OpEd:
American Media Coverage of Iran: Possible Blackout?
June 17, 2009 by Kyle BradyTags: Ahmadinejad, Conspiracy, Gag Order, Government, Iran, Media, Middle East, Mousavi, MSM, Obama, Politics
As required by the FTC, a Full Disclosure is available - this piece adheres to the Code of Ethics
As is probably obvious to most Americans at this point, Iran has had a Presidential election, pitting incumbent Mahmoud Ahmadinejad against a “revolutionary” named Mir-Hossein Mousavi – initial results said Mousavi won the election, but later results claimed Ahmadinejad won by a landslide, with suspiciously quick (in comparison to previous elections) verification by the Ayatollah, the Supreme Leader according to their political structure. There have been protests-turned-riots by a large number of the people since the events of June 13, 2009 – the ‘net has been awash with criticisms, support of the protesters, and pictures/video showing the worsening situation. Despite the drama, American media has been strangely silent on the issue until yesterday (6/16/2009), and is only covering the issue with the slightest of attention and realism – labeling videos and pictures as “unverified”, using loaded wording in describing the situation, and a number of other shocking journalistic faux paux’s that questions the independence of such media institutions. Even CNN fell prey to this.
American media, however slanted, is typically independent of the federal government and its wishes, often acting as a counterbalance to the government itself. However, the media occasionally subjects themselves to the will of the feds, and there's even a recent example: the media blackout of military coffins returning to the United States after foreign deaths during the Bush Administration. The ban was eventually leaked, and then lifted, but the fact remains that it existed within the last decade. The reasons for such a ban were the usual litany of patriotism, national security, and withholding fuel from terrorists. Who’s to say this couldn’t have happened in regards to the ongoing Iran election protests?
If there was a federal gag order to American mainstream media on the recent Iranian events, there would have to be good reasons – and many can be easily imagined.
The Evil You Know
Prior to the election, President Obama was concerned with Iran’s growing nuclear threat/program and alarming political choices, and this election could swing that issue in either direction. Replacing the current figurehead with an unknown could be highly dangerous, no matter how the “revolutionary” has presented himself to the world. Perhaps keeping Ahmadinejad in power, so long as he either wins or pretends to win, is a better decision for our future – small strides have been made since the change of power in America, and this progress could be quickly erased by a new leader wishing to start over. Or, maybe more relevant to modern political times, is the example of Afghanistan - America helped initiate a change in power many years ago, for a leadership that was deemed favorable to our interests. Only to have that same ruling body become a significant problem for our current military interests, and an abject lesson in political power struggles.
Becoming the Villain
Speaking in favor of a specific side in the election drama could backfire, depending on who succeeds – supporting the challenger for democracy is all well and good, until he is disposed of, leaving an angry and encouraged longtime enemy in his wake. Interfering with the elections, or even discussing them via what may be seen as national media organizations, could give an already skeptical leader a figure to vilify, prompting further ignorance of the international regulatory action. Even worse would be the reaction of Iran’s allies to such actions, making an already politically polarized region moreso.
Accelerated Middle Eastern Destabilization
If Iran collapses into civil war, or whatever the presiding political force of Iran would wish to call it, lines will be drawn – countries will take sides for and against the rebellion, not only creating further international animosity, but would provide just-another-in-a-long-list-of-reasons for countries that hate each other to fight. An arena already fraught with disaster, chaos, and unstable regimes does not need more reasons to launch all out war with each other.
New Foreign Policy
The most logical and politically charged reason for a mainstream media gag order could be the new Administration’s Foreign Policy. After the last eight years, America needs an image makeover – President Obama knows this. He has spent considerable amounts of time stating positions on international issues, as well as making it clear that we are not interested in imperialist military action wherever our whims take us – this was the basic premise of the recent speech in Cairo, Egypt. To vocally participate in a Middle Eastern country’s political drama, which could potentially be a surprising revolution, would be to undo what has already begun. Further, if military action, or even sanctions, were imposed on Iran based on America’s official position, most of the world would likely discount our future words and actions as disingenuous, creating an unsavory situation for the entire country. President Obama actually recognized this point in a comment on Iran yesterday.
Conclusion
There is no official, or even unofficial, word on a mainstream media gag order, but the actions of the media organizations may very well speak for themselves. Such a gag order is not necessarily un-American or even unintelligent, since the mere words of pundits could easily be interpreted by unfriendly countries as an official position, or the will of the people – creating a string of problems, both political and militaristic in nature, that would likely push America further into a hole that is increasingly difficult to climb out of.
--- --- ---
Update (6/17/2009 1:00am PST): Reprinted at The Inquisitr with permission.
Kyle can be found on Twitter and MySpace, or reached via email.
