The media has always played a pivotal role in accounting governments and shaping public opinion. Its form may have evolved over the ages but its impact is still feared by the ruling class which the Qur’an refers to as the mala (ملا). All the messengers came in to conflict with this group starting from the first of the messengers Nuh (as). Allah ta’ala says,

لَقَدْ أَرْسَلْنَا نُوحًا إِلَىٰ قَوْمِهِۦ فَقَالَ يَـٰقَوْمِ ٱعْبُدُوا۟ ٱللَّهَ مَا لَكُم مِّنْ إِلَـٰهٍ غَيْرُهُۥٓ إِنِّىٓ أَخَافُ عَلَيْكُمْ عَذَابَ يَوْمٍ عَظِيمٍۢ

قَالَ ٱلْمَلَأُ مِن قَوْمِهِۦٓ إِنَّا لَنَرَىٰكَ فِى ضَلَـٰلٍۢ مُّبِينٍۢ

“Indeed, We sent Noah to his people. He said, “O my people! Worship Allah—you have no other god except Him. I truly fear for you the torment of a tremendous Day.” But the chiefs of his people (mala) said, “We surely see that you are clearly misguided.”[1]

When the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ began his mission in Makkah it was this ruling class that immediately clamped down on him and the early Muslims to prevent the spread of the message.

This presentation by Ustadh Abu Yusuf starts with some very nice examples of the power of Arabic poetry which was the media at the time of Islam.

Tyrant governments across the world including the Muslim world impose strict controls on the media, and many journalists and editors have been imprisoned for exposing government corruption. Salma al-Shehab, a Saudi citizen and mother of two was jailed 34 years in the Kingdom over a tweet![2]

The west prides itself on having a free press without the stringent media controls and censorship which exists in the Muslim world. The reality however, is that no country operates a completely free media or has unlimited free speech. Media in the west works for the interests of a tiny wealthy capitalist elite. Owen Jones in his book ‘The Establishment’ explains this point.

“There is not a free press in Britain: there is a press free of direct government interference, which is a different thing altogether. Instead, most of the mainstream media is controlled by a very small number of politically motivated owners, whose grip on the media is one of the most devastatingly effective forms of political power and influence in modern Britain. The terms of acceptable political debate are ruthlessly policed, particularly by the tabloid media; those who fall foul of them can face crucifixion by newspaper. The media, in other words, is a pillar of the Establishment – however much many journalists may find this an unpalatable truth.”[3]

The clampdown on pro-Palestinian journalists who have been exposing the Israeli genocide in Gaza offers no clearer proof of this. Despite a crime epidemic in London where shoplifters carefully browse the shelves and openly steal products without fear of arrest, 10 police officers arrived at the home of Electronic Intifada’s associate editor, Asa Winstanley, shortly before 6am and confiscated his electronic devices. They didn’t arrest him because no crime had been committed, but simply intimidated and threatened him over his pro-Palestinian articles.[4]

Role of the Media in Islam

The government of the Caliphate does not have a monopoly on the media. Any citizen of the Islamic State is allowed to set up media whether newspapers, magazines, radio or television. Permission is not required to establish this type of media, although a licensing mechanism will be in place and a code of conduct that must be adhered to.

All states have limits to the general remit of the press and they must operate within the law. The Islamic State is no different in this regard except the underlying values of the society impose different limits on what is acceptable and unacceptable speech. Sensitive information related to national security cannot be published. Slander, libel, incitement, racism, insulting religious beliefs and the propagation of depraved and misguided cultures are not allowed by sharia.

The media within the Caliphate has full rights to account the Caliph and his government, investigate any government oppression (mazlama), or other issues that pose a danger or are in the interests of the society at large. The media can investigate and publish this without fear of any arrest or persecution.

The work of the media within the Caliphate falls under the general obligation of enjoining the good (ma’ruf) and forbidding the evil (munkar) which is a collective duty on society as a whole.

