(IPS) news feature

When Iraq invaded Kuwait in Aug 1990, it was days before some of the Saudi Arabian newspapers reported the event, which they even referred to evasively as 'tension' in the region.

In contrast, since day one, Middle Eastern newspapers have splashed reports on the United States bombings in Afghanistan that began earlier this month on their front pages.

Outsiders may attribute the difference in the response of the region's media to the fact that the latter event involves a Western superpower. But Middle Eastern media insiders say it is merely one of the results of changes in the way some governments in the region have been handling the press in recent years.

''We are enjoying a sort of freedom that we didn't have before,'' says Mohammed Al Tunisi, editor of the Arabic business daily ' Al Eqtisadiah ' in Saudi Arabia.

''Nobody tells us anymore 'don't publish this'. They feel we are responsible for reflecting the interests of our country.''

Indeed, media observers in the region point out as an example the case of a mall bomb blast that killed two people in the Saudi city of Khobar two weeks ago.

In contrast to the scant coverage given to similar bombings in the same city just five years ago, the recent incident got wide publicity and security agencies were very forthcoming with information to the press.

Taboo subjects

Saudi newspapers are now also covering issues that used to be considered taboo for public discussion, such as child abuse, ill treatment of domestic servants, and rising unemployment.

The English language daily ' Arab News ', for instance, recently published an article about three Saudi youth who murdered an Asian petrol station worker to avoid paying a 39-riyal ( US$10) bill. A few years ago, such a story would have never seen print.

''Things have really opened up here - nowadays you can't hide anything,'' says ' Arab News ' editor-in-chief Khaled Al Maeena. He adds, obviously pleased, ''As a journalist I feel much more comfortable.''

Tunisi notes that journalists no longer wait for official word before they start writing about problems arising from different situations.

Last year, for example, the Saudi media began covering a fever outbreak in Rift Valley in the kingdom way before the Ministry of Health said anything about it. According to the media reports, the outbreak claimed hundreds of lives.

While the health ministry initially did not admit that there were casualties, it later began holding daily briefings revealing the exact status of the epidemic.

There are a few theories on what brought on the changes in official attitude toward media coverage across the region.

Many observers agree that among the main contributors have been the satellite television and the Internet in general, both of which have given the public access to, and information about, events and topics it would have otherwise not heard about.

Some observers, though, also credit the apparent improvement in local media coverage to the emergence of the so-called ' CNN of the Arab World' - the Al Jazeera network in Qatar - and the new batch of younger leaders in the Middle East.

Today, even regional outsiders have heard of Al Jazeera , which has served as a channel of communication between Osama Bin Laden and the rest of the world.

Launched five years ago and sustained by a US137 million grant from the Qatari emir, the satellite television channel is now charging up to US20,000 per minute of footage of Bin Laden.

The hard-hitting network has been criticised by Arab governments for previous pieces on sensitive matters. More recently, however, Jazeera has come under fire from no less than Washington, which has accused the network of arousing anti-US sentiment in the Middle East.

Balanced reporting

Remarks Jazeera 's editor-in-chief Ibrahim Helal: ''First we were accused of being financed by Iraq, then we were accused of being financed by Israel's Mossad, and now we are being accused of being financed by the Taliban.''

''These accusations are contradictory,'' he says. ''They are all wrong. We carry everybody's opinion and we are balanced.''

And contrary to the usual norm wherein governments in the region give in easily to US pressure, Qatar officials have been refusing to heed any demands from Washington to get Jazeera to tone down the coverage of Bin Laden.

Foreign Minister Sheikh Hamad Bin Jassim Bin Jabr Al Thani has even cited freedom of the press in his defence of Jazeera against the US charges of ''inflammatory rhetoric''.

''Qatar's emir wants to promote freedom of the press and the state of law,'' Hamad said, expressing his ''surprise'' at US Secretary of State Colin Powell's remarks that the channel was giving too much airtime to Islamic extremists.

To be sure, the US move has drawn angry responses press freedom advocates in the region, most of whom say Washington is jeopardising a healthy new trend in the Middle Eastern media.

They note that Jazeera itself made its name by broadcasting what no other Arab news organisation dared to - the hard truth. The 24-hour Arabic channel was even the first to show exclusive footage of Taliban's destruction of two ancient giant Bamiyan Buddha sculptures in Afghanistan some months ago.

At the same time, however, it has also been very consistent in espousing the cause of the Palestinians and their intifada or uprising against the Israeli occupation of the West Bank.

Says Noora Abdullah, who works at the Dubai Media City here in the United Arab Emirates (UAE): ''It gives you both the truth and the gossip. The hottest news is on Jazeera .''

Meanwhile, analysts say the second-generation leaders in the region have also been instrumental in 'freeing' Middle Eastern media.

Serious attack

Then again, there is Jordan, which is now headed by the 39-year-old King Abdullah II. There, the press has been fretting with a post-Sept11 amendment to the country's press law. According to the Jordanian government, the change was made to avoid destabilisation of the country by 'terrorist groups'.

The amendment gives a broader definition of terrorism and stricter penalties, including new sanctions for violations of the press law - ''permanent or temporary closure'' of publications that carry ''false or libelous information that can undermine national unity or the country's reputation''.

The Jordan Press Association has strongly criticised the measures as a "serious'' attack on democracy even though the ambiguous law may not dent their freedom too much.

The good news is that Jordan may now be an exception. In Manama, for example, Bahraini authorities are currently working on a press freedom law and a panel tasked with democratic reforms has called for the lifting of curbs on the media.

An official affiliated with the Bahraini National Action Charter even observed recently that freedom of expression for journalists and writers ''should be guaranteed under the constitution''.