How did the Islamic Republic lose the war on the free flow of information to society?

A note from Saeed Peyvandi: A real media war is underway in Iran between a public opinion thirsty for the free flow of information and a government that refuses to accept the rules of the game and the norms of an open society in the 21st century. This war is neither new nor a phenomenon hidden from the eyes of a society that has lived the bitter experience of four decades of government censorship.

What seems new in this is the shift that has gradually occurred in the balance of power between the government and the civil sphere. If in the more distant past the government was able to wage a one-sided media war and the circulation of information to its advantage, now the tide has turned and a large part of society has acquired the tools and skills that allow distrustful and disillusioned citizens to independently and creatively access information, data, and “unauthorized” and independent media, putting an end to government dominance in this area.

All evidence shows that this is a frightening turn for those who believed that the condition for the religiousization of society and the success of the Islamic government was comprehensive surveillance of the media and the engineering of public opinion.

Mr. Khamenei's remarks on the occasion of Nowruz 1400 regarding the management of cyberspace and criticism of its "looseness" are a clear sign of this concern about the fading of censorship and cultural engineering by the government and the empowerment of society in the area of ​​widespread access to information and media, "unauthorized" news and content, and new cyberspaces for dialogue.

Comprehensive monitoring of information flow

The issue of comprehensive surveillance of the media and cultural affairs, as one of the most important tools of political domination and control of society, has been a major concern of the authorities since the beginning of the revolution. In the eyes of those involved, engineering public opinion within the framework of the Shiite government's value model, Islamizing society, and integrating large groups of people into the religious-revolutionary culture desired by the government was possible through control of the media and complete surveillance of the country's cultural space.

The meaning of this comprehensive supervision in the Islamic "Umm al-Qara" is that the government plays the role of "master" and "guardian" of the people in the issue of the circulation of information and access to the media, and it is also the one who must tell the people, based on its own interests, what is the truth, what are good and bad things, what things the society should read, know, see or hear, and what things are inappropriate and forbidden for it. The government considers itself to have a sacred mission and to justify the policy of official censorship, it both resorts to religious principles and brings into play public "morality" and the interests of the political system.

This media approach and cultural engineering has meant putting a huge lid on society and trying to isolate Iran from the rest of the world. The way state-run radio and television operate is an example of this understanding of the flow of information and the policy of pervasive cultural surveillance. Television and radio deal with a multitude of red lines, forbidden areas, and individuals who are “gone from view” and “gone from sound,” and interfere in the political affairs of the country just like a government party.

The insistence on cultural and media engineering is so great that, for example, the use of the word "dance" in a television program becomes controversial, or those with censorship scissors carefully monitor the broadcast of sports competitions abroad, lest viewers notice the "inappropriate" clothing of female spectators; concerns that perhaps cannot be found in a conventional government of our time and colorful media.

A 40-year-old media war of attrition

The government's war on unauthorized media, unofficial culture and art, and the free flow of information has a 40-year history. In the 1960s, the censorship policy mostly included comprehensive surveillance of the media, cultural and artistic affairs, and book publishing. In the 1970s and 1980s, the policy of surveillance and pressure on the press and independent journalists was supplemented by a war with satellites and climbing people's walls to dismantle receivers. The goal was to prevent access to the free flow of information and media that could inform people, open doors to another world for them, and fuel their religious and political "suspicions."

Authorized non-governmental media outlets were also forced to submit to this government censorship. To step outside the narrow confines imposed by the government and speak out and report “unauthorized” news meant the end of their lives. The 1970s and 1980s were a dark and bitter period in Iran, with a large number of media outlets being closed and journalists, writers, artists, and civil society activists being constantly harassed.

The first significant shift in the relationship between media power began with the gradual introduction of the Internet and the rise of the emerging social media. The dynamic and freedom-hungry Iranian society of that time was searching with indescribable enthusiasm for ways to reduce the pressure of censorship and government restrictions. The unprecedented popularity of blogging in Iran and the emergence of a large number of citizens, each playing the role of a media outlet, led to a transformation of the media landscape of this era. The Green Movement was formed in such a climate, and activists cleverly used cyberspace to fight repression and censorship.

The new media power of society

The 1990s should be called the decade of the rise of a new media power in a society in which the free flow of information has become a public challenge. Social media, cyberspace, the Internet and related software have created a great revolution in society's relationship with mass communication and the flow of information. The insatiable thirst of Iranian society for access to this new tool, including restrictions, censorship and a closed and gloomy culture of the government, is the same as can be found in few places in the world. Conditions have arisen where it has become very difficult and even impossible to keep facts, events and news hidden from society.