The Prophet Muhammad ﷺ said:

وَالَّذِي نَفْسِي بِيَدِهِ لَتَأْمُرُنَّ بِالْمَعْرُوفِ وَلَتَنْهَوُنَّ عَنْ الْمُنْكَرِ أَوْ لَيُوشِكَنَّ اللَّهُ أَنْ يَبْعَثَ عَلَيْكُمْ عِقَابًا مِنْهُ ثُمَّ تَدْعُونَهُ فَلَا يُسْتَجَابُ لَكُمْ

“By the one in whose hand is my soul, you must enjoin good and forbid evil, or else Allah will soon send punishment upon you. Then, you will call upon Allah and it will not be answered for you.”[5]

Is there freedom of speech in the Caliphate?

The concept of ‘freedom of speech’ is derived from the Capitalist ideology that is based on the belief that God and religion should be separated from life’s affairs (secularism). Human beings define how to live their lives free of the constraints of religion which is why freedom of individual, ownership, religion and speech are essential cornerstones of Capitalism. The right to speak and what are the limits of speech are therefore all defined by human beings.

Noam Chomsky, summed up the western concept of freedom of speech when he said: “If you believe in freedom of speech, you believe in freedom of speech for views you don’t like. Goebbels was in favour of freedom of speech for views he liked. So was Stalin. If you’re in favour of freedom of speech, that means you’re in favour of freedom of speech precisely for views you despise.”[6]

This view completely contradicts Islam. In Islam, it is the Creator of human beings Allah (Most High) who gave the right of speech to people and defined the limits on what is acceptable and unacceptable speech.

The Prophet Muhammad ﷺ said:

وَمَنْ كَانَ يُؤْمِنُ بِاللَّهِ وَالْيَوْمِ الآخِرِ فَلْيَقُلْ خَيْرًا أَوْ لِيَصْمُتْ

“Whosoever believes in Allah and the Last Day, then let him speak good (khair) or remain silent.”[7]

Khair in this hadith means Islam or what Islam approves of.

Every word a human being speaks is recorded by the two angels called Kiraman Katibeen. Even the speaking of one bad word may lead someone to the hellfire.

The Prophet Muhammad ﷺ said:

إِنَّ الْعَبْدَ لَيَتَكَلَّمُ بِالْكَلِمَةِ مِنْ رِضْوَانِ اللَّهِ لاَ يُلْقِي لَهَا بَالاً، يَرْفَعُ اللَّهُ بِهَا دَرَجَاتٍ، وَإِنَّ الْعَبْدَ لَيَتَكَلَّمُ بِالْكَلِمَةِ مِنْ سَخَطِ اللَّهِ لاَ يُلْقِي لَهَا بَالاً يَهْوِي بِهَا فِي جَهَنَّمَ

“A slave (of Allah) may utter a word which pleases Allah without giving it much importance, and because of that Allah will raise him to degrees (of reward): a slave (of Allah) may utter a word (carelessly) which displeases Allah without thinking of its gravity and because of that he will be thrown into the Hell-Fire.”[8]

Right of speech in the Caliphate

The west propagates to the Muslim world that freedom and democracy is the only way forward if they want to progress and rid themselves of their oppressive dictatorships. However, as Muslims we look to Islam and Islam alone for our political solutions. The Qur’an and Sunnah have given us all the answers we need to establish an Islamic political system that will free us of the current corrupt systems ruling over us. This is the Caliphate Ruling System discussed on this site.

In the Caliphate, it is the constitutional right of all citizens (men and women, Muslim and non-Muslim) to express their opinions freely without fear of arrest or imprisonment within the limits of sharia. The main areas where this right is exercised is through the Majlis, Political Parties and media. Accounting the government achieves the highest reward in Islam – martyrdom.

