This is a typical piece of Western Propaganda. It presents selective aspects of current Iranian life without any historical context. No mention of, say, the overthrow of democratically elected Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh by the CIA in 1953, the implementation of a Western-stooge tyrannical government led by Reza Shah Pahlavi. The subsequent popular uprising of Iranians against this Western-backed regime in 1978-79. In general, any context of why Iran is in its current political situation is omitted. As a freethinking humanist, I am no fan of the Iranian Mullahs, neither I am a fan of the fascist US and British Empires that are so much worse. But context matters. This is NOT 'reporting'. It is propaganda.
Propaganda isn't always untrue. It's a perspective for gain. Sure, there's gain for the West by tarring Iran. But the plight of women in Iran is true. I can consider that aspect whilst keeping my knowledge of the CIA separate. Not everything has to be destroyed by context. Similarly, Vice's change of heart on Ukraine disappoints me, but I can still appreciate the bravery of their reporters and others issues they present. Our modern era of deliberate cloudiness requires us to become knowledgeable so that we can pick and choose better. For the most part, I believe that I can. Consequently, I found value in this piece.
Would I prefer that women not have to wear a hijab in public in Iran? Yes. Would I prefer that women can get family planning and abortion services in Southern US states? Yes. Reporting without context is propaganda, any way you slice it, imo. Imagine a scenario in which Iranian reporters are given access to, say, San Francisco's Market Street and report on the truly horrendous homelessness situation there. Of course, this valuable piece of reporting is then broadcast to Iranians for...Propagada purposes. Who knows, May have happened already, smile.
Sure. And RT regularly did that before being banned. I'm glad they did. And I watch Western doccies about Russia. I like to think I'm cleverer than the Iranian and US governments. When I take over the world, don't be surprised if I make Isobel Yeung the Secretary of Culture :)
This was interesting. I can’t say I have a lot of previous knowledge on the subject and was somewhat skeptical of the Vice News component but who knows.
No brainer for me. Moslem women don't have equal rights, and its worse when clerics are in charge. That's a different issue to my position on geopolitics, with the caveat that the CIA helped destroy democracy there, and thus helped destroy women's rights. If you want Vice showing the beautiful side of Iran, see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=voA0cS1JiGQ
This is a typical piece of Western Propaganda. It presents selective aspects of current Iranian life without any historical context. No mention of, say, the overthrow of democratically elected Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh by the CIA in 1953, the implementation of a Western-stooge tyrannical government led by Reza Shah Pahlavi. The subsequent popular uprising of Iranians against this Western-backed regime in 1978-79. In general, any context of why Iran is in its current political situation is omitted. As a freethinking humanist, I am no fan of the Iranian Mullahs, neither I am a fan of the fascist US and British Empires that are so much worse. But context matters. This is NOT 'reporting'. It is propaganda.
Propaganda isn't always untrue. It's a perspective for gain. Sure, there's gain for the West by tarring Iran. But the plight of women in Iran is true. I can consider that aspect whilst keeping my knowledge of the CIA separate. Not everything has to be destroyed by context. Similarly, Vice's change of heart on Ukraine disappoints me, but I can still appreciate the bravery of their reporters and others issues they present. Our modern era of deliberate cloudiness requires us to become knowledgeable so that we can pick and choose better. For the most part, I believe that I can. Consequently, I found value in this piece.
Would I prefer that women not have to wear a hijab in public in Iran? Yes. Would I prefer that women can get family planning and abortion services in Southern US states? Yes. Reporting without context is propaganda, any way you slice it, imo. Imagine a scenario in which Iranian reporters are given access to, say, San Francisco's Market Street and report on the truly horrendous homelessness situation there. Of course, this valuable piece of reporting is then broadcast to Iranians for...Propagada purposes. Who knows, May have happened already, smile.
Sure. And RT regularly did that before being banned. I'm glad they did. And I watch Western doccies about Russia. I like to think I'm cleverer than the Iranian and US governments. When I take over the world, don't be surprised if I make Isobel Yeung the Secretary of Culture :)
That would be a great improvement over the current brutal mess. Looking forward to it!
This was interesting. I can’t say I have a lot of previous knowledge on the subject and was somewhat skeptical of the Vice News component but who knows.
No brainer for me. Moslem women don't have equal rights, and its worse when clerics are in charge. That's a different issue to my position on geopolitics, with the caveat that the CIA helped destroy democracy there, and thus helped destroy women's rights. If you want Vice showing the beautiful side of Iran, see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=voA0cS1JiGQ