It all began in Morocco, but the debate gained a radical aspect in Egypt and Tunisia. Between the storm that was raised concerning the official media reform in the realm of the “construction documentation" issue – the Moroccans discovered that this issue was a mere test concerning the demarcation of the distance between the Authority's media and the media's authority – and the appointment of new officers in newspapers and official platforms by the new rulers, it seems that the media issue has gained a lot of attention. The stirring of media sensitivities in these or other countries indicates that the logic of reverting to the public with the aim of creating new directions and movements is an acceptable and warranted option. Without mobilizing minds and arms, no bet can be won especially when it comes to starting a new culture based on the principles of dialogue, participation, and relinquishing alienation and marginalization. The past practices were criticized because the official media did not have a voice and because it had been turned into a tool for propaganda and praise of the ruling authorities. Thus, hope must be revived by consolidating freedom, preserving pluralism, enhancing credibility, and maintaining an equal distance with all the parties and partners. Obviously, the concern when it comes to the issue of the media cannot be simply dealt with by modifying faces and names. In addition, scoring the media people according to how loyal and flexible they are cannot solve the problems at hand. The media has a major responsibility, given the need of the public to see the tangible features of change both in the train of thought and in the practices. This means that the public must now be addressed in the realm of a new culture where servility and resignation have no place at all. Only the immunity of the private and state media institutions represents a guarantee to the fact that these institutions will be playing their part away from any submission to any pressure or harassment. The immunity of the MPs is viewed as a constitutional way to help them carry out their duties, learn the facts, and hold the decision making centers accountable. In paradox, the media, which is in charge of denouncing the truth, is viewed as a minor baby. The massive opportunity offered by the media in the Arab revolutions reflects the extent of the interaction of the public and new generations with the communication means. Just like the technological revolutions created a major change and reduced the distances between the reception of information, the interaction of ideas, and the creation of initiatives; so did the new media communication mechanisms, as these mechanisms had a major effect in breaking the wall of fear. Thus, one must admit that the media was an effective player in the change that took place since media has always been the most prominent victim of oppression and coercion; not only because the tyrannical state focused its authority on the media scene, but also because the state believed that loosening its control over the media institutions will threaten its very existence, thus leading to a security authority in parallel to media monopolization. However, the iron grip fell in the face of the storm that started through a soft media tone and then spread out and challenged all kinds of censorship and control. Then, this turned into a massive river when people shouted: the people want to topple the regime. The fallen regimes failed to realize that when the media is honest, independent, and reflective of the Street's movements, it can destroy the media of the Authority. The importance of the current debate concerning the media issue stems from its connection to the scenes of democratic transformations. One of the advantages of this debate is that it induced protests against the decisions of the ruling authority in appointing officers in prominent posts. This was not the case in the past whereby the appointment lists were cooked in the loyalty chambers or the elections' corridors without any consideration for the essence of media responsibility. However, protests are not a sufficient proof to that things have really changed. The protests, which are dictated by the feeling of injustice, must constitute a preface for a wider dialogue around the media issue. It is important to remember that the state media is now viewed under a different angle as a result of the present circumstances and the evolving. The competition has increased, and so has the effect of the trans-continental media. Similarly, there is a growing aspiration for an independent media, one that is more connected to the real situation and to people's aspirations. There is no unique reality in light of the political and intellectual pluralism. Thus, shielding the media from all forms of tutelage and pressure; and allowing it to confront the political, professional, and intellectual challenges represents the best guarantee to overcome the period of confusion and oscillation. The media challenge is connected to the agenda of the changes that aim at consolidating freedom, justice, social development, and values of equality, tolerance, and co-existence. The media is like a compass that indicates the features of the road in a vast desert. This vast desert always needs a scout to seek out the sound of the water in the depth of the sandy dunes. This is the media of the truth by excellence. Relying on the reality scouts has always been a way for the flourishing of science, knowledge, and civilizations.
