Moammar Gadhafi's use of the Media

By Stephanie La Leggia

For the last 42 years, Libya has been under the ruling of Colonel Moammar Gadhafi. Alongside his control over education, laws and military, Gadhafi attempted to influence and control the media. When the uprising against Gadhafi began in February, he put a media ban on reporters, keeping them away from the rebels and the chaotic reality of his country.             Gadhafi put much reliance on the media, trying to persuade people that he does not encourage violence and that his country is not in complete disarray.

Unfortunately for Gadhafi, trying to control foreign reporters and the country’s media backfired on him. When he invited reporters to Tripoli, he chose the drivers to show them around the city, exposing them solely to this superficial, cleansed spectacle. This plan did not work. By collaborating such a scheme, Gadhafi depicted himself as a desperate, vulnerable dictator ruling a chaotic and unorganized country. By allowing foreign journalists to report on Libya’s situation, reporters were able to see how much control the rebels has outside of Tripoli.

In March 2011, Gadhafi finally agreed to an extensive interview with BBC’s Jeremy Bowen. He attempted to persuade the public that “[his] people love [him]” and that “they would die to protect [him].” He never admitted to being aggressive and violent with the protestors. Gadhafi did not realize the changes that technology has brought forth. He can no longer dictate Libya the way he sees fit without other countries criticizing his methods of ruling. It is debatable whether he is lying or in denial.

Although Gadhafi adopted the role of a loving and non-violent dictator on BBC, he conveyed a different message to his people. He tried to inflict fear upon his people, using Libyan’s state television station, Jamahiriya, to threaten anti-Gadhafi Lybian with violence. Unfortunately for him, he was not successful for very long. The Arab League demanded the Arab Satellite Communications Organization (Arabsat) to block any channels that were devoted to Gadhafi. Two months later, in July 2011, NATO bombed three of the station’s satellite transmitters of a station used by the dictator.

           

In August 2011, rebel forces took control of Tripoli and Libya’s state television network. A spokesman for rebel alliance said, “"The revolutionaries stormed the television building … after killing the soldiers surrounding it. It is now under their control." Furthermore, they claimed they had capture Libyan state television anchor, Hala Misrati, a female journalist and Gadhafi loyalist. The Sunday before the invasion, Misrati creating a spectacle on television, waving a gun in the air and vowing to defend Gadhafi till death. She threatened the rebels and said: “You won't take the channel, Tripoli or all of Libya. I will protect my colleagues at the channel … We are willing to become martyrs." When Iman al-Obeidi’s story of being repeatedly raped by Gadhafi forces received media attention in May 2011, Misrati defended Gadhafi and called the Libyan woman a liar.

There are however, Libyan journalists who opposed Gadhafi's regime. Some have been killed, others detained, for reporting and exposing the violent crisis in the country. 

When the rebel forces scared Gadhafi out of Tripoli, he went into hiding and used a privately owned, Syrian-based television station in order to spread his propaganda. Al Oruba TV broadcasted two audio messages. The first targeted his loyalists in Al Oruba, asking them to fight for him and Libya until death. Gadhafi used his second message to inflict fear upon the rebels, demanding his loyalists to “cleanse Tripoli of the rats.”

With today’s technology, Gadhafi could not have had complete control over the media. This was clearly seen in the media coverage of Gadhafi’s death. In the final moments of his life, Gadhafi’s weakness and the true hatred of his people were exposed. Although some media stations did filter the images, the violent videos can be found anywhere because of the Internet and cell phone cameras. Many media outlets received complaints from viewers who believed that the media went too far in exposing such brutality. What makes this moment so historically interesting is the fact that every television network used videos taken from cell phones rather than footage from professional cameramen. Networks such as ABC and BBC defended their usage of the raw footage, believing that such video coverage is essential to good news.