How can a political presenter be banned from being photographed? / Neutrality has religious problems – Mehr News Agency | Iran and world’s news

Mehr News Agency – Art Group – Atieh Moazen: Implementing political programs is like walking on a razor’s edge; You must both articulate the demands of your audience and satisfy them in questioning their demands and concerns, and be careful that the high-ranking official who sits in front of you and responds to criticism and questioning endures. This is why the presenters of political programs can enter the field of questioning in a few cases and sometimes give the field to its rivals and leave it due to the pressures of officials, higher institutions, supporters and even managers within the Radio and Television Organization.

Vahid Imani is one of the presenters who has experienced the valley of performance in various fields, but one of his most colorful programs on the air was “marginal text”, which had a socio-political atmosphere and in which he talked to officials.

Imani, who has had fewer programs on the air over the years, spoke about the relationship between performing in such programs and that he tried to break some taboos.

Q: You were the host of programs such as “Marginal Text” and “Ten and Ten Minutes”, which had a demanding atmosphere in the political arena.

This is the gap that exists in the national media as the most serious media in the country. When I entered the political field, unlike the social field, where most of the programs and presenters were branded, few presenters entered and were known in this field. I became better known in the political arena, however, I also hosted religious and social programs and they weighed more. We do not have a brand executive in the political field. We did not have a brand program, and the rule of political programs before the “marginal text” program was that an official would just report and leave.

The * What were the taboos you tried to break?

At that time, the question was coordinated with guests from officials and officials, the questions were asked in advance, and even the official himself said that he wanted to talk about something, but we put it all aside. Rarely did a challenge arise between the host and the guest and a demand develop, and even now some programs still