The episodes of Professors Qinan Al-Ghamdi and Dawood Al-Sharyan with colleague Abdullah Al-Mudaifer in the Al-Liwan program raised a lot of controversy and side dialogues about the Saudi media, its future and the glorious past that it leans on, and the genius stories that some of them were released by the two professors, and how was the effort to get a precedent or a journalistic story Great and arduous, difficulties whose pleasure and results we miss now, and media intruders know nothing about.
It also revealed a lot of what was hidden behind the scenes of the media for decades, whether journalistic or television, but it also proved how traditional media and the television screen are still the most exciting and most interactive whenever they provide appropriate and attractive content.
However, the most important thing that can be mentioned in the two dialogues is the breaking of the “state of silence” that journalists have adopted throughout their professional lives, and it is one of the most important secrets of the profession, especially the relationship between them and the political and administrative leaders and government agencies, as well as between colleagues themselves.
A policy of silence focused on the idea of the journalist keeping his stories, sources, and information, which gives the journalist his credibility with all the parties he deals with. This idea has inspired the lives of many professional journalists, but the fracture that occurred in the box of secrets and private stories will raise many questions.
In any profession with limited opportunities such as the media, rough frictions emerge, and in return the so-called paralysis appears, which is present in most of the arts, media, acting, singing, etc., and the reason is that the work is exposed to viewing and criticism from the public, and therefore it needs a high percentage of ratings. Harmony between its parties, being overlapping circles, and needing joint action, and this is not a justification for paralysis or legislation for it.
Conflict and squabbles between writers and intellectuals are not new. Arab literature witnessed it since Jarir and Al-Farazdaq, and perhaps before them. We also saw it between Talal Maddah and Muhammad Abdo, but its appearance in this public form and on television among senior journalists made it more exciting than others because of the long and ongoing debate about the media and those The reason for his decline and his influence is between those who are inside the circle and those who are outside it.
The recent dialogues of the colleague "Al-Mudayfer" also revealed a fine line in any television dialogue – perhaps the simple viewer does not notice it – between the truth and the passing of messages, for example the relationship of the detective with the Saudi press, which the broadcaster passed during his questions with his guests. », The detectives are not a monitoring body over the media, as may be understood in rare dialogues, nor is it an authoritarian body that pursues media professionals and media outlets, but rather a body that “investigates” cases that need more depth and are referred to it, even if we go back to the millions of publications in the Saudi press. Over the decades, we have found only a small number of cases in which the security services intervened for investigation and verification only, and the agency authorized to impose sanctions is the Ministry of Information only.
Finally, the media debate will remain, until its ship, which has been subjected to a heavy wave in the past ten years, stabilizes, following the decline of advertising and the entry of intruders from the leaders of “social media” programs into the media arena and the clear confusion between them and journalists and their real means, so who will bear responsibility and announce a new form of media that restores His prestige, status, and the status of his children, who still hold the keys and secrets of the profession in their hands.
Muhammad Al-Saed
