Change Your Media Policy
For the Iranian foreign minister, journalists are microphones which should only transfer his words and dare not to challenge
The unexpected visit of Iranian Minister of Foreign Affairs Manouchehr Mottaki to Washington has brought up many questions for journalists and political observers. The bottom line: what was the reason for this unprecedented, hasty visit?
Mottaki and Foreign Ministry Spokesman Hassan Qashqavi claim that visiting Iran’s Interest Section in Washington was the reason. After the news leaked out, in a press conference in New York, among foreign correspondents and his Iranian journalist friends, Mottaki tried to gloss over his visit. However, in a subsequent interview with Iranian News Agency (IRNA), the most obedient media of Ahmadinejad’s administration, Mottaki said: "United States hosts the largest number of Iranians abroad and our consulate duties are the heaviest in the United States. Our Interests Section in Washington has the largest number of staffs due to these responsibilities".
This did not stop Associated Press, Al-Arabiya and other media to cover the visit and make speculations however. Considering Iranian Chief Nuclear Negotiator Saeed Jalili’s meeting with Five plus One representatives, the leakage of the news of Iran’s second uranium enrichment facility and multifarious international pressures, there comes the question that even if Mottaki’s claim was true and his trip to Washington was to visit the Interests Section why should it take place at this time and how could it be justified?
After it admitting Mottaki’s meeting with two members of U.S. Council of Foreign Relations, Hassan Qashqavi told Iran’s Arabic news channel Al-Alam that: "Mottaki only talked to members of Iran-U.S. Committee and his meeting aimed to arrange some consulate affairs".
Simultaneity of Mottaki’s visit and the Geneva talks immediately brings to mind questions about the connection between these two. As Reuters has conjectured, we would like to know if Mottaki was carrying a message for Barack Obama; or as Al-Arabiya claims, he wanted to diffuse tensions over Qom nuclear facility in his meeting with CFR members?
At any rate, the side effects of the trip were more than Iranian diplomats could predict. The trip was a piece in the puzzle completed after negotiations between Iran and six world powers and led Wall Street Journal and Washington Post to deem Iran’s move as a withdrawal from its stance while no details about the talks had been reported yet. Undoubtedly, the behavior of Foreign Ministry and its head Manouchehr Mottaki lend credibility to these hasty analyses.
In his return from Washington, Mottaki attended a press conference in United Nations. With the controversy surrounding Ahmadinejad’s visit to New York, Mottaki had adopted an aggressive tone, such that in response to a female correspondent (possibly representing Al-Arabiya) about Iran’s nuclear activities and ballistic missiles, the Iranian foreign minister contemptuously replied: "Looks like your way too late"!
Should Mottaki’s response start with such a sentence? It seems that he had forgotten the problems which may occur in simultaneous interpretation. It is in such an occasion that the importance of media advisors comes to the fore. Unfortunately, advisors such as Mahdi Kalhor are busy comparing Iranians soldiers’ eight years of bravery with American Western movies. More than having the ability to control media crises, figures such as Kalhor are fuelers of controversy and they should be ousted from the political and media scene of Iran as soon as possible. Main point about the media-diplomacy relation is the attitude of diplomats towards the notion of media. It seems that for people like Mottaki, journalists are microphones whose only role is to transfer their words and dare not to challenge them.
It is worth mentioning Ahmadinejad’s frequent and useless interviews with foreign media, especially his recent talk with Larry King. The only advantage of his last interview was jumping to the top of CNN’s list of entertaining programs. Among media experts, more than a professional TV host, Larry King is known as a showman who runs an entertainment program. Unfortunately this was the second time Ahmadinejad interviewed a person who has no specific knowledge about Iran, post-election developments and Iran’s role in Middle East Affairs. His questions were void of any analytical, expert value. Not surprising if we know that the list of his guests includes Hollywood’s cheapest stars. Why doesn’t Ahmadinejad talk with journalists such as Fareed Zakaria who has his own TV show in the same channel? There is a lot to say about media decisions of Ahmadinejad’s administration during the last four years and the way it treats foreign media.
