What a Middle Eastern owner does for a newspaper

The Independent’s Arabic version has set alarm bells ringing over the prospect of a UAE-owned Telegraph t was a somewhat surprising report to read in a title with the Independent’s famous “eagle” logo sat above it. In a long-winded, turgid item, the report railed against Jews for running a “hidden empire” and possessing a “plan for a world takeover”. Loyal and right-thinking British readers of the the newspaper founded in the 1980s as a safe haven for liberal, independent thinking, were thankfully spared the diatribe.

The article, published last month, was only available in

an online Arabic offshoot of the paper that is published under a licensing agreement with a Saudi Arabian media conglomerate. (After a complaint from a media monitoring group, the item was radically re-edited although not removed.)

The editors in the UK will not have had a clue about what was being published in its name in Arabic but the article carries with it a severe editorial warning; one that might be at the back of the minds of regulators and ministers as they ponder whether Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan, the vice-president of the United Arab Emirates and one of the world’s richest men, should be allowed to take effective control of

IRobert Mendick CHIEF REPORTER

Abu Dhabi’s plan to own

is contentious to say the least. Many of the newspaper’s readers are furious. So, too, are senior MPs on all sides of the House. Opponents of the deal are appalled at the prospect of

being effectively owned by the UAE, an authoritarian regime with little to no track record on press freedom. That they say, is reason enough to block it.

The deal, however, has support in high places in a Government keen for UAE foreign investment, among them, according to reports, Lord Cameron, the Foreign Secretary.

In the battle for the

own Middle East tie-up becomes all the more intriguing, because the online newspaper is almost a third Saudi-owned.

In recent weeks, Geordie Greig, the Independent’s editor, has been extolling the virtues of the Saudi deal. His newspaper, which has been online only since 2016, has stayed independent while also becoming profitable, supporters of the Saudi deal point out.

A recent report by Enders Analysis, a subscription research service specialising in media, indicated that the Independent/Saudi deal could give Sheikh Mansour a way out of the impasse in which he now finds himself.

With the regulators still investigating and amid vociferous protests against the sale, Enders warns that the “saga of the ownership of The

… could roll on and on through 2025”. One option, it suggests, is for RedBird IMI, the investment vehicle set up by Sheikh Mansour and its chief executive Jeff Zucker, to “broaden the investor base and thus address the threat of editorial interference more directly”.

In other words, Sheikh Mansour needs to drastically reduce his 75 per cent stake in RedBird IMI. The Saudis’ 30 per cent stake in the Independent is the best benchmark out there.

Except, of course, that may not be enough to assuage concerns.

Readers of the English-language version of the Independent will be blissfully unaware but Independent Arabia is causing growing concern. It is not just about what is published, but what gets left out that raises questions about freedom of speech and the wisdom, or otherwise, of launching a brand across authoritarian regimes.

An analysis of shows it has published anti-Semitic content while omitting articles critical of the Saudi regime that had appeared in the English version.

In January, Independent Arabia published an article in which Jews were blamed for running a “hidden empire” and possessing a “plan for a world takeover”. The article was drastically edited after a complaint made last month.

In another contentious article, an Independent Arabia theatre critic praised as “touching and realistic” a play in which Anne Frank was re-imagined as an Israeli neo-Nazi.

And a story in the UK Independent that drew attention to the censorship of a US satirical TV show by a Dubaibased broadcaster over references to the crown prince’s alleged involvement in the 2018 murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, was itself censored in Independent Arabia.

On climate change, the two websites also appear to markedly diverge, which may alarm the eco-friendly readership and inevitably lead to claims that Independent Arabia dare not rail against Saudi’s oildependent economy.

It is impossible to comb every single story ever published on Independent Arabia, but one Arabic-speaking commentator said he could not find an article critical of Mohammed bin Salman, Saudi’s powerful crown prince.

An Independent spokesman said: “Like many global news organisations, The Independent has licence agreements outside of the UK. All licensees, including Independent Arabia, operate independently but under a strict code of conduct and editorial guidelines. If contraventions are identified, The Independent always intervenes as appropriate.”

Independent Arabia were contacted for comment.

Sir Iain Duncan Smith, the former Conservative party leader who has led opposition to sale, said the licensing of the Independent to Saudi Arabia provided further grounds to block the Abu Dhabi takeover.

