the lead story in all 
media.  We are told by straightfaced GOJ officials close to 
the court that "His Majesty really doesn't like this sort of 
thing and has asked the press to tone it down."   One Palace 
contact told us following the King's May visit to Washington 
that he hoped the King's real accomplishments would not be 
lost in the hyperbolic press coverage, inspired by the 
Palace's own media advisors.  The publishers, according to 
these contacts, find the Royal Supplements a good way to 
persuade the private sector to take out expensive 
advertisements.   Media contacts also report a requirement 
imposed by the Royal Court that the media (print and 
broadcast) run its press releases or announcements verbatim. 
One journalist told us that he was suspended from his paper 
for refusing to write enough stories about the King.  The 
wall-to-wall, servile praise of King and family in the press 
is unparalleled here, in the view of long-time 
Jordan-watchers at post --unparalleled in its extent and in 
its discord from public opinion. 
 
Just Who Are the Gatekeepers? 
 
¶6. (C) Our contacts in the media assure us that the 
Government owns a controlling interest in at least one of the 
three Arabic dailies and that it exercises strong influence 
through advertising revenues.  Moreover,  the General 
Intelligence Division (GID) is widely alleged by our 
journalist contacts to exercise control over local 
journalists, especially when they cover domestic issues.  We 
are told, for example, that there is a special GID division 
which monitors the press, and that a number of columnists and 
commentators make no secret of faxing their articles to GID 
officers for prior approval, or of writing articles based on 
instructions from the GID.  If true, this would reflect the 
concern with which the security services continue to view the 
media, a historic battleground of inter-Arab and ideological 
rivalry, and a potential shaper of -- or brake on -- passions 
in the street.  It is inconceivable that the editorial staff 
determines the overall slant of the news or the tone of the 
commentary over the long haul without a lively appreciation 
of the regime's red lines.    The publisher of a weekly that 
sometimes features exposes of second-tier Ministers and other 
officials and has adopted a violently anti-American tone in 
the past  was recently jailed on charges of blackening 
Jordan's image and threatening its relations with a "friendly 
state" (Saudi Arabia) at a time when the GOJ was negotiating 
an extension to a vital oil concession.  The journalist later 
"voluntarily" suspended his paper  and agreed to write a new 
article in praise of Saudi-Jordanian relations. 
 
The Official Paradox: Both Sides of the Mouth 
 
¶7. (C) Given the control that the GOJ exercises over the 
media when it wishes, why does Jordan's leadership tolerate 
such an unbalanced and unrelenting distortion of U.S. goals 
in the region and of American society and history?  The 
King's strong links to the U.S. are well known, and an INR 
poll last fall showed that most Jordanians, although they 
strongly reject U.S. policy, believe that their country, down 
to the ordinary citizen, benefits from that relationship. 
One explanation for the media's stance is that the GOJ hopes 
to provide in the media a "safety valve" for the passions of 
the street.  The other motive may be to divert popular 
frustration with political oppression and economic pressure. 
 A third motive may be to balance the scales a bit against 
its strong association with unpopular U.S. policies 
--although rapid attacks against U.S. policy in the long run 
must reinforce negative public views of Jordan's reliance on 
the U.S. 
 
¶8. (C) As one media analyst recently put it to the IO, "the 
security services are concerned first and foremost with the 
regime's survival.  They know there is anger in the street 
aimed at the government -- price hikes, the King's frequent 
travel and apparent high living -- and therefore see it as 
necessary to channel popular anger in the only acceptable 
direction, at the U.S. and Israel.  And they don't have to 
work hard given the very real anger out there about Iraq and 
Palestine.  It's more an issue of letting it go and not 
getting in the way."  The IO commented that that sounded like 
a dangerous game.  After all, the relationship with the U.S. 
is also vital to the regime.  Evoking public passions against 
the U.S. could make it difficult over the long run for the 
government to maintain the close level of cooperation on 
issues like Iraqi or Israel that it has shown in the past. 
But the contact replied that the security services saw no 
other path.  He maintained that the tenor of local coverage 
of the King's "triumph" in gaining assurances (papers used 
the verb "snatched") from  President Bush regarding the final 
settlement of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict was part of 
the same tactic. 
 
Needed: Press Freedom --The Real Thing 
 
¶9. (C)  It would be against American ideals and interests (as 
well as counterproductive) to urge the GOJ to stifle 
editorial opinion against the U.S.  The USG cannot attempt to 
direct editorial policies while maintaining that reform, 
including press freedom, must come from within the Arab 
world.  We should not, however, ignore distortions or 
inaccuracies or the absence of any countervailing voice in 
the Jordanian news media.  The Post  works hard to rebut 
individual cases of misrepresentation with newspaper editors 
and individual journalists, and our efforts often result in 
corrections and even follow-up stories reflecting the 
Embassy's complaints.  But these are insufficient to stem the 
volume of  distorted and pejorative coverage of the U.S. and 
the long-term poisoning of popular emotions. 
 
¶10. (C) We should make Jordanian journalist and media owners 
and managers aware of how  truly virulent anti-U.S. articles 
affect the image of Jordan and the Arabs among Americans who 
follow their media.  One of our contacts recalled the 
astonishment of a senior columnist known for his anti-U.S. 
diatribes, who was on a recent visit to the U.S. and 
encountered several Arabic-speaking USG officials and 
scholars who had read his attacks on U.S. society and 
culture.  He was astonished by their interest.  "That toned 
him down for quite a while," our contact said.  In our 
opinion, it would be useful to arrange a series of dialogues 
between Jordanian and other Arab journalists and informed US 
counterparts who could compare and contrast mutual news 
coverage and its impact  on popular perceptions and political 
trends in both societies. 
 
¶11. (C) Finally, if America-bashing is indeed tolerated by 
the regime to divert their public from their own failings, we 
need to encourage more -- not less -- press freedom, ensuring 
that journalists are free to examine local issues.   We 
should encourage freedom to report honestly and without 
inhibition on issues that affect daily life, including 
corruption, nepotism, the lack of jobs or political 
participation and other issues that affect the ordinary 
citizen.  Solid investigative reporting on these issues, we 
suspect, would prove much more riveting than rehashed attacks 
on U.S. policy and might even result in a cooler, more 
balanced treatment of the U.S. role.   The conversation about 
press freedom would need to happen at the highest levels. 
 
GNEHM