The Prophet Muhammad ﷺ said:

سَيِّدُ الشُّهَدَاءِ يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ حَمْزَةُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الْمُطَّلِبِ وَرَجُلٌ قَامَ إِلَى إِمَامٍ جَائِرٍ فَنَهَاهُ وَأَمَرَهُ فَقَتَلَهُ

“The master of the martyrs on the Day of Resurrection is Hamzah ibn ‘Abdul Muttalib, and a man who stands up to a tyrannical leader, prohibiting him from evil and enjoining good upon him, and he is killed for it.”[9]

Muhammad As-Sallabi explains the right of the ummah to account the rulers.

“The Ummah has the right to keep watch on its rulers and set them straight. Allah ta’ala says:

وَلْتَكُن مِّنكُمْ أُمَّةٌۭ يَدْعُونَ إِلَى ٱلْخَيْرِ وَيَأْمُرُونَ بِٱلْمَعْرُوفِ وَيَنْهَوْنَ عَنِ ٱلْمُنكَرِ ۚ وَأُو۟لَـٰٓئِكَ هُمُ ٱلْمُفْلِحُونَ

“Let there be a group among you who call ˹others˺ to goodness, encourage what is good, and forbid what is evil—it is they who will be successful.”[10]

The first thing that Amir al-Mu’mineen Ali said after he was appointed [as caliph] was: “No one has any right to this matter (the position of leader) except the one you appoint, and I cannot decide any matter without your approval.”

This is similar to what Abu Bakr said when he was appointed: “If I do well, then help me, and if I do wrong, then set me straight.”

Umar said something like it: “The dearest of people to me is the one who points out my mistakes to me.” Umar also said: “I am afraid that I may do wrong and no one will stop me for fear of me.”

Uthman said something with the same meaning: “If you find in the Book of Allah that you should put my leg in chains, then put my leg in chains.”

This is how the caliphs acted in the era of the Rightly Guided Caliphs. They submitted to the right of the Ummah to watch over the rulers, and no one objected, which indicates that there was agreement (ijma) on this.”[11]

With the rise of social media, citizen journalists and influencers can now play a role in voicing opinions on societal matters and contributing to the overall atmosphere of discussion and debate within the state. In a hadeeth[12] the Prophet ﷺ said,

كُلُّ رَجُلٍ مِنَ الْمُسْلِمِينَ عَلَى ثَغْرَةٍ مِنْ ثُغَرِ الْإِسْلَامِ، اللَّهَ اللَّهَ لَا يُؤْتَى الْإِسْلَامُ مِنْ قِبَلِكَ

“Every Muslim man is on a frontier of Islam. By Allah, by Allah, let Islam not be attacked from your side.”[13]

Is it allowed for the media to expose corruption?

Media in the west for all its faults has been pivotal in exposing government corruption and war crimes. The 2009 expenses scandal in Britain exposed widespread abuse of expenses by MPs, and CBS News in 2004 published photographs of torture and abuse by US soldiers at Abu Ghraib in Iraq. Would such exposes be allowed within the Caliphate since in origin Islam prohibits spying or exposing someone’s sins?

A Muslim who commits a sin does so either secretly or publicly. The media should not expose the secret sins as we find many tabloid newspapers doing in the west.

The Prophet Muhammad ﷺ said:

وَمَنْ سَتَرَ مُسْلِمًا سَتَرَهُ اللَّهُ يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ

“Whoever screened a Muslim (hiding their defects), Allah will screen him on the Day of Resurrection.”[14]

As for the one who publicly commits sin there is no question of hiding it because he himself has exposed it. Despite this, the media should refrain from publishing stories about those who commit sins publicly not to hide their defects but due to spreading lewdness among society.

This exposure of secret and public sins applies if the sin and corruption is confined to the individual and does not spread. However, if there is harm to the state or wider society then the corruption must be exposed and made public even if the sin was committed secretly.