He said: “This raises an additional reason as to why Abu Dhabi should not be allowed to take over

What has happened with the Independent reinforces the point that once you get money like this – and in the case of the Telegraph from a foreign government – you lose control of what it can do next.

“The idea they can produce an alternative version of the paper tells you everything you need to know about how they [Abu Dhabi] will use newspapers as propaganda. This gives them a title with credibility because it is a British newspaper. But what it sells is a wholly different view of the world.”

A spokesman for Index on Censorship said: “The ownership of British media outlets by companies in authoritarian regimes is extremely worrying.” The campaign group urged the Government to “look very carefully at the relationship between the Saudi state and the Independent and ensure that free expression is protected, wherever it is published.”

Reporters without Borders, which compiles an annual press freedom league table, ranked Saudi Arabia 170th out of 180 countries last year. The UAE, incidentally, came 145th.

The Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting and Analysis (Camera), a pro-Israel organisation set up to counter what it claims is “frequently inaccurate and skewed” reporting of events in the Middle East, has also voiced concerns.

Adam Levick, Camera’s UK researcher, said: “The does not hold its Arabic-speaking subsidiary to serious journalistic standards, as years of tolerance towards anti-Semitic content show.

“This week’s removal of content suggesting a Jewish conspiracy for world domination is the first correction we received from

ever since the ‘Once you get money from a foreign government you lose control of what it can do next’

website was launched in January 2019, despite dozens of attempts.

In a warning over the proposed sale of Mr Levick said: “In addition to the editions in all languages, this reflects badly also upon the entire model of Arabicspeaking media outlets, which are owned and operated from the Gulf but carry Western brands.”

A spokesman for Campaign Against Antisemitism, said: “The content published by … makes one wonder whether there is any anti-Semitic trope that

will not stoop to? That this is all done under the umbrella of the UK’s newspaper brand makes it all the more disturbing.”

The hit news stands in 1986, famously boasting of its refusal to tow any single political line. It has passed through a number of owners since, ending up in the hands of the family of Alexander Lebedev, the Russian tycoon, formerly a senior intelligence officer in the KGB, in 2010. One year earlier, the Lebedevs bought the London

In 2017, Sultan Mohamed Abuljadayel, a Saudi businessman, bought a 30 per cent stake in the

through an offshore fund that was ultimately owned by a Saudi bank in turn owned by the Saudi state. A report by Ofcom, the media regulator, said Mr Abuljadayel came from a “well-known wealthy family in Saudi Arabia” but had no ties to the Saudi royal family.

When the Saudi investment was secured in July 2017, a spokesman for the online newspaper, said: “The editorial independence of the

has been formally protected by a new agreement between the shareholders.”

Ofcom said in a report in 2019 it could not rule out there may be “incentives and ability for the buyers to alter the accuracy or editorial stances of the publications” but that it found “no evidence of any influence in practice” since the acquisition.

In January 2019, the owners agreed the licensing deal for the launch of with Saudi Research and Media Group (SRMG), described as a Saudi statebacked media company. Based in Riyadh, SRMG is the largest publisher in the Middle East. Under the exclusive licensing agreement, four websites were set up in Arabic, Persian, Urdu and Turkish, all using the title and logo of an eagle.

The SRMG websites “feature direct translations of articles from independent.co.uk” but its journalists also produce their own content.

SRMG pays an undisclosed fee for the use of the name and logo. It is unclear what the deal is worth to the but it contributed to a £2million increase in revenue, up nine per cent on the previous year, according to the Independent’s accounts for 2019, the year the deal was struck.

The team, which is based in west London with offices in Cairo and Beirut, has a separate editor. Mr Greig edits independent.co.uk while editor-inchief is Adhwan Al-Ahmari, a Saudi national based in London. He launched the website on the back of an interview with Saudi Arabia’s intelligence chief Prince Bandar bin Sultan.

At the time of the licensing deal, the

said: “All editorial practices and output will conform to the world-renowned standards, code of conduct and established ethos of

The Independent.”

It is unclear what plans RedBird IMI have for In a previously unpublished exchange from an interview with the paper in November, Mr Zucker discussed the and its relationship with Saudi Arabia.

Asked if he would be willing to give undertakings to Ofcom that if Red

Bird IMI were allowed to take control the brand would not be licensed out or used to create publications in other languages, he said: “A hundred per cent. I don’t even understand that.”