Why does a news agency publish thought-provoking articles, analytical reports, and reflective pieces? And why does BETH not resemble the agencies familiar to Arab readers? The answer begins with a larger question: Is the media’s role merely to report what happened, or to help people understand it?

By Abdullah Al-Omairah

Recently, I have received recurring questions from followers of BETH Agency—some driven by curiosity, others by genuine surprise:

Why does a news agency publish articles alongside news and reports?

And why does it write in a bold and distinctive style unlike anything we are accustomed to seeing from Arab news agencies?

The question is understandable. For many years, the prevailing model among Arab news agencies has remained tied to official news, rigid language, and coverage that tells readers an event occurred but rarely ventures beyond the event itself.

Most of these agencies emerged within official environments and continued operating through the same templates. In many cases, they eventually came to resemble the local newspapers that republish their material: speaking to themselves in their own language instead of addressing the world through its language, questions, and ways of understanding.

By the world’s language, I do not mean only the words people speak, but the language of the mind. The more important requirement is for journalists to understand how recipients think, how they read the news, and what questions take shape in their minds before writing for them.

At BETH, however, we begin from a different understanding:

The news is the beginning of the work, not its end.

Every Story Has a Mind

Anyone who follows the agency’s output will notice that analysis is not a separate section reserved for major events. It is a method extending across most of what we produce.

We have news that gives readers information.

Reports that place it in context.

Analysis that reveals what lies behind it.

And articles that examine its impact on people, society, and decision-making.

We therefore do not produce impressionistic content based on passing opinions or undisciplined emotions. The articles we publish are, at their core, analytical or report-based articles. They begin with an event, raise its questions, compare its implications, and ultimately reach an interpretation readers can examine and discuss.

We always try to read what is unfolding within recipients and to articulate on their behalf what they feel but cannot express; awakening their reservoirs of thought and emotion, and giving what lies hidden within them a language and a voice.

A text may take the form of an article while retaining the discipline of a report.

Another may appear to be a report while possessing the depth of an article.

We are not overly concerned with the name of the format; what matters to us is the value that reaches the reader.

Even Calmness Is Journalism

BETH also publishes reflective articles that may appear distant from the noise of news, wars, and politics.

These are not empty interludes or sentimental words added merely to complete the scene. They are part of our vision of the human being who receives images of killing, disasters, conflicts, and threats every day, then puts down the phone carrying the weight of everything witnessed.

That person has the right to find within the media a space that restores balance and offers an idea, a lesson, or a moment of reflection.

Although our reflective articles bring reassurance, they are never devoid of meaning. They explore fear, loss, attachment, relationships, mental overload, and the ability to continue living.

Media that knows how to make people anxious should also know how to help them understand their anxiety.

A News Agency Is Not an Incident Bulletin

We do not believe that a news agency should be a repository for dry and distressing news, transmitting incidents and statements according to a fixed agenda and then considering its mission complete.

A truly global news agency should encompass politics, economics, culture, science, society, thought, and life.

Our agenda at BETH is not a list of subjects imposed on recipients, but a serious attempt to understand what they need:

To know what happened.

To understand why it happened.

To see what may happen next.

And, amid all of that, to find something that speaks to both mind and spirit.

Diversity does not mean abandoning professional standards. We do not pursue cheap sensationalism, present distorted subjects or superficial provocation, or violate the ethics of the profession.

Reality is the central pillar of our work, but reality itself is broader than official statements and breaking news.

Nothing Stands Still

Journalism is not a sacred template, and media is not a profession whose tools have reached completion and then stopped evolving.

Every art in life develops. How, then, could the art of media and the science of journalism fail to evolve when they are more closely connected than almost anything else to people, their technologies, and the ways through which they understand the world?

Followers of BETH will therefore encounter continuous change. If it does not appear every day, it will emerge every week or at the beginning of a new phase.

We experiment with different editorial windows, develop imagery and media arts, review our presentation methods, and search for a language capable of reaching readers wherever they may be and addressing their minds in a way they can understand and engage with.

We did not arrive at this point by chance. It is the result of thirteen years devoted not only to producing news and developing journalistic arts, but also to studying patterns of thought among recipients in different societies: how they read the news, how it affects them, and what impressions it leaves in their minds.

We trust our experience, and we place even greater trust in the ability of our colleagues to innovate.

An agency that does not change with its readers may continue publishing, but it will stop reaching them.

What About Artificial Intelligence?

The question sometimes arrives in a form that appears inquisitive but is not entirely free of an attempt at disparagement:

Do you rely on artificial intelligence?

The answer is simple: Who works in media and knowledge today without using artificial intelligence tools?

These tools are available to everyone—to institutions and individuals, adults and children, journalists and non-journalists. Merely using them is therefore neither an achievement nor an accusation.

The real question is not: Do you use artificial intelligence?

It is: What can you create with it?

The tool does not choose the issue. It does not independently understand the sensitivities of society, automatically distinguish boldness from recklessness, recognize an institution’s identity, or identify the question everyone else has overlooked.

It needs a journalist who understands the profession, knows what is wanted, possesses the ability to verify, select, critique, and revise, and ultimately accepts responsibility for what is published.

Even the most advanced tools cannot give vision to a journalist who does not know the objective. They may generate an abundance of words, but they will not provide an intelligent question, professional instinct, or the ability to discover what lies behind the news.

Artificial intelligence does not eliminate the journalist’s mind; it reveals its size.

At BETH, we do not surrender our minds to the tool. We place the tool within a system led by human intelligence, experience, and editorial policy. We use it for research, comparison, broadening perspectives, and developing production. The final decision, however, remains with the person who understands the profession, the community, and the responsibility involved.

Why Do We Not Resemble Them?

Because we did not establish BETH to become another copy of an existing model.

We respect every professional experience, but we do not believe that respecting the profession means repeating its old templates. Journalism does not advance when those who come later imitate their predecessors, but when they ask what those predecessors are no longer capable of providing.

Our articles, analytical reports, intellectual windows, human-interest pieces, and new experiments will therefore continue.

We will review and develop them, and we may replace some when a better format emerges. But we will not return to a concept that regards a news agency as a machine for redistributing statements.

We do not want followers to leave BETH carrying only a piece of news; we want them to leave with a broader understanding than they had before they arrived.

Those accustomed to seeing a news agency stop at the final line of a news story may find what we do surprising.

We believe the real work begins there.