Ivan Sheehan
|
Tehran’s Influence Operations a Threat to Journalistic Independence
For decades, Tehran’s theocratic rulers have gone to great
lengths to make inroads
in Western media outlets once notable for upholding commitments to journalistic
independence.
These efforts have been so successful that many such organizations
are now threatened from within by assets – often disguised as journalists –
portraying Iran as the victim of US-led interference and even a looming war.
These instruments of propaganda are used to demonize the regime’s opponents at
key moments and stave off basic freedoms that would cause the regime to
collapse like a house of cards.
Many of these so-called journalists of Iranian
origin previously worked for Iran's state-controlled media, and some parrot the
regime’s talking points as if they are still on the payroll.
Most have found comfortable homes in left-leaning media
outlets in the West, including MSNBC, Al-Jazeera English, Britain's
Channel 4 News, The Guardian, and The Independent, where they freely
leverage their bylines to do Tehran’s bidding with little pushback.
Here’s how they do it.
In recent years, the regime has handpicked certain news
organizations to advance a “controlled” media presence in Iran. Local
assistants and translators for foreign journalists require permits from the
Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance. These apprentices normally come from
the Intelligence Ministry and have prior backgrounds in local state media. Over
time, they help prepare reports and interview top regime officials who would
normally avoid talking to the international press. As relationships develop,
those who demonstrate a particular proclivity to toe the line go on to become
permanent news staff and are sent abroad.
Though some of these journalists do, from time to time,
reference human rights abuses in Iran, seldom – if ever – do they contradict
the regime's fundamental positions in critical areas such as the potential for
regime change via domestic protests, the effect of sanctions in fueling
anti-regime demonstrations, or the role of the organized opposition in
advancing grassroots change.
In fact, they insist, without a shred of evidence, that
sanctions will harm ordinary Iranians, not the regime; US support for
protesters will rally the population behind the mullahs; and the alternative to
the regime is a cult that tortures its own members and wants to install an even
more ruthless dictatorship. That there is not an ounce of evidence to support
these claims seems not to matter.
In recent weeks, a series of reports have been published in
international media outlets demonizing Iran's principal democratic opposition,
the People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran (PMOI or MEK). The
latest report was a 6,600-word piece by Arron Reza Merat in The
Guardian that accused the MEK of brainwashing members, torturing
ex-members, harassing female staff, suppressing Iraqi Kurds on behalf of Saddam
Hussein, and killing Iranian nuclear scientists with the help of Israel.
Neither official testimony by current and former US State Department and
military officials that refutes the claims nor credible assessments advanced by
scholars seem sufficient to overcome the outrageous accusations.
Note that Merat, who wrote the libelous report slandering the
MEK, previously served as a Tehran-based correspondent and has been known to
lavishly praise the regime’s illiberal President Hassan Rouhani.
Al-Jazeera English also recently aired a program
attacking MEK members living in Albania. Its producer and host, Will Yong, is
half Iranian and previously served as an anchorman for Iran's English-language
state-television channel Press TV – an outlet headquartered in Tehran
with close ties to the Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.
Similar pieces targeting the MEK have appeared in other media
outlets as Tehran's agents leveraging their Western press associations and
bylines attempt to persuade their cosmopolitan audiences that the regime's
opponents are worse than the regime. In reality, the MEK is Iran's largest and
best organized opposition group, and its “Resistance Units” in Iran have played a key role in
organizing anti-government demonstrations. The group is part of the coalition
of dissident organizations that fall under the banner of the National Council
of Resistance of Iran (NCRI). That the NCRI is led by a charismatic
woman, Maryam
Rajavi, and is the only opposition movement with a clearly
articulated 10-point plan for a free Iran particularly rankles the
regime’s old guard.
To be clear, Iran's disinformation campaign is hardly limited
to the MEK. The Guardian's Iran correspondent Saeed Kamali Dehghan, a
vocal critic of President Donald Trump’s sanctions against Tehran, previously worked for the Fars News Agency, an
outlet affiliated with the Revolutionary Guards. This distinction, which would
obviously compromise his journalistic integrity, is notably absent in his Guardianbyline.
He too is deeply hostile to the MEK.
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo last week tweeted a
rebuttal to an article in Newsweekclaiming that newly re-imposed US
sanctions would prevent ordinary Iranians from accessing basic humanitarian
needs. “Shame on #FakeNewsweek” for helping Iran's Foreign Minister Javad Zarif
spread lies” his unusually sharp rebuke said. “The truth is: the U.S. does not,
and never did, sanction food and medicine.”
Some gullible left-leaning news organizations may simply be
naïve in reporting Tehran’s bogus claims that the US is planning yet another
war in the Middle East. But decades of appeasement by prior US administrations
and EU governments, each more eager than the last to paint Tehran in a positive
light, have unquestionably helped Iran plant its apologists in Western
newsrooms.
These pro-Iran writers and their syndicates are not ordinary
journalists; they are PR agents for a regime that jails reporters, censors free
media expression, and enslaves a restless nation.
Speaking up for an independent press should include exposing
Tehran’s influence operations in Western media outlets and the foreign agents
who traffic in disinformation.
The failure to do so threatens journalistic independence and
compromises values essential to a free press.
Comments
Post a Comment