close button
Switch to Iranwire Light?
It looks like you’re having trouble loading the content on this page. Switch to Iranwire Light instead.
Technology

Blocking Internet Access is Neither Possible Nor Useful: A Conversation with Ahmad Pournejati

July 22, 2013
Omid Memarian
14 min read
Blocking Internet Access is Neither Possible Nor Useful: A Conversation with Ahmad Pournejati
Blocking Internet Access is Neither Possible Nor Useful: A Conversation with Ahmad Pournejati
Blocking Internet Access is Neither Possible Nor Useful: A Conversation with Ahmad Pournejati

 

The reformist politician Ahmad Pournejati has held senior positions across a range of Iranian government institutions, and has extensive experience in the state's cultural and media policies. He has served as a Member of Parliament, deputy director of Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting (IRIB), deputy Minister of Intelligence, and a cultura advisor to former President Mohammad Khatami's cabinet. He was a supporter of Mir Hossein Mousavi during the disputed 2009 election, and in addition to his political activities, enjoys writing about culture and journalism. He talked to Iranwire about whether state television can compete with foreign satellite networks, whether the majority of officials back Internet censorship, and the effect of what he termed the “bleak, dark years” of Ahmadinejad's tenure for books, culture in Iran.

Over the past decade, several new Persian television networks have emerged, and Iranians' access to satellite TV has increased significantly. It seems only nature to expect such access has reshaped their tastes. How has this phenomenon made itself felt in popular culture?

Even with all the existing limitations, the expansion of the satellite television networks and access to virtual media has increasingly affected the mentality and living patterns of many people in society, especially in the cities. Of course this has not equally affected  different layers of the Iranian society. Among the general public, it has gradually changed the behavior and the shape of life and the consumption patterns­ – even in the case of cultural and artistic products, such as music –  while for elites, it has affected their thinking, leading to changes in cultural and political approaches, and has created demands in these areas. But even considering the variety and attractiveness of the broadcasts of these newer networks, as compared to the programs produced by IRIB, state television's politico-cultural role and impact among a wide range of sections in urban and rural areas of the country remains undeniable.

In recent years, the West has imposed severe sanctions in IRIB, from barring particular officials from foreign travel to removing its Persian, Arabic, and English language channels from Hotbird and Intelsat satellites. These sanctions also make purchase of satellite equipment difficult. The countries who backed these measures have claimed IRIB's involvement in human rights violations, including its broadcast of forced confessions and show trials.  What have the implications of such sanctions been?

First of all, I would like to clearly state my opposition to these sanctions, be they imposed by international authorities or by countries. Sanctions, in all cases, create problems and obstacles, but in my opinion the IRIB sanctions have been more symbolic or political, targeting IRIB's reputation and mainly for international purposes. Both now and in the past, state televison and even some newspapers affiliated with the government have had to broadcast some programs according to the interest of the security and judicial organizations. Of course I do not intend to justify their actions, and I know that some of the IRIB managers shared the same goals with the other entities related to this issue. What I mean by the political nature of the sanctions is that their imposition falls beyond the subjects that are used as the pretext for the sanctions. But I have also been opposed to turning the IRIB into a tool for any other organization, especially security institutions. An example of this was my opposition to the broadcast of Hoviyat program during my tenure, which was broadcast by IRIB's political section.

(Editor's Note: Aired on national television in 1996, Hoviyat (Identity) was a documentary series devised and produced by Iran's Ministry of Intelligence. The program targeted, mostly, secular intellectual and political activists through "revealing" their "true nature." Hoviyat was designed to smear the reputation of the secularists and prepare the ground for their eventual arrest and in incarceration. Many of those portrayed in Hoviyat were later murdered, imprisoned or forced into exile.)

How important would it be for officials under the new Rouhani administration, or the IRIB itself through its own actions, to try and have the sanctions lifted?

In my opinion the subject of sanctions against IRIB is a part of a bigger issue. The favorable changes in the country’s domestic political atmosphere, and also the adoption of new approaches by both the global community and Iran, have created hopes in these new circumstances that have been provided after the new election. I don't believe separate efforts by the new government or by IRIB itself have been proposed merely for lifting the sanctions against IRIB. Of course there have been, and there will be, objections but it is more political than possibly effective.

Is state television capable of becoming competitive, given the presence today of such a diverse and polished range of satellite networks? Does IRIB view increasing viewership for domestic program as a priority, and if so, is this even possible?

