Recently, NOW Lebanon conducted an interview with Rami Naiim, the owner of one of the country’s most prominent websites, Assiasa, to gain insights into how he sustains his institution financially while engaging in journalistic endeavors. During our discussion, he expressed skepticism regarding the existence of investigative journalism in Lebanon, attributing this to the centralized nature of information within the political elite that protect each other’s.
He noted that Revenues from ads do not cover site costs, requiring consistent funding. Nevertheless, the writing style on his platform remains unaffected by financial limitations, embodying Ghassan Tueni’s approach of diversifying funding sources to maintain editorial independence. This strategy protects the integrity of the editorial content, ensuring that financial viability is not jeopardized by the withdrawal of support linked to content that may reveal political corruption. Under Rami’s leadership, the website is structured with an editor-in-chief and a clear organizational framework that facilitates independent operations. While he is free to share his personal views on Lebanese politics, the platform itself upholds a neutral position and is supported by a diverse team. In the political landscape, the primary sponsor does not impose any political agenda on the site, thus allowing for considerable operational freedom.
This independence is not merely a reflection of the publisher’s choices but also indicates the sponsor’s commitment to upholding freedom of expression. Despite legal frameworks that permit access to accurate information in Lebanon, acquiring verifiable data often necessitates connections with security agencies or political bodies capable of providing relevant documentation. Furthermore, even when political entities in Lebanon offer informational or financial assistance, public criticism of them remains rare due to prevailing societal norms.
In summary, Rami developed a business model that combines the autonomy of journalistic endeavors with an internal policy that accommodates all Lebanese constituents, including Hezbollah that became a source of threats for external investors.
Among the investors is Habtoor Khalaf, a businessman from the United Arab Emirates, who expressed interest in the media sector following his investments in hospitality and entertainment, which are conventional funding avenues for media, while some digital media are studying how to get more interaction from youth on articles that focuses on sports that attract under 35 years old in traditional media so on journalism will operate in two markets – the audience market and the advertising one -, while digital production removes some of the costs associated with the traditional media.
The governmental support for Hezbollah has deterred certain investors from the Gulf region, including Khalaf, from establishing a new media outlet due to concerns over security risks, as noted by journalist Tony Boulos.
The political climate affecting external investors is also contingent upon the political elite that governs Lebanon. According to a study conducted by Samir Kassir Foundation entitled Media ownership monitor Lebanon 2024, “most of the media owners are directly or indirectly politically affiliated and allegiances and indirect affiliations shift with financial needs.” This is the reason why the risk of political control of media outlets and distribution networks is assessed as high for media pluralism. For example, most of the outlets that are not directly controlled by a political party adopt editorial lines that support a political group or a strong political leader.
“Out of the owners listed,” the study continues, “69% are politically affiliated. This also involves more than 80% of the outlets surveyed. The TV sector is the most politically affiliated, as all eight outlets have direct connections with the State, political parties, and currently active or aspiring politicians. One channel is state-owned. Four are owned or co-owned by currently active politicians, and while three TV channels do not have a direct affiliation to a political party, they are co-owned by business figures who have sought political office. As a whole, politically affiliated owners reach 100% of the audience.”
The influence of ownership is significantly heightened in the decision-making processes within the newsroom, akin to that observed in political programs, which collectively shape the media industry.
NOW also conducted an interview with Mohamed Barakat, the editor-in-chief of Assas Media and a researcher, who examined the repercussions of the 17 October revolution on television networks and the banking industry in his publication. His research delves into the interplay between agenda-setting, governmental political objectives, and the dynamics of the media sector, with a particular emphasis on Lebanese Broadcasting Channels, MTV, and New TV, along with their financial affiliations with banks. These financial relationships play a crucial role in shaping the content priorities of their political programming and news coverage.
Through comprehensive content analysis, it becomes apparent that media organizations redirect public discontent from financial institutions towards political leaders, emphasizing governmental corruption rather than banking practices. Banks, by exerting influence over media outlets through decision-makers in newsrooms, tend to sidestep direct criticism and may even affect the choice of reporters, revealing editorial biases that influence media narratives. This editorial oversight extends to the prioritization of news stories, including the coverage of protests against the Central Bank of Lebanon, regardless of potentially limited viewership.
Barakat scrutinizes the framing of inquiries, the diversity of questions, non-verbal communication cues, and guest selection on political programs such as Albert Kostanian’s show, which appears to oppose the revolution based on his content analysis. The intricate network of funding sources and the ideological stances of media proprietors collectively shape public perception. Barakat’s findings indicate that LBC adeptly navigated public sentiment against the October revolution, MTV adopted a pro-revolution position, and NTV maintained an objective stance, allowing the government a degree of opportunity, all of which are linked to the banking sector.
Between the banking sector and political figures funding the media sector and owning it we asked Doctor Sami Zgheib who is one of the researchers in the paper ‘Follow the Money: The informal channels of Lebanese media funding.’ He told NOW that “the result of the analysis of the operations of television, radio, and print media reveals that the income derived from commercial activities, particularly advertising, often falls short of covering production and operational costs.”
Consequently, media organizations frequently depend on external financial assistance, which may originate from sources such as episode purchases, program acquisitions, or support from organizations like political parties, banks, or corporations, thereby potentially affecting their editorial independence.