This is derived from the hadith of Zayd bin Arqam who said: While I was taking part in a Ghazwa (battle), I heard Abdullah ibn Ubay saying. “Don’t spend on those who are with Allah’s Messenger, that they may disperse and go away from him. If we return (to Medina), surely, the more honourable will expel the meanest amongst them.” I reported that (saying) to my uncle or to ‘Umar who, in his turn, informed the Prophet of it. The Prophet called me and I narrated to him the whole story…”[15]

Zayd bin Arqam’s action is considered spying. However, this spying was obligatory because of the harm from Abdullah ibn Ubay who was head of the hypocrites in the Islamic State of the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ. Abdullah ibn Ubay and his group used to secretly conspire against the state and therefore exposing their corruption was essential to the wellbeing of the state and society.

Islamic Groups are not above the law

Following on from this, a very important role of Islamic media is to expose corruption and malpractice among the movements operating within the Muslim community and Muslim countries. There is a wide spectrum of groups operating, and this isn’t about condemning all the Islamic movements and institutions but there are some groups and institutions which are beyond the pale, and who have caused huge fitna within the countries they operate, and in fact put people off the religion rather than bringing them to the religion.

The Dangers of Religious Fanaticism

The totalist cult-like insular movements which have almost disappeared from the Muslim communities but whose thoughts continue to linger in some quarters, are certainly in need of exposure if the need arises. This is because as Robert Lifton says, “In many groups, there is a “no gossip” or “no nattering”rule that keeps people from expressing their doubts or misgivings about what is going on. This rule is usually rationalized by saying that gossip will tear apart the fabric of the group or destroy unity, when in reality the rule is a mechanism to keep members from communicating anything other than positive endorsements. Members are taught to report those who break the rule, a practice that also keeps members isolated from each other and increases dependence on the leadership.”[15.5]

Only with exposure will those inside the movement find out what is actually taking place.

Media in the Islamic State of the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ

Media among the Arabs during the time of the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ was verbal not written and the medium was poetry. The head of the Prophet Muhammad’s ﷺ Media Office was Hassan ibn Thaabit who was the chief poet.

Hassan ibn Thaabit narrated: I asked Abu Huraira “By Allah! Tell me the truth whether you heard the Prophet ﷺ saying, ‘O Hassan! Reply on behalf of Allah’s Messenger ﷺ. O Allah! Help him with the Holy Spirit (Angel Gabriel).” Abu Huraira said, “Yes”.[16]

Other prominent poets were Ka’ab ibn Malik, and Abdullah ibn Ruwaahah. Together they worked in the service of the Islamic State in Medina.

Muhammad As-Salabi describes the effect of Hassan’s media campaign against Islam’s arch enemy Quraish.

“The main medium of spreading information during the Prophet’s lifetime was word of mouth, and given the ease with which good poems were memorized, the main information that was being spread by word of mouth was in the form of poetry. Skilled poets, therefore were a valuable commodity in Arabia.

After the Battle of Badr was over, the poets of the Quraish concentrated their talents on composing poems that honoured Quraish’s fallen soldiers and that expressed grief and resentment for the many losses their army suffered. After (the Battle of) Uhud was concluded, those same poets – such as Hurairah ibn Abi Wahb, Abdullah ibn Zab’aree, Diraar ibn Al-Khattab and Amr ibn Al-Aas – tried to overstate the significance of their victory; but no matter, for Muslim poets – Hassan ibn Thaabit, Ka’ab ibn Malik, and Abdullah ibn Ruwaahah – were ready to refute them and to counter the effects of their poems.

