April 06, 2013
One of the most annoying aspects of spending time in the United
States, as I have just done with a month’s working visit there, is to follow
the news coverage of Iran in the mainstream American media. Well, calling it
“news” coverage is a bit of a stretch, because the mainstream American media is
not really reporting news about Iran, but rather repackaged ideological attacks
and threats that emanate primarily from the American and Israeli governments.
The main problem—evident in virtually every story about Iran in
the mainstream media, including the “quality” outlets like the New York
Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal and the leading
television channels—is that the coverage is inevitably based on assumptions,
fears, concerns, accusations and expectations that are almost never supported
by factual and credible evidence. Two things in particular are wrong in the
coverage.
First is that most media stories about Iran view the country
almost uniquely through the lens of its being an adversary and a threat to the
United States, Israel and Arab allies of the U.S., whether because of Iran’s
alleged regional hegemonic aims or its terrorism links. Iran only exists for
most American media as a threat to be beaten back at any cost.
The second is that most media analyze Iran almost exclusively
through the issue of its nuclear industry. This attitude sees Iran as secretly
developing a nuclear bomb that it will use to threaten or destroy neighboring
powers, including Israel and Arab oil-producing countries. For the U.S.
mainstream media, Iran is first and foremost a nuclear threat, and little else
about the country is deemed worthy of serious coverage.
I have no doubt that any impartial assessment of the
professional conduct of most American media in covering the Iran situation
would find it deeply flawed and highly opinionated, to the point where I say
that mainstream media coverage of Iran in the United States is professionally
criminal. I base this on having learned my journalism craft and values in the
United States, where quality press coverage of any issue ideally should be
characterized by a combination of accuracy, balance, depth and context, within
a rigorous attempt by the writer to remain impartial when reporting stories
that include controversy or conflict.
These professional qualities are usually absent from news
coverage of Iran in the United States, and I say this is a criminal enterprise
because the consequences of the flawed and aggressive coverage helps shape a
public opinion environment in which it becomes acceptable to threaten and
sanction Iran on the basis of mere suspicions and fears in the minds of
American and Israeli politicians—all of whom, I would guess, have never visited
Iran or even spoken to any credible or “normal” Iranian who is not involved in
political lobbying in Washington, D.C. The discussion of Iran in the media over
the past two years has also been full of references about the possibility of
attacks against Iran by Israel or the United States, with very little if any
serious analysis of whether such unilateral attacks are permissible under
international law.
I am continuously amazed to see every accusation in every story
about Iran’s alleged sinister and secretive nuclear bomb plans hedged with
phrases like “it is assumed” or “officials believe” or “analysts suspect” or
Iran “may be” or “is thought to be” or is “suspected of” doing this or that.
There is no certainty, little credible proof, few verifiable facts, only anger,
assumptions and fear.
This same hollow and shoddy level of evidence presented in the
media’s portrayal of Iran could never be used to frame, say, the actions of
young African-Americans, Hispanic teachers, or professional women bankers,
because it would be ejected by both professional media standards and common
human rights standards as being a bag of wild prejudices and stereotypes that
are not supported by fact. The mass media gets away with disguising ideological
venom as impartial news coverage in the case of Iran, though, because a
different standard of professionalism is at work here, one which makes it
permissible for the media to ignore its role as a reporter of facts in favor of
being an ideological warrior that serves the purposes of assorted governments.
We saw at great cost in Iraq what destruction, waste and criminality this sort
of behavior can lead to.
It will be fascinating now to see how the media reports on
possible signs of progress in the negotiations between Iran and the P5+1
countries (U.K., China, France, Russia, the United States and Germany) that
resume in Kazakhstan. I hope our American journalism colleagues will summon the
moral and professional strengths within them to cover both sides of these talks
in their full and accurate political and technical contexts, rather than
continue to act like robotic cheerleaders for the American and Israeli
governments.
Rami G. Khouri is Editor-at-large of The Daily Star, and
Director of the Issam Fares Institute for Public Policy and International
Affairs at the American University of Beirut, in Beirut, Lebanon. You can
follow him @ramikhouri.
Copyright © 2013 Rami G.
Khouri—distributed by Agence Global