Although this financial structure is legally acceptable, many media companies in Lebanon operate as subsidiaries of larger corporate groups. This relationship fosters interconnected frameworks where profits are redirected to the parent organization. To sustain this model, various tactics are employed. External influences from political bodies and powerful groups can manipulate public perception, thereby reinforcing the current system.
Suggested remedies to tackle these issues include the removal of banking confidentiality for media organizations, implementing comprehensive financial audits to trace funding origins, and promoting the transparent disclosure of financial data. These initiatives aim to inform the public about the financial foundations of media content and encourage increased transparency within the sector.
In a publication like Hisham Karaki’s, understanding advertising mechanics is crucial. Advertisers must adhere to internal guidelines and legal standards. They receive details on viewership metrics and platform impact.
The advertising agency syndicate, led by George Jabbour, provides valuable insights, stating: “When selecting advertising platforms, it is crucial to evaluate a range of both traditional and emerging media channels, taking into account the product and the demographics of the intended audience. For example, social media platforms are particularly effective for engaging younger consumers. The choice of platforms hinges on their reach and effectiveness, which have a direct influence on the advertising budget.”
It is important to note that “while social media remains neutral in political matters, politicized news is more commonly found on television networks. Advertisers may be drawn to entertainment programs due to their substantial viewership. The political stance of a network does not dictate advertising decisions; rather, the emphasis is placed on the audience reach of the platform. When selecting a channel, it is essential to prioritize access to suburban audiences and align with products that are in demand within those regions. Ultimately, the primary objective for advertisers is to forge a connection with consumers”
Professor at the Lebanese University, Nahwand Kadri further investigates the subject by stating that “examining the influence of funding on media agendas and journalism professionalism reveals challenges like lack of transparency, misleading practices, and regulatory circumvention across different political systems.” She notes that “major media conglomerates frequently engage in partnerships involving politicians, business leaders, and media tycoons such as Robert Murdoch and Silvio Berlusconi. Currently, presidential candidates in democratic countries are forging alliances with technology giants and corporations, which may lead to the evasion of legal and ethical standards. The rise of capitalism has nurtured individualism, pushing journalists who express dissent or critique practices on social media to the margins. At the core of these media empires are financial interests that prioritize profit over legal and ethical obligations.”
In her assessment of the situation in Lebanon, Kadri highlights that the complexities of political financing are closely linked to the sectarian and religiously based political framework, which shapes a media environment divided along sectarian lines. Media outlets associated with specific sects often reveal their political and financial connections, facing challenges from both internal and external forces. These media platforms frequently serve competing interests, promoting foreign agendas while obstructing meaningful discussions on issues of public welfare.
Safeguarding journalists’ rights within media organizations is complex due to undisclosed interests and blurred lines between employees and journalists according to Dr. Kadri. Lack of strong unions and dialogue leads to isolation. In Lebanon, freedom of expression is often misunderstood as freedom of the press. Professional journalists manage pressures, pursue excellence, innovate, refine communication, and consider context.
She concluded by stating that “agendas are influenced by funders, advertisers, politicians, and public preferences, thereby dispelling the notion of a wholly neutral agenda.” For her, “media outlets shape public opinion by highlighting specific narratives while sidelining others. It is essential to confront myths, biases, and misinformation within the media landscape. Traditionally, in democratic societies, the media serves to bridge communication between the state and the populace, thereby maintaining social order.”
Karim Seif El-Din, a researcher at the Samir Kassir Foundation, underscores the significance of supporting independent institutions (alternative media outlets) to allow them to implement a competitive business model and prepare for the challenges posed by electronic and social media. Rather than changing the funding structure, the emphasis is placed on attracting donors who maintain rigorous standards of media quality and professionalism. The objective is to establish an additional approach that complements the existing framework, with a focus on investing in public media rather than official channels. This strategy guarantees that state funding does not favor the ruling political party, thus upholding the core principles of public media.
Regarding the legal framework, legal researcher Tony Mikhael from the Maharat Foundation has indicated that there are no direct avenues for financial transactions among parties. All financial obligations must be processed through a corporation, with individuals and their families restricted to a maximum ownership of 10 percent of its shares, regardless of their professional background. Full disclosure of all earnings is required. Donations from foreign nations, criminal organizations, or individuals from adversarial countries are prohibited; however, subscriptions are permissible.
Per his words, “while the legislation does not explicitly permit financial contributions from businessmen, economists, politicians, or public figures, it clearly prohibits funding from nations with ulterior motives. Furthermore, current regulations mandate that channels must submit an investment report detailing the operations of the media entity. Insufficient revenue and significant deficits present challenges for media organizations.”
The Alternative Press Syndicate advocates for the inclusion of a provision in the proposed media bill that would improve the transparency of funding sources for media organizations. It emphasizes the necessity of monitoring media funding during election periods, arguing that the existing framework is insufficient and exhibits considerable bias towards specific candidates.
The Syndicate points out that Lebanon’s advertising market does not adequately support media needs, prompting a search for funding that preserves journalistic integrity and transparency in reporting. It underscores the critical nature of professionalism in news dissemination and the importance of transparent reporting, cautioning against allowing funding to interfere with media operations.
Furthermore, the Syndicate warns of the potential for self-censorship among media professionals due to external pressures, calling for the avoidance of any interference that could impede journalists in performing their responsibilities effectively.
Rita Boulos Chahwan is a Lebanese researcher and journalist.
The views in this story reflect those of the author alone and do not necessarily reflect the beliefs of NOW.
This post was originally published on here
