Recently, the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) stated that an anonymous Islamic website in the Middle East urged Muslims to show their outrage at the Apple Store in New York City, which built a pavilion coincidentally resembling the cube shape of the Ka'aba, the ancient structure in Mecca towards which all Muslims pray (the actual structure is glass, though MEMRI referenced a black plywood cover during construction). Predictibly, the post brought out cries of indignation from people upset that Muslims would be offended (yet again). But missing in the report was the name of the purported website, why it was considered authoritative on the matter, or any actual offended Muslims (our straw poll garnered a collective shrug, along with much respect for Steve Jobs, himself the son of an Arab). It's not the first time the controversial organisation has selectively framed an issue to show Muslims in a less than positive light, nor is it the only instance of pre-emptive outrage attributed to Muslims in recent months. Take the case of a Kate Moss advertisment across the street from a New York mosque. The idea that Muslims might be offended by this went from blog post to mainstream media, somehow becoming "hundreds" of Muslims "infuriated" along the way. Nobody bothered to ask Muslims, though. In fact, no Muslim ever complained. A similar story happened when a UK art gallery pulled some sexually explicit art pieces depicting young girls so as to not "shock the population" of Muslims who live in their east London neighborhood. As with the above, no Muslims actually complained, but it didn't matter - the damage was done, and Muslims were labeled anti-art without even having a say in the matter. The list goes on. A British school bans children's stories about pigs so that Muslims won't get offended - again no Muslim complained ("It is rather sad," commented UK imam Ibrahim Mogra. "Muslims would not find the Three Little Pigs offensive."). A German opera last week cancelled a performance in which the leaders of various religions were beheaded, again citing Muslim sensibilities - even though, again, no Muslims complained, and the opera was performed three years ago without incident. Despite the reaction of the Muslim world to the Danish Muhammad cartoons - which probably drove much of the paranoia behind these decisions - Muslims in the west have a thicker skin than most people think, and the vast majority aren't looking to impose their values on others. But in the case of the (selective) MEMRI account, where at least one Muslim did (allegedly) complain about the NYC Apple Store, it seems that whenever a lone Muslim says something incendiary - even when it is an anonymous person hiding in a cave somewhere - his words are taken to somehow represent all Muslims. When whole groups of Muslims issue condemnations of terrorism, they are treated as "brave but isolated cries", or worse, ignored. In MEMRI's case, the mainstream media has already begun reporting it as fact. When it comes to Muslims, everyone loves a rumor.

I just can't believe that this is an issue for anyone! For crying out loud, even the Apple Store has to become associated with Muslims, and in a negative way? I think this is a plot by Micro$oft (joke [?]).

Finally, some critical press:

"It is transparent glass with an Apple logo in the middle and looks as much like the Ka'ba as the Pompidou Centre looks like the Great Pyramid. We have heard reports of Apple fans swirling around the cube hoping to touch the sacred symbol in the middle, but that is nothing to do with Islam and is entirely a different sort of creed."

>> even when it is an anonymous person hiding in a cave somewhere - his words are taken to somehow represent all Muslims.

.. and the amount of even less significant voices who will defend what that person has to say. But its not a uniquely muslim phenomenon to be subjected to bias. Our various media are equally capanle of it. There needs to be reform of the so called free press. Like an independent judiciary, it should have some ethical guidelines. Truth needs to be enabled by the public goodwill, not sponsored by advertisements.

And can anybody institute legal proceedings against the person who started the tall tale? Maybe even legal proceedings against the media houses that reported on it without adequate fact checking? The impact of irresponsible media is tremendous.

I have decided to be simply offended by dint of being a Muslim. Better to meet expectations from the outset rather than all these futile attempts to draw the rest of the world's attention to reality. And by the way, Bush's foreign policy is enlightened, the UK anti-terrorism laws are the best thing since the magna carta and Uri Gellor is for real.

Wasalaam

TMA

There was a post about this (and lengthy comment section) at TUAW yesterday. While there are a few bigoted and exasperated comments, most people there--Muslims and non-Muslims--saw through this for the unsubtantiated flamebait it apparently is.

Other voices of sanity are coming out:

Muslim Community Responds: We Love the Apple NYC Cube (applegazette.com): "What really makes me angry is that under the guise of news about Apple (which we all love), a blatant flat-out lie was perpetuated. The reality of the matter was that it was a random post on a random website, without a single supporting name or organization to reflect the ìmuslim communityís outrage.î The MEMRI article did not even link to, nor identify, the Arabic news source it was supposed to be citing or translating!"

Mac users can also be morons (electric-escape.net): "Being a rational-thinking Mac user, my bullshit detector was buzzing over this. Aside from the lack of any cites or references (just an anonymous "an Islamic website"), even the most casual geek knows that Apple's NYC store finished construction months ago. Throw in the fact that the only people calling the store "Apple Mecca" are self-professed wags, and that the Genius Bars in the Apple Stores don't serve alcohol, and you've got more than enough discrepencies to wonder if the (anonymous) writer was submitting a bit of stale satire."