On a psychological level, Hassan’s poems were like bullets being sprayed at the Quraish. Quraish’s victory, Hassan explained, was no victory at all. The Muslims, with a wonderful show of bravery, managed to kill the flag-bearer of Quraish’s army. Hassan mocked Quraish’s soldiers in his poems for being cowardly, an attribute of theirs that was attested to by the fact that they could not even protect their flag-bearer – one of the most protected men of any army. Furthermore, Hassan reminded them of how their flag ended up in the hands of one of their women, since all of the men had left it, being busy with the task of fleeing from the battlefield. With these insults Hassan wanted to remind Quraish’s nobles that they showed cowardice and that they went through many humiliating situations during the early part of the battle; in effect, Hassan was saying to them: “Do not be deceived by your victory; it was tainted, and we are still alive and as strong as ever!” To be sure, Arabs valued honour above all else. What honour then did Quraish’s nobles have left when all over Arabia poems were being circulated in which a description was given of how Quraish’s soldiers fled, which left one of their women with no choice but to pick up their flag for them. That a woman did what they were supposed to do underscored their cowardly actions.”[17]

During the Umayyad and Abbasid Caliphates poets continued to play a pivotal role as the media of the state, for which the Caliphs would reward them generously. El-Affendi describes the effect of this, “This did not only contribute to the flourishing of culture, but became also an important instrument of state power, since poets at that time played the roles of today’s media, advertising the ruler’s (mostly imaginary) virtues, publicising his policies and shoring up the system’s legitimacy.”[18]

The power of media in shaping public opinion

There are many examples of how the media shape public opinion. Most notably we can see this in the western billionaire owned media, and their relentless campaign to malign Islam. After the horrific killing of three children in July 2024, Muslims were immediately blamed on social media, and far-right, anti-immigration protests erupted across the country with Muslims and Mosques targeted, even though the attacker was not Muslim or an immigrant.

Ayatollah Khomeini (d.1989) gives a vivid example of the power of public opinion in 1962 Iran. This is an era under the Shah which had a brutal secret police who routinely tortured people. Despite this, people lost their fear and confronted the regime forcing them to back down against an un-Islamic law being introduced.

He says, “Enjoining the good and forbidding the evil has been made a duty primarily for the sake of accomplishing these high aims. We have restricted it, however, to a narrow category of affairs where harm is suffered chiefly by the individual who is guilty of a sin by deed or by omission. We have the idea firmly in our heads that the instances of evil we are called upon to combat (munkarāt) are only the things we encounter or hear about in everyday life. For example, if someone plays music while we are riding on the bus, or the owner of a coffee house does something wrong, or someone eats in the middle of the bazaar during Ramadān, we regard all these things as instances of evil we must denounce. Meanwhile, we remain totally oblivious to far greater evils. Those who are destroying the welfare of Islam and trampling on the rights of the weak – it is they whom we must force to desist from evil.

If a collective protest were made against the oppressors who commit an improper act or crime, if several thousand telegrams were sent to them from all the Islamic countries telling them to desist, to relinquish their errors, they certainly would desist. If every time a step were taken or a speech given against the interests of Islam and the welfare of the people, those responsible were condemned throughout the country, in every single village and hamlet, they would be obliged to retreat. Could they possibly do otherwise? Never! I know them; I know what kind of people they are. They are very cowardly and would retreat very quickly. But if they see that we are more gutless than they are, they will give themselves airs and do whatever they want.

When the ‘ulamā of Qum met and banded together on one occasion, and the provinces supported them by sending delegations and delivering speeches to show their solidarity, the regime retreated and cancelled the measures we were objecting to.[19] Afterwards, they were able to cool our enthusiasm and weaken us; they divided us up and invented a separate “religious duty” for each of us.[20] As a result of the differing opinions that appeared among us, they grew bold again, and now they do whatever they want with the Muslims and this Islamic country of ours.”[21]

Notes

[1] Holy Qur’an, Surah Al-A’raf, 59-60

[2] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/feb/10/salma-al-shehab-saudi-woman-jailed-for-34-years-over-tweets-released

[3] Owen Jones, ‘The Establishment,’ Penguin Publishers, Mediaocracy Chapter

[4] https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/uk-counterterrorism-police-raid-home-electronic-intifada-journalist-asa-winstanley