Due to the monopolistic nature of IRIB and its legal and organizational structure, which is completely dependent on the government’s structure, there is very limited maneuverability for competing with satellite networks. This medium is basically without competition within the country, and therefore there is not much ground or need for the trouble of competing with the other media outlets. The custodians and producers of IRIB have always tried to emulate the form, content, and themes of other satellite network programs, while keeping their own cultural and political agenda, and creating attractive programs for the audience. Some relative successes and advantages are undeniable. Many Iranian families are sensitive about moral values, beliefs, customs, and upbringing of their children, and find IRIB’s programs, with all their shortcomings, to be healthier than satellite programs. The increasing trend towards satellite networks, however, is indicative of IRIB’s increasingly less successful competition with them.

How would you evaluate the track record of Mr. Ahmadinejad’s government in the realm of books, music, and movies? Do you find the current climate to be in line with the cultural capacity of Iranian society? What is the role of the government in improving the situation?

Unfortunately, Ahmadinejad's tenure was a time of darkness, chaos, confusion, and insecurity for arts and culture. Of course one cannot just hold Ahmadinejad or his colleagues responsible for the creation of this constricted and dark space. A number of those in leaderships positions throughout the political establishment, parallel organizations, and in particular the hegemonic discourse of the narrow-minded fundamentalist extremists, have led to this situation, which has caused a great number of creative minds, whether in the realm of books, music, theater, performing arts, or media, to lose motivation. We shouldn't limit our assessment of political behavior in Iranian society to just one or two parameters. The media has had an important role in this situation, be it the satellite networks or the IRIB. There are positive and negative roles on both sides.

However, I think that in practice, since the election of Mohammad Khatami in 1997, in the political realm, the Iranian people have moved towards rationality, realism, and making the best of opportunities for reform.  Even the experience of 2009 election, with all its bitter and unpleasant consequences, and the obvious and hidden protests against the political modus operandi and the security-oriented approach of the officials in handling those protests, finally did not result in changing the people’s approach for pursuing their demands through the ballot boxes. Thus the overseas analysts, the satellite networks, and Iranian officials must have all received society’s message though its actions; Iranian society, although somewhat invisible and astonishing, knows how to pursue its demands.

Based on what you said, what priorities and urgencies do you see in terms of social and cultural policies?

In my opinion there are three important reform priorities facing the new government that require  immediate and decisive attention:

Entrusting management of the government’s cultural, arts, and media sectors to individuals who have the professional competence and the necessary credibility among the folks of those sectors. These individuals should be loyal to reforms and changes.

Making rules and regulations transparent and stripped of [political] tendencies and opinions, including personal political preferences or beliefs, especially those that are security and extra-judicial preferences.

Reducing the government’s interference in media, arts, and cultural affairs, and providing an atmosphere of legal security for the establishment and development of independent trade organizations and non-governmental organizations in those sectors.

The subject of allowing women spectators into sports arenas, or the issue of women’s sports, or that of women's leadership roles in the society, and laws related to women have becoming central matters of social debate in recent years. Has government policy been commensurate with these existing needs, and what changes must still be made?

The issue of the role and status of women in public life has always been one of the challenges facing the fringes of the political structure and institutions of power in  Iranian society. The ever increasing awareness and the organized efforts by women, especially after May 23, 1997, and some effective actions in the sixth parliament [2000-2004] and by Mr. Khatami’s government, created suitable grounds for formation of a kind of woman’s rights movement in the direction of equal male and female citizenship rights. Considering the cultural characteristics and the rooted [ideological] beliefs in the society about the position of women and their type of social presence, any kind of reform and change, even if it is considered a government policy or program, will in practice encounter obstacles and questions.

The women’s presence in sports arenas, or other public places, is a small part of the main problem. I think that concurrent with making idealistic demands and striving for elimination of discrimination, a realistic, deliberate, and gradual approach must also be considered.  The government should not only respond in symbolic ways such as selecting some of the cabinet ministers from among qualified women, or through creation of a Ministry of Women's Affairs, but also through addressing the demands and needs of women in a real way. At the same time, the most important role is played by independent women’s organizations that can institutionalize awareness and prioritize the demands of this part of the society.

Ever since the Internet arrived in Iran, the question of control of its content and filtering of sites has been widely discussed. As an active Internet user and a cultural manager, have you ever faced any problems connecting to various websites while trying to work, study, or do research? In general, what kind of policy do you see pertinent to the realities of today's Iran and the world in which we live?

