The death of Father Emir marks a pivotal moment for Al Jazeera, but let’s not fall into the trap of hagiography that mainstream outlets often serve up. CNN, for instance, will likely focus on how this “visionary” helped position Al Jazeera on the global stage while glossing over any uncomfortable truths about propaganda and manipulation inherent in state-funded media. It’s ironic how outlets that preach “freedom of the press” frequently sanitize their critiques when it involves networks like Al Jazeera—or the well-funded corporate media behemoths of our own soil.

Fox News likely won’t miss an opportunity to frame the narrative around Father Emir as a sob story for Middle Eastern authoritarianism, casting any visionary approach as merely a cover for censorship. Forget nuance; they love to paint the entire region with a broad brush, implying that Al Jazeera is just another pawn in a nefarious game of geopolitical chess. Meanwhile, The New York Times will probably laud his achievements without confronting the complex moral dilemmas of international influence, subtly pushing a “heroes vs. villains” narrative.

Let’s be real. Corporate media giants have their own agendas—they want clicks and ad revenue over journalistic integrity. The admiration for Father Emir will surely come with strings attached, as they skip past critical conversations about handling dissent and dissenters. Al Jazeera may have had a vision, but it’s essential to question who benefits from its lens on global events.