In the aftermath of the Arab spring, a large body of literature on the Arab spring, its roots and its consequences appeared in the two fields of mainstream Political Science and Middle East studies. However, rarely did this vast body of literature engage with the writings of native academics and commentators who were writing compelling accounts and analysis of what's happening in their countries, mostly in Arabic. In this paper, I address the consequences of this omission on and its consequences on the scholarly production on the Arab spring. In particular, I analyze the various forms of this omission, including but not limited to selective translation, treating Arab academics as native informants, and reproducing narratives about the Arab democratic deficit and the cultural factors behind despotism). This paper argues that the politics of positionality, language, and the power dynamics separating native academics from those working in the West serve to marginalize certain native voices, while highlighting others. It further argues that western academia is not immune to many of the biases that exist in covering the region in the mainstream media. Through an analysis of selected texts written by Arab scholars and how they received ( or not in Western academia), this paper aims to question some of the main assumptions informing producing scholarly knowledge on the Arab uprisings, and suggest an agenda for future research that takes into consideration the unequal structure of knowledge production in western academia.