Unfortunately, the passive approach of [limiting people's access] has been tried in other cases and shown to be futile. Years ago, it was tried for video equipment and even Fax machines, and later with Internet access and satellite receivers. Undoubtedly the Internet will affect all those who have access to it, like the turbulent waves of the ocean, it will pound on the tranquil shores of minds, language, behavior, culture, and ethics of all those who encounter it. Perhaps it has effects on the transformation and destruction of certain cultural and moral foundations of the society. But in my opinion, the solution to these concerns in not to prevent or restrict the users or to block their access to content. This is neither possible nor useful. We should think of policies and measures that would allow quick and easy access to the [Internet] and useful utilization of it, while deeming any utilization of Internet that aims to or results in harming the foundations of public culture and the society’s moral values ​​as unjustified and dishonorable. The requirement for this method is to refer to the judgment of the public opinion and formation of legal guarantees for public oversight over the Internet. The current method of filtering, which is more security-oriented and arbitrary, is not acceptable.

You are probably in contact with many current or former officials and talk with them on various occasions. What is their general view on the Internet issue? How realistic do you see their views?

The perspectives of officials vary by background and political faction. Some essentially consider cyberspace as the enemy’s minefield in the “soft war.” Conversely there are realistic-minded figures who do not believe in such an extreme approach, and they defend the competitive atmosphere of the media and the right of the users to choose between the good and the bad. It turns out that the first view is not realistic, and despite spending a great deal of money on it, it has not resulted in much. We must not forget the reason some of the authorities and official bodies offer to justify their presence in the cyberspace and even on social networks—keeping an eye on the techniques used by the enemy and trying to thwart those efforts. But what is more important is the ever-increasing presence of families and children of state officials on the Internet and their interactions as normal users. This suggests a kind of natural and unavoidable need for the Internet in the broader society.

Recently an image of the popular singer Shakira was broadcast during a televised soccer match. Presumably the person who was at the live broadcast controls must not have recognized her. This raised objections by some individuals such as the MP Ali Motahari. What is your view about such reactions?

Everyone is entitled to their opinion in these cases. Mr. Motahari is expressing his cultural views, and insofar as he is stating his personal opinion, there is no cause for concern. But the reality is that double standards in all areas, especially in cultural and political policies, will have adverse impact on public opinion and undermine the authorities' credibility. The broadcast of certain images – whether it is of men or women with clothes that according to officials'  views are unconventional – cannot be permitted in certain settings, such as during voting events or the anniversary of the Revolution, or even in a television series, and prohibited in some other settings. In my opinion, a vast majority of these issues are based on personal taste and cannot be the basis of an official policy for society. In my view the presence of women in the same clothes and appearance as they have chosen to use in public places (streets, parks, movie theaters, music concerts, elections, etc.), should be allowed in stadiums. The related institutions must take appropriate action to prevent any violations of the law and maintain the security of individual citizens.

In the last few years many prominent members of Iranian civil society have left the country. Many did not leave because of security concerns but because of pressure that made their activities inside the country virtually impossible. Do you see any possibility that specific actions could be taken to encourage their return, so that they could go back to Iran without any problem?

Of course it is still too early to predict the future of the country’s security conditions and the demise of the radical movement in the post-Ahmadinejad era. But I am optimistic and hopeful about the future.

After the election of Mr. Rouhani as the next Iranian president, different individuals and groups have expressed high expectations of him. What explains the sheer volume of such demands? And to what extent do you think Mr. Rouhani will be able to meet them?

The most important conclusion that can be drawn from the various political, economic, cultural, and social expectations is that a vast majority of Iranians are unhappy with the situation, policies, and practices of the past eight years and are thinking of changing them. The art and craft of Mr. Rouhani and his team of colleagues is to first remain faithful to their campaign pledges in a realistic way and with the same moderate approaches that became the trademark of their campaign. The second thing they should do is to keep open the line of continuous and transparent communication with public opinion, both for receiving social demands and also for explaining the possibilities and limitations. I believe that despite all the limitations, the government (the executive branch) is a powerful component of the current political structure in Iran, and although it is not at the helm of all affairs, if it acts with tact and determination and utilizes its social potential, it could meet many of the society’s demands. The important thing is to set the priorities cleverly and to take advantage of opportunities appropriately.

comments

Speaking of Iran

An "Electoral Uprising" in Iran

July 22, 2013
Speaking of Iran
1 min read
An "Electoral Uprising" in Iran