Unethical role of Western media in Iranian elections

by Aboo FAIZAL

“However much the Iranian individual had gained his or her freedom from Shah and the United States, he or she still appeared on American television screens as part of a large anonymous mob, de-individualized, dehumanized, ruled again as a result.

Yet whether they did so consciously or not, the news media were in fact using their powers of representation to accomplish a purpose, similar to that intended by the US in the past: namely, the extension of an American presence, or what to Iranians amounted to the same thing, negation of the Iranian revolution......... With very few exceptions, the media’s purpose seemed to be to wage a kind of war against Iran.” Edward W. Said, Prof. of English and Comparative Literature at Colombia University, in “Covering Islam”

It must have been a disembroiling experience for a mini army of over 250 men and women from the world’s prominent media to come to know in two to three days, the electoral mysteries of the Islamic Republic of Iran, with a population of 70 million people spread across 30 provinces, in a country over 2,250 km. in length and 1,400 km. in breadth. Their task was to unravel to the world, Iran’s electoral process.

It was grossly unfair for CNN, BBC, Al Jazeera and other world renowned media, to expect their men and women on the electoral front, with only a few days in Iran to give an expert, nay an authoritative presentation to the world of how the 46 million voters stretching from Ardebil to Zanjan were going to vote.

Not that there were no acceptable basis for assessing a country’s mood, such as through independent pre-election polls. But, in a country, without such pre-polls, rightly discouraged, as polls too could unfairly influence voters and with people spread far and wide in a country the size of U.K, France, Switzerland, Italy and Spain all combined, to expect even experts to present a reasonable assessment in 2 to 3 days time, of the mood of the urban and rural voters, men and women, girls and boys is simply to ask them to perform miracles! And miracles they did perform as we will shortly see.

The nett result was an untested, unconfirmed and superficial assessment of what may very likely to or equally unlikely to happen, based on the views of their immediate contacts, mostly urban, where Iran’s presidential aspirant Mir Hussain Mousavi had undoubtedly a resurgent support particularly in North Iran, with a population of nearly 5 million, as strong as Ahmadinejad’s support base in Southern Tehran with a population of 8 million.

Anyone in Tehran placed in such chequered circumstances, would genuinely have got the impression that Mousavi was surely on the road to victory, though most media men did not fail to notice that President Ahmadinejad was the only head of state to visit everyone of the 30 provinces with his entire Cabinet to resolve the people’s problems.

Indeed, he paid a second visit as well, to everyone of the 30 provinces with his entire Cabinet, to double check whether the problems of the rural poor presented in the first round, had in fact been resolved.

The BBC, on the evening of the election day, recognized this fact but still maintained that Mousavi is expected to win the Presidency.In fairness to Mousavi, he did extremely well, in garnering 13 million or 33% of the votes cast.

Even twice President Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, who in the 2005 Presidential Elections contested Ahmadinejad then only a former Tehran City Mayor and lost to Ahmadijejad! Ex-President Rafsanjani gained only 5.71 Million or 19.5% of the votes cast, as against Mousavi’s superior performance of 13 million votes in the current elections.

Based on superficial assessments of the reporters, the CNN, BBC, Al Jazeera and other Western media believed what their reporters on the spot knew, their bosses would be happy to believe - Reformist Mousavi will oust controversial Ahmadinejad

They made the world too to believe the unscientific story. It was in this background, people who were made to believe of a ‘close contest’, a western media theory, found it impossible to believe Ahmadinejad overtaking Mousavi’s 13 million votes by another 10 million!

The young women voters, they said, were supportive of the reformist Mousavi, even though their rare coverage of Ahmadinejad betrayed an equal number of young women chanting slogans in support of Ahmadinejad.

The BBC reporter, who questioned a young woman voter, an engineering graduate, put leading questions to her. She was not asked for instance, what her considerations were for voting for any of the candidates.

She was not even asked to comment on Iran’s growth in the industrial, technological or engineering sectors, areas she had a claim for competence. The leading question she was asked was intended to elicit an answer, that was fairly well-known, would be detrimental to Ahmadinejad!

The question was, what she thought of the management of the country’s economy, a subject, where Ahmadinejad was considered to have faired poorly, and the BBC correspondent, like lawyers in Court, got the answer she and her western audience wanted to hear. Clearly the BBC was not after the truth.

They were there, without any consideration for ethics, for propaganda, assuming quite liberally that the Iranians belonged to an earlier century.

The time had however come for the pro-western media, with an opportunity to build up the momentum for Mousavi. Though trapped by their own misconceived assessments, they were behaving more like the mafia! The foreign media had no difficulty in boosting Mousavi’s image to the hilt. One example would suffice.

When Ahmadinejad accused Mousavi’s alleged supporter and financier Rafsanjani, of corruption and Mousavi being promoted by the corrupt, the foreign mafia, was quick to blame Ahmadinejad of ‘unethical campaigning’ even though ‘corruption’ in public life must necessarily be an issue at any elections.

Even as voting closed and counting started in the presence of the representatives of all the four candidates and a host of others, not a word was uttered by anyone of a possible rigging!

Throughout voting day and the night that followed no one alleged any fraud! Having ignored the rural strength of Ahmadinejad, and having built up an euphoria over Mousavi, the entrapped Western media and its Tehran based reporters found it difficult to believe and perhaps genuinely so, that Ahmadinejad could get a lead of over 10 million votes over Mousavi’s 13 million.

The reporters and their bosses were at a loss of face with their western audience, who were made to believe that though Ahmadinejad was strong, Mousavi was cruising towards victory!

Suddenly a day after the elections, as counting revealed a comfortable lead for Ahmadinejad, one heard for the first time, words such as ‘rigged’ ‘fraud’, ‘cheating’ etc., allegations believed to have been inspired by the foreign media!

Mousavi supporters, they said, were expected to come on to the streets, virtually inciting the Northern Tehranis to rebel. Bitter at their own total miscalculations, “street protests” were the only saving grace, for the fraud perpetrated on Mousavi’s supporters by the world’s so called independent media.

Mousavi’s supporters, mostly Western educated upper class businessmen and their fun loving children, were made to honestly believe that they were en-route to the Presidency, with enormous benefits to reap.

The result shocked only them, because the rural and semi urban voters, over 30 million in number were mercifully unaffected by the mafia propaganda.

What CNN, BBC and Al Jazeera failed to tell Mousavi supporters was that it was impossible for 10 million, repeat ten million, votes to be ‘cheated’ or ‘rigged’, without a single person coming forward to expose such an outrage.

After all, nearly 700,000 persons were involved in handling the election in 45,000 polling centres and the counting centres throughout Iran and any rigging on such a huge scale could have been easily exposed by at least a few among them! Mobile phones, could have captured the alleged rigging!

If any one in the world, could muster 700,000 election officials to be one’s blind supporters, then the world would probably say, he deserves to win!

In Iran, the foreign media mafia stood exposed of conducting an unethical campaign. This section of the world media, in seeking to boost Mousavi, and project him as the winner - as if they had read the minds of a substantial number of the 46 million voters - had in fact taken them up the garden path and left them disillusioned that they had lost, though in fact Mousavi had performed remarkably well, given the odds against him.

The western media thereafter made Mousavi supporters to believe that they were cheated, without raising the obvious questions that any ethically responsible media would have raised, namely why did not, even a single person, who was a witness to any such alleged cheating, come out before the world media and explain how and where the cheating occurred or raise the question whether anyone in the world was capable of cheating or rigging such a huge number of over 10 million votes?