IT is a simple, logical, rule; before solving any problem, tacking any issue, you should define it first, acknowledge its existence. That is what the controversial TV show “At 8 o’clock with Dawood” is simply doing.
In a conversation with a friend, he was extremely angry with the show. Saying that the show is putting the Saudi society in a very bad light. A lot of problems, so many personal and organizational issues, lousy public and private services. The show should be stopped at once, he argued. For someone who lived a considerable portion of his life in the United States, it is a surprising argument.
The TV show of Dawood Al Shereyan, the veteran Saudi journalist, is one of the shows meant to monitor the government performance. As new and shocking it was to the Saudi audience, it falls in a common theme of programs in other parts of the world. In each and every news channel in the world, there is at least one program that is dedicated to discussing, criticizing, monitoring and evaluating government performance. The program, that started as a radio show, did not take long to capture the attention of both the public and the government. In just a few weeks, it did not only become the talk of the country, it turned from a new reporting program, to a news maker itself when other media outlets started to run after its scoops, covering the same topics, following up on the same issues.
If there are any secrets behind the success of this show and its presenter, then it must be one of two reasons. The first is the unprecedented transparency that the program has been able to present to its audience; this is the problem, this is the agency responsible about it, and here is an example. People were shocked, they were not used to governmental agencies and governmental officials sitting on the defensive chair, trying to explain their own shortcomings and their plans to modify the situation. As sad and painful the show was at times, it was promising and full of hope at other. The second reason that might be behind the success was the personality of the presenter himself, who won the prize awarded by the governor of Sharajah, UAE, as being the personality of the 2013 in government communication. A lot of the audience identified themselves with him. He is the neighbor next door, the friend at the office, the person we see regularly at the mosque. He came across very simple and relatable with his local dialect and spontaneity.
Having said that, the program do have a lot of shortcomings. One of those, in my opinion, is that it does not conform to the basics of fruitful, productive discussions. Most of the time, it is the same spontaneity of the presenter that is off putting. A lot of interruptions and interjections when the guests are talking makes it impossible to follow on the flow of a certain idea to the end. Also, the program seems to be discounting any possibility of different opinions. Usually, it is the view of the presenter and his editorial team that is dominating the discussions, dismissing any voice that is trying to take any other direction.
Moreover, as in any successful endeavor, there must be conspiracy theories to surround it. One of those is that the show that seems to be criticizing the government from the outside is the making of that same government. Honestly, I am not able to buy such an argument. Maybe the personal relationships between the presenter and some key persons in the government allowed him to push to boundaries no one reached before, still, that does not discredit the show or strip it of its values.
If we still do not have not-for-profit watchdogs or non-governmental organizations to monitor the government performance, such programs could do the trick for now. It is always good to bring problems to the light, to identify them and to deal with them. That is what healthy and growing societies do; but the most important thing is to find news ways to solve them. So it is not shutting such shows that we need, in fact, we need more of them.
