Battle of the “Green” Channels
Aug 6th, 2010 by pedestrian
Long before the June 2009 Selection, at the time when reformist papers were being shut down faster than you can say “Khamenei” one after the other, there was always a discussion amongst reformist ranks of the need for the opposition to have its own indepedent TV channel and its own media outlet far from the reach of the hardliners. Karoubi often spoke about setting up an independent satellite channel.
The problem of course has always been that this “opposition” is so broadly defined that getting a group together has never materalized.
The momentum built after the June 2009 Selection however, gave that cause new impetus and new purpose. Why let the BBC and the VOA become our mouthpiece? many wondered. It’s time to have a voice of our own.
Now, two different groups have announced that they will be launching TV channels.
One group has set up a foundation called “Bonyad-e Neda” (The Neda Foundation) and the heads include academic Ramin Jahanbegloo, cartoonist Nik Ahangh Kowsar, journalist Masih Alinejad, writer Shahrnoush Parispour and activist and lawyer Mehranghiz Kar, among others. The channel is called Iran Neda.
The other group is those at JARAS (Rah-e Sabz) which include Mohsen Kadivar, Abdolali Bazargan, Fatemeh Haghighatjou and Mohajerani. Their channel is going to be called RASA (The Green Path of Hope).
Funding sources for neither network has been announced so far.
While both groups are compsed of a myriad of different people, if I were to generalize, I would say that the people involved with RASA are more religiously oriented and closer to the reformist political parties in Iran – some, including Mohajerani and Haghighatjou are actual former politicians. They are also probably close to Rafsanjani, who could be a possible source of funding (his son who was been residing in Britian for the last few months has got to keep himself busy with something, right?) Iran Neda on the other hand, has a more artistic/academic and secular orientation.
Both groups have a great wealth of scholarship and knowledge to invest, and while we might each be closer to one group than the other, I am looking forward to seeing these projects develop. I also keep my fingers crossed that they actually do develop – too many projects like this one end up in feuds even before the project itself gets off the ground.
It is also interesting to see how each is marketting itself just from the name and logo: the first group calls itself “Iran Neda” and writes “one medium, a thousand voices”. They have also steered far away from using green. The second calls itself “The green path of hope”, has a green background and a “V” logo and they write at the bottom “the green medium of Iran” clearly marketting themselves as a “green” outlet.
[...] GMT: Green Media. Pedestrian takes a look at two forthcoming channels for the Green Movement: RASA, which he sees as “more religiously oriented and closer to the reformist political [...]
when I see sb calls “it” a Selection(rather than Election) it fills me with joy and at the same time invokes all the doubts about what really happened in that ?election. it really hurts that there is no strong proof to support this huge claim…..what if? what if? ….
[...] Die Schlacht der „grünen“ Sender (empfehlenswert) [...]
From my point of view, RASA is more promising. I assume the people behind this medium are closer to what REALLY could instigate change as they are attached to a political movement which just arose from the midst of Iran’s civil society. I have lots of respect for the likes of Jahanbagloo or Alinejad. I just have the hope they do not use their medium as a plattform for their own. The addressees, those for whom these channels are made for, should be the people of Iran. The founders should not be after publicity for their personal case.
I second your hope, that both channels in fact develop. And I further hope there will be no competition between these two but rather a complementary dimension.
Thanks for your post,
AM
[...] 7. August 2010 von Julia Ein persönlicher Kommentar von Pedestrian, 6. August 2010 Quelle (Englisch): http://www.sidewalklyrics.com/?p=7046 [...]
faraz, I’m sure you’ve of this. And the countless other accounts from the hardliners themselves. Many reformist arrest warrants were issued BEFORE the election … why?!
None of this however, PROVES that there was fraud, or the extent of it. My guess is that Ahmadinejad may have even won … but with a much smaller margin. The fact remains that the brutal suppression of those who doubted the results, the ILLEGAL actions of the Guardian Council (which made their “investigation” completely irrelevant) and the leader’s refusal to commission an INDEPENDENT body to look into allegations, his excruciating mishandling of evens and blatant, despicable side taking … is enough reason to think there was foul play, irrespective of the results, and thus a
Selection of full proportions.AsdollahMirza … you should know you are one of my favorite characters of all time
I agree – if these channels don’t end up bickering and humiliating one another, I think they are actually very nice compliments to each other.