The widespread use of smartphones, the Internet, and the connection of a large portion of the population to virtual networks, despite filtering, gradually reduced the government's media power. In virtual networks, news, past and present films, messages, commentaries and articles, grievances and demands are passed from one phone to another, and the free flow of information horizontally and from below has become a public and national process.

Virtual social networks have eliminated the geographical distance between the multi-million diaspora (communities far from home) scattered across the four corners of the world and within the country, and access to cross-border media has become very easy.

A painful turnaround for the government

Once upon a time, the government used bullying to impose whatever it wanted on the country's media space. Today, society has enjoyed a kind of independence in the area of ​​information circulation and access to the media, despite the continued restrictions. It is as if people are taking revenge for four decades of government repression and censorship by sharing news, publishing uncensored news, republishing critical articles and materials, challenging official news, and humorously confronting the superstitious world of religious and political officials.

Important events of the past few years, such as the street protests of November 2019, the downing of a Ukrainian plane, the case of major corruption of officials, or the lives of the Aghazadehs, and the launching of large-scale campaigns surrounding the victims of security forces or the judiciary, have been the scenes of this media battle between society and the government.

Another example of the changing balance of power in the field of information circulation is the formation of a new type of indirect relationship between society and government. Today, society fearlessly questions the policies, beliefs, statements, and behavior and actions of the government and its stakeholders in cyberspace and poses fundamental questions to them.

For example, the 25-year contract with China becomes a public debate, critical writings and commentaries are exchanged, and officials can no longer ignore public opinion as in the past and settle for propaganda and one-sided statements. Even in the religious field, when the Friday prayer leader of Tehran brings up the story of "opening eyes" and "a kind look" at the washing of the lifeless body of Mesbah Yazdi on a television program, the reaction of society in cyberspace is so widespread that he is forced to admit that the claim is baseless and retract his words.

For a government that has always carried out its affairs through bullying and high-handedness, this is an unfortunate and painful turn. It is not for nothing that someone like Alam al-Huda considers the “destructive” role of the Internet to be worse than the US military. The government no longer holds the initiative in the realm of information circulation, and it is society that, through media actions, widespread dissemination of information, and criticism of official news, is waging war against the propaganda system and the government monologue. For the first time in the past four decades, the government, and especially the shadow government, has effectively lost the media battle in the public arena.

One of the main consequences of the nationwide movement to share and confront the media and government propaganda is that the traditional ceiling of censorship has lost its meaning in practice. Radio, television, and other domestic state or non-state media are well aware that people have access to other sources and are forced to change their methods of work to attract an audience.

The government's response and new forms of media warfare

Despite the media landscape's transformation, the government has not given up on its dream of comprehensive media surveillance. The various forms of presence of security forces and "unknown soldiers of the Imam of the Time" in cyberspace, from hacker activity, filtering policies to the spread of false news and data, are increasing every day.

But the government is not satisfied with this level of pressure and censorship and wants to take away the power of the media that the people have made their own. The reaction of the Revolutionary Guard Corps to Mr. Khamenei’s Nowruz speeches or the statement of Hamid Shahriari, a member of the Supreme Council for Cyberspace, that “the country’s information exchange space requires sovereign attention,” shows a strong will to restore order. Many stakeholders are seeking to operationalize the Chinese, Russian, and North Korean models for monitoring public opinion and censoring cyberspace.

The political meaning of the end of the era of pervasive government surveillance

The political significance of this important transformation in the sphere of information circulation and new spaces for dialogue in society is the disruption of the psychological balance of power to the detriment of the government. Today's society has found the ability to protest the policies and inefficiency of the government in various forms, to reveal the hidden secrets of the Islamic system, to create new spaces for dialogue by escaping government censorship, to criticize officials and policies and to demand answers from them.

In contrast, government media and officials, unlike in the past, are forced to react to what the people know and ask, and to justify their behaviors and policies from a defensive stance.

In times of political crisis, this media superiority and openness to the public sphere is crucial. In fact, the key to future developments may lie, among other things, in this media war.

In a country where civil society, political parties, unions, and non-governmental and professional organizations are constantly pressured or suppressed by the government, a kind of virtual nationwide opposition is formed and challenges the government's authority in various arenas.

Source: Radio Farda