But I really thought people get sued in America. Can't someone be sued? lol

Ghulam, its more of an issue that editors were certain that quoting MEMRI would produce sales / page views. Media, despite the Marxist and post-modern criticisms of it, is still a demand driven industry in a capitalistic economy. To highlight this point: before 9-11 or Madrid or London or Bali, who would have reprinted such a story? Hardly anyone, I think becuase no one would have paid money to read the story. Nowadays, people fear Muslims and Islam because of those events, so people spend money out of fear and wanting to be informed about that fear. Suing them will only reinforce the notions that Muslims will use and abuse the legal system to litigate against a fundamental right: free speech. It would backfire on us, I think.

this is an excellent article. MEMRI deserves to have its feet placed to the fire

Thanks to intrepid bloggers, MEMRI has been forced to respond - but they still won't divulge the original source for corroboration:

"In response to readers' comments to MEMRI regarding the content and details mentioned in the report "Apple's 'Mecca Project' Provokes Muslim Reaction," it should be emphasized that all content published by MEMRI is translated directly from the primary source. MEMRI's mission is to present material as originally written and read in the Arab world, that would otherwise go unreported."

This is getting out of hand, what next? Will Minnie Mouse offend some poor slob because she wears short skirts and doesn't wear a Hajab? Whenever some idiot says this crap they need to be slapped on the spot for suggesting ignorant insults to Islam. Sort of like the little boy who cried wolf, he needed a beating.

If I say I'm offended, can I get discounts? :P
This would be a great mid-Ramadan laugh if it weren't so pernicious. Everybody needs to have a cup of cammomile, lie down, and quit either worrying about Muslim mobs with torches and pitchforks, and forming said worrisome mobs, causing Nervous Nellies to see them round every corner. Good grief.

>> ...wanting to be informed about that fear

Seems to be a very universal hunman phenomenon. People will reinforce their prejudices.

A young person I knew had her parents killed by hijackers. She naturally took the fact that black african people had committed this crime by reinforcing the fiction that black people are uncultured, violent and inhuman. Its easy in South Africa for muslims because we were classified as non-white in the old regime. That combined with the fact that it is a black african country, makes the prejudice less justifiable.

Its probably tougher to shake loose as a minority ... and minorites reinforce their own prejudices as much as prejudice are reinforced against them. I think its something we do as an Ummah all the time.

Like most rumours, there is a grain (a very small grain) of truth in the MEMRI story. When the store was under construction, a temporary wooden structure was erected on the street to surround the worksite and protect the public from injury. That structure was painted black and was indeed a large cube. At that time, at least one Web site that is apparently run by one or more Muslims complained bitterly (in Arabic and English) about it. Someone asked about the complaint on the forum run by my local Islamic Community Centre and posted a page from the site. Unfortunately, I do not have the URL.

The actual store is a transparent glass parallelepiped that does not look like the Kaaba. The complaint that the store was called a "computer mecca" shows that the complainer does not know much about English. If Christians had a universal place of pilgrimage, they would no doubt say "computer jerusalem" or computer rome". Instead they fell back on their own knowledge of the huge power of attraction of Mecca and, since around 1850, any place that attracts larges numbers of people for a specific purpose is called a "mecca" (in this sense spelled with a small M).

Yes, this is ridiculous. As mentioned above, there has been a post on TUAW which portrays the MEMRI story as truth. (http://www.tuaw.com/2006/10/11/muslim-community-offended-by-apples-fifth-avenue-nyc-cube/). The writer, Laurie A. Duncan supposedly "fixed" it by adding a question mark but has neither apologized or stated anything regarding the questionable validity of the original MEMRI source. I have repeatedly posted comments asking for her to be fired (or at least an admission of making a mistake) and they have been repeatedly deleted. Please join me in calling for her resignation. Go to [url=http://www.tuaw.com]http://www.tuaw.com[/url] and make a post.

@thomas ~ Read her little addendum. She's certainly milking the controversy. A promise of a follow up article with no criticism of the obvious weakness of her source. This happens over and over again within the media. That a front page insult becomes a back page apology. Its one thing to have a free press. Its another thing to have an effective and honest one.

Oh dear, now the website 'This is London' (linked to the xenophobic London Evening Standard) is running a story saying Muslims are offended because the coming UK Olympics in 2010 'clashes' with Ramadan! The IHRC have, allegedly, already expressed their 'outrage'. If this isn't media manufactured outrage, I don't know what is, but will Muslims in Britain fall for it? Comments on at least one UK Muslim forum suggests some of them might!

Wasalaam

TMA

Update:

The New York Post reprints the story (as expected... they are the Daily Mail of the US), but identifies a website that MEMRI has not made public... Al Hesbah. The thing is... it's a MESSAGE BOARD (check out the translation, courtesy of Google). A post on a message board constitutes credible outrage??

BTW, the Post also uses one of the most awkward titles ever put to newsprint. The Metro (a free commuter paper printed all over Britain) just ran the story as well this morning.

This is why it was so important for us to press MEMRI to release the source. (A reporter told me about this on Friday after she spoke with Mr. Carmon himself.) Is it an organization? An influential person? A powerful group? Or is it a lone person? And if it was a lone person, did others on the site take up the call? These things matter when you're talking about having the "Muslim community offended". MEMRI was shamed into releasing this info because people demanded it. Good thing we kept the pressure on.