I have the same thoughts, Ped, that ironically AN might have pulled off a slimmer win. But while there is no concrete evidence (after all, who would have it?), too many things remain suspicious – why raid Mousavi’s headquarters? That just doesn’t look good no matter how you slice it. I would add the quickly tabulated partial vote and initial media announcement, as well as the hasty validation by Khamenei. And I don’t know how much you read into this, but I thought the lack of support from maraje to congratulate AN was also curious.
Whether or not he would have won, they revealed something about themselves, irregardless – which of its own invalidates their legitimacy. As such, I don’t even think the “great (s)election debate” is even necessary anymore. Subsequent suppression is much plainer to see, and thereby also harder for apologists to refute — though minimize, rationalize and deny they still do.
Yes, there needs to be a domestic answer to VOA and BBC Persian, of course. I just really hope they are successful. I must admit to some pessimism that they would be up long. I’m not too clear of details on how the hurdles beyond internal bickering and funding will be surpassed.
I like the play on the word Neda (I assume it is, since you did not translate it). What are they to do, start banning Persian words, like baby names? Speaking of, I’d be curious to know if Neda is still an acceptable baby name…
I’m sorry to say I’ve been catching up after neglecting your blog a few weeks. Glad to see you continuing to be so prolifically insightful!
Hi Kurt,
I think the great
Selection debate is necessary, only because it reveals more and more about what we’re really up against. This Moshfegh (the guy whose comments I linked to below, who talks about the hardliners strategy before and during the election) for instance, gives us a really good view into how these guys think, and what they’re doing, etc.And although I doubt even the hardliners know the real results of the election, if we did know, it would give us a good window into Iran, and how it stands politically at least (although I agree with views that say Ahmadinejad’s popularity has sharply declined since the election).
I’m also not very optimistic, given the internal bickering that exists already – both between the two groups and amongst themselves … but hey, it’s always nice to be proven wrong
Yes, I misspoke. I think the debate is necessary. I’ve just been annoyed by those hiding behind such uncertainty to ignore what happened in the aftermath. More leaks like Moshfegh’s along with Ahmadinejad’s talk of a Velayat Party speak to an ideology rooted in a philosophy which is inimical to political pluralism.
I don’t know what you’ll think of this, but that you’ve mentioned you like The New Yorker before. I have some quibbles with the Nuclear content, but thankfully, it is not the main focus, as it is in most of the American (and Western) media.
After the Crackdown by Jon Lee Anderson
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/08/16/100816fa_fact_anderson?currentPage=1
Such a good weblog!
!دست مریزاد
Thanks Reza!
Kurt, I sent the New Yorker 5 or 6 emails because I had yet to receive this issue! Then I realized my subscription has expired
So now I’ll have to resort to reading this article online.
Yup, I have lots of issues with their nuclear coverage as well …
Dear Pedestrian,
As to the purported election results I would like to quote the following blog entry by a reader called Elisabeth Müller (pen-name) commenting an online-article on ‘rebus iranicis’ of the serious German weekly DIE ZEIT (published June 6th, 2010) [translation by the undersigned]:
»Everything is correct and alright
O.K. Let’s simply suppose I accept that […] the ballot boxes actually contained the true will of the electorate. That means: Instead of the expected neck-and-neck-race and the second ballot a landslide victory for the president:
He has gained additional seven millions votes! Seven million voters, additionally to the 17 million voters of 2005, are convinced: He is our man!
And then, immediately afterwards: We have won! Spontaneous outbreaks of joy! Car parades, joy fires, the jubilant atmosphere comparable to that of having won the qualification competition for the 2010 FIFA World Cup! The cheering masses are jubilant! Viva Mahmood! Long live Mahmood!
That’s the kind of public mood and atmosphere to be observed after an unexpected, overwhelming victory.
Well, where had the 24 million people been?
At any rate, they weren’t to be seen spontaneously rallying round the winner of the election in the streets.
There were only to be seen the troops of thugs of the Bassidj and the millions of people, who inquired publicly about their vote.
Where are Mahmood’s 24 million voters? […] Why are the places that empty, if Mahmood honours the province with his visit?«
http://www.zeit.de/politik/ausland/2010-06/iran-sanktionen?commentstart=89#cid-733181
best regards
Publicola [German]
Publicola, thanks so much for translating!