This paper focuses on the media coverage of the Abū Fānā crisis from August 2008 to January 2009, thus it ties in with Susanne Huber's paper “Coptic activist and media reporting about the tensions related to the Monastery of Abū Fānā” (see AWR 2008, week 40, art, 2). 99 articles were found on the Internet, from different English, German and Egyptian sources and were analyzed for this paper.
The tensions around the monastery spread far beyond their local surroundings and had serious repercussions throughout Egypt and beyond its borders. Unfortunately most reporting on the issue turned out to be inaccurate and extremely biased. In western countries especially Christian activist reporting on the Abū Fānā incidents describes it as an example of violence against and the persecution of Christians in Egypt, without placing it in context or presenting readers with the historical background of the conflict, which is important in order to understand its various aspects. The Egyptian media also often denies or does not highlight all of the aspects of the case, they are rather defensive about the accusations of sectarian tensions and mostly present the public opinion of the government, mainly focusing on the disputes over land. They criticized Coptic activists around the world for their involvement, in order to protect Egypt’s image at an international level, but largely failed to address the problems citizens are facing and furthermore lacked transparency when dealing with the actual conflict. In the mean time – what was the “general” Christian reaction to this criticism aimed at spreading aversions against their freedom to express their opinions openly? It is almost unnecessary to say that they did not give in, but rather attacked the Egyptian authorities in return. This is an ongoing dispute, up to the point, where one might ask if reporting really tackles serious questions concerning the solution of conflicts such as the one that occurred around the Monastery of Abū Fānā or is rather used as a pretext to publicly undermine the state on one hand and the influence of foreign Christians on the other hand, concerning national matters.
As a result the line drawn between verified facts and outrageous claims is a thin one and one that is often crossed, which can be clearly seen when examining the reporting on the Abū Fānā incidents.
Too often it forces readers to position themselves and pushes those who feel attacked into an anti-authorities, anti-Muslim or anti-Christian corner. That conflicting parties try to manipulate information and thus their readers opinions, in order to strengthen their own positions enhances the possibility of future conflict and should be dealt with seriously, by addressing one-sided arguments, contextualizing them and examining the difference between the conflict itself and the position these incidents are staged for. Since misinformation naturally leads to misunderstanding, only by opposing inaccurate reporting can the harmful results can be reduced and hopefully prevented.