How Emad Badi's nuanced analysis was stripped of its nuance and turned into propaganda (EP 4).
After Haftar's April 4th offensive on Tripoli, Badi co-wrote an analysis with scholar Fred Wary. The piece deliberately blamed both sides of the conflict. It was measured, specific, and critical of everyone.
Libyan media outlets — operated by foreign-backed actors — partially translated the article into Arabic. They removed the sections that challenged "their" side. What was published made it look like Badi was endorsing one faction.
Badi watched his work get weaponised in real time. An analysis designed to hold all parties accountable was turned into a recruitment tool for one of them.
He described the experience as both infuriating and clarifying. It showed him exactly how the information ecosystem in Libya works: media outlets are not neutral platforms. They are owned by conflict actors who use content — including academic content — as ammunition.
This story connects to Libyan Media and Propaganda: the same media landscape that Abdulaziz Lamlum described as deliberately stagnant under Gaddafi became deliberately manipulative after 2011. The technology changed. The principle — controlling what people see to control what they think — did not.
Ghazi Gheblawi (EP 5) described the writer's version of this: Ahmed al-Bukhari, a Libyan writer who spoke freely, was targeted by militias and forced into exile. The cost of honest expression in post-revolutionary Libya is not abstract.