I have come to know much about manipulative journalistic measures: I read between the lines and infer where a journalist is going with an argument, and, I, shrewdly if I may add, can anticipate the tone, voice, and scope of media outlets. More importantly, I have come to realize that some journalists work relentlessly against Egypt and are unabashed about that hatred.
It is apparent that most western media are against the current Egyptian regime. Some uphold democracy, human rights, and legislative channels over security and development. Others may be misguided, manipulated, or uninformed. While many others are part of a bigger scheme to thwart Egypt s improvement opportunity.
We will never know the real cause behind the animosity of western journalists towards the current regime, but here is how they manufacture antagonism against -- if not dissent -- in Egypt, and lead the western reader, and the Egyptian one for that matter, into seeing a picture of their own making as far as Egypt is concerned.
Word Usage
Journalists use words that imply deception or inaccuracy. The verb "alleges" in particular is perpetually embedded in articles to distort facts.
When a journalist writes, “The regime in Egypt alleges that the Muslim Brotherhood is behind the attacks,” the reader assumes the Egyptian regime is lying. When he says, Morsi is “under indictment for allegedly breaking out of prison during the 2011 revolt,” it implies Morsi did not break of out prison. “Egypt confiscates assets of 16 alleged Muslim Brotherhood Members” sheds doubt on these persons identities. This is why journalistic pieces on Egypt are doused with the verb “allege” for the sole reason of confusing the reader and blurring truths.
Another interesting verb is "to claim." “The government of President Abdel-Fattah El-Sissi claims the Brotherhood is resorting to violence,” misguides readers into believing the government has neither evidence nor proof.
And another confusing phrase is "they said," or "it is said that." So, "Egyptian security forces killed several MB members they said were terrorists in Cairo," implies dubious and not verified information.
The passive voice comes in handy, too. The “manifestation of the deeply troubling way the Egyptian judiciary has been used as a tool to settle political disagreements.” “Has been used” by whom? Obviously authorities.
Or better yet, they use directive adjectives “Actually, Egypt Is a Terrible Ally” does not imply but clearly states that Egypt is unable to fulfill its role as an ally. Or “It was 29 June 2013, the day before much-hyped demonstrations that were expected to give the Egyptian military the cover they needed to sweep Morsi from power” explicitly states that the demonstrations against Morsi were a mere facade to get the military in power again.
And by continuing to call the terrorists in Sinai "militants" and Sinai attacks "insurgencies," western media give the terrorists a right of way. Imagine how repugnant it would have been for the citizens in Paris and Brussels if the terrorists were called militants.
Words are powerful and manipulative, and western media use them craftily to mislead.
Repetitive techniques
Another tool in the manipulative process is to keep repeating the same notion, again and again, until the reader finally accepts it as a given.
The majority of western media refers to ex-president Morsi as the "first civilian president" giving ex-President Morsi a justified presence forever. Regardless of whether the articles need the reference or not, phrases such as “Egypt s first democratically elected leader,” “the country s first free elections in which Mohamed Morsi was elected president” are repeated in all articles about Egypt.
“To describe Friday s horrific gun and bomb assault on a Sufi mosque in the northern Sinai Peninsula as the deadliest attack by armed militants (rather than the state) in Egypt s modern history understates it.” In this sentence, an irrelevant off-topic lie, "rather than the state,” is embedded. Then it refers to the sadistic terrorists as mere "armed militants." Finally, it implies that the state has done that sort of action before — killed praying Egyptians.
Such twisted information is repeated again and again until some assume it true.
