For all you free speech naysayers out there, this one’s for you.  A quick primer on the devastating effects of media characterizations and their unparalleled ability to influence public perception followed by some “leftist” theorizing. 

When reading, keep in mind that it has never been the position of this site that journalists be censured or expression be impeded; we are more concerned with large-scale media outlets being held more accountable for their pivotal role in society and the power they wield.

(Note:  This site fully supports the right to expression, open and public debate and participation in the marketplace of ideas for all).

A Personal Account of the American Media Shift:  Pre and Post Revolutionary Iran

Professor Flora Keshishian, recent Fulbright Award recipient, is also an Iranian immigrant to America.  In one of her scholarly articles (Keshishian, F.  (2000).  Acculturation, Communication, and the U.S. Media: The Experience of an Iranian Immigrant.  Howard Journal of Communication 11 93-106), she provides a personal perspective on the traumatizing impact of media characterizations and stereotyping.

To keep this brief and to the point I will put context to the excerpts and let Professor Keshishian’s words tell the story.

The time period is the 444 days including and following November 4, 1979, the day of the infamous “hostage crisis” of Americans in Iran, during the unsettled post revolutionary atmosphere.  U.S.-Iran relations instantly deteriorated and the media coverage became fragmented, incomprehensive and ideologically oriented:

…In a manner reminiscent of the experiences of the Japanese Americans in the 1940s, Iranians in the United States became scapegoats and suffered harassment and covert discrimination, mainly because of their national heritage (Ansari)

…Instead of clearly discussing the socio-politico economic forces that lead to the revolution, the U.S. press made the situation in Iran look like a recurrence of a crusader’s war, Islam versus Christianity

 …In and of themselves these images were not problematic because they do respresent parts of Iranian culture.  But the association the American public had made, because of the way the media had presented the images, was problematic.  These negative perceptions were further intensified by references to Iranian leaders as “antimodern,”fundamentalist,” and ‘irrational”; and referred to people in Iran as “religious fanatics,” “leftist-backed,” and “backward.”

 …What was a relatively postiive, though still stereotypical and oversimplified, prerevolution and prehostage image of Iran–hospitality, Persian carpets, oil, caviar–vanished. 

…During the hostage period, I heard stories about Iranian immigrants who had been attacked–a woman who had been raped and, in another incident, a few men who had been beaten in a bar–because they were Iranian

…These incidents affected me to a point where I no longer felt comfortable identifying myself as Iranian, and I was not alone in feeling this way.  According to Ansari (1988), “the anti-Iranian reaction was so widespread that it forced Iranian Americans to misrepresent their ethnic identity”

Just Another Example of Hurt Feelings?

The preceding historical reflection is not assumed to be a novel, mind-blowing description of an unexplored sociological phenomenon.  Surely it will be dismissed as one of the costs of living in a free and democratic society.  However, in my view, it was worthy of a post if not for the fact of its educational value, then for the mere purpose of re-publicizing a point of view that is far too often left out.

Most importantly, however, it is a documented account of the American media’s recurring practice of vilification. As a result, individuals residing within American borders are absorbing the adverse effects of the U.S. government’s severed diplomatic relations with a foreign nation and actions unrelated to them.  Flowing from this media offensive is a degraded quality of life, marginalization, discrimination and, at times, a threat to the security of the person for residents of the same ethnic background as the enemy state. 

The press, no doubt, have an incredibly important role to play and expression, debate, discussion and the exchange of ideas are indeed the cornerstones of a functional democracy.  With that said, I have yet to witness any tool or profession that is immune from misuse, abuse and the potential to run awry.  All our rights and freedoms, some of which are arguably more sacred than expression (life, liberty and security of the person) have at times been attenuated for the benefit of the people. However, It is only when the restraints and restrictions are tugging at the coat tails of the aristocracy that they become a problem.

Everything and everyone needs checks and balances, and in absence of them, not imposition, there then becomes an increased risk for totalitarianism.