Mottaki and Foreign Ministry Spokesman Hassan Qashqavi claim that visiting Iran’s Interest Section in Washington was the reason. After the news leaked out, in a press conference in New York, among foreign correspondents and his Iranian journalist friends, Mottaki tried to gloss over his visit. However, in a subsequent interview with Iranian News Agency (IRNA), the most obedient media of Ahmadinejad’s administration, Mottaki said: "United States hosts the largest number of Iranians abroad and our consulate duties are the heaviest in the United States. Our Interests Section in Washington has the largest number of staffs due to these responsibilities".
This did not stop Associated Press, Al-Arabiya and other media to cover the visit and make speculations however. Considering Iranian Chief Nuclear Negotiator Saeed Jalili’s meeting with Five plus One representatives, the leakage of the news of Iran’s second uranium enrichment facility and multifarious international pressures, there comes the question that even if Mottaki’s claim was true and his trip to Washington was to visit the Interests Section why should it take place at this time and how could it be justified?
After it admitting Mottaki’s meeting with two members of U.S. Council of Foreign Relations, Hassan Qashqavi told Iran’s Arabic news channel Al-Alam that: "Mottaki only talked to members of Iran-U.S. Committee and his meeting aimed to arrange some consulate affairs".
Simultaneity of Mottaki’s visit and the Geneva talks immediately brings to mind questions about the connection between these two. As Reuters has conjectured, we would like to know if Mottaki was carrying a message for Barack Obama; or as Al-Arabiya claims, he wanted to diffuse tensions over Qom nuclear facility in his meeting with CFR members?
At any rate, the side effects of the trip were more than Iranian diplomats could predict. The trip was a piece in the puzzle completed after negotiations between Iran and six world powers and led Wall Street Journal and Washington Post to deem Iran’s move as a withdrawal from its stance while no details about the talks had been reported yet. Undoubtedly, the behavior of Foreign Ministry and its head Manouchehr Mottaki lend credibility to these hasty analyses.
In his return from Washington, Mottaki attended a press conference in United Nations. With the controversy surrounding Ahmadinejad’s visit to New York, Mottaki had adopted an aggressive tone, such that in response to a female correspondent (possibly representing Al-Arabiya) about Iran’s nuclear activities and ballistic missiles, the Iranian foreign minister contemptuously replied: "Looks like your way too late"!
Should Mottaki’s response start with such a sentence? It seems that he had forgotten the problems which may occur in simultaneous interpretation. It is in such an occasion that the importance of media advisors comes to the fore. Unfortunately, advisors such as Mahdi Kalhor are busy comparing Iranians soldiers’ eight years of bravery with American Western movies. More than having the ability to control media crises, figures such as Kalhor are fuelers of controversy and they should be ousted from the political and media scene of Iran as soon as possible. Main point about the media-diplomacy relation is the attitude of diplomats towards the notion of media. It seems that for people like Mottaki, journalists are microphones whose only role is to transfer their words and dare not to challenge them.
It is worth mentioning Ahmadinejad’s frequent and useless interviews with foreign media, especially his recent talk with Larry King. The only advantage of his last interview was jumping to the top of CNN’s list of entertaining programs. Among media experts, more than a professional TV host, Larry King is known as a showman who runs an entertainment program. Unfortunately this was the second time Ahmadinejad interviewed a person who has no specific knowledge about Iran, post-election developments and Iran’s role in Middle East Affairs. His questions were void of any analytical, expert value. Not surprising if we know that the list of his guests includes Hollywood’s cheapest stars. Why doesn’t Ahmadinejad talk with journalists such as Fareed Zakaria who has his own TV show in the same channel? There is a lot to say about media decisions of Ahmadinejad’s administration during the last four years and the way it treats foreign media.