[5] Sunan al-Tirmidhī 2169, https://sunnah.com/tirmidhi:2169

[6] Noam Chomsky, ‘Manufacturing Consent: Noam Chomsky and the Media,’ 1992

[7] Muttafaqun Alayhi (authenticity agreed upon). Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī 6136 https://sunnah.com/bukhari:6136 ; Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim 47 https://sunnah.com/muslim:47a

[8] Sahih al-Bukhari 6478, https://sunnah.com/bukhari:6478

[9] al-Mu’jam al-Awsaṭ lil-Ṭabarānī 4079

[10] Holy Qur’an, Surah Al-‘Imran, ayah 104

[11] Dr M. Sallabi, ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib,’ International Islamic Publishing House, Volume 1, p.390

[12] There is ikhtilaaf (difference of opinion) on the strength of the isnad (chain) in this hadith.

The isnad is: Muhammad ibn Idris –> Ahmad ibn Abi al-Hawari –> Marwan ibn Muhammad –> Yazid ibn al-Samt –> al-Wadhin ibn Ata –> Yazid ibn Marthad

The last in the chain is Yazid ibn Marthad who met and transmitted from three sahaba – Ubadah bin As-Samit, Shiddad bin Aws, and Wathilah bin Al-Asqa’. He is therefore a Tabi’ and considered a trustworthy narrator.

The actual sahabi who narrated this from the Prophet ﷺ is missing, making the hadith mursal. The opinion held by Imam Malik and all Maliki jurists and others is that the mursal of a trustworthy person is valid, although in this hadith Al-Albani doesn’t accept this.

The dispute is over al-Wadhin ibn Ata. Al-Albani is of the opinion that al-Wadhin ibn Ata is weak and so the hadith is da’if. Other scholars including Sheikh Bin Baz (d.1999) who quotes this hadith, are of the opinion that al-Wadhin ibn Ata is trustworthy.

Therefore, the hadith for these scholars is hasan, which is the opinion I have adopted and Allah knows best.

The meaning is also in conformity with another famous hadith in Bukhari and Muslim,وَكُلُّكُمْ مَسْئُولٌ عَنْ رَعِيَّتِهِ “Each of you is a guardian and responsible for his charges.”

[13] The Sunnah of Al-Marwazi 1/13-28, https://shamela.ws/book/13032/19

[14] Muttafaqun Alayhi (authenticity agreed upon). Sahih al-Bukhari 2442, https://sunnah.com/bukhari:2442 ; Sahih Muslim 2699a, https://sunnah.com/muslim:2699a

[15] Sahih al-Bukhari 4901, https://sunnah.com/bukhari:4901

[15.5] Margaret Thaler Singer, ‘Cults in Our Midst: The Continuing Fight Against Their Hidden Menace’ p.72

[16] Sahih al-Bukhari 453 https://www.sunnah.com/bukhari/8/102

[17] Dr Ali Muhammad As-Sallaabee, ‘The Noble Life of the Prophet ﷺ,’ p.1214

[18] El-Affendi, Abdelwahab, ‘Al-Shu’ra’ kanu Ajhizat I’lam al-Arab’ (Poets were Arab Media Organs), Al-Arabi, December 1976.

[19] A reference to the agitation against the new laws on the election of local councils promulgated by the Shāh’s regime on October 6, 1962. These laws no longer specified that candidates were to be Muslim, and they were seen as a prelude to increased participation in public life by the Bahā’is and eventual abolition of the Constitution of 1906. After a prolonged campaign against the laws, in which Imām Khomeini took a prominent part, they were annulled by the government on November 28, 1962.

[20] This law was reinstated the following year in what became known as the White Revolution.

[21] Imam Khomeini, ‘Governance of the Jurist,’ translation of Velayat-e-Faqeeh, Iran Chamber Society, https://www.iranchamber.com/history/rkhomeini/books/velayat_faqeeh.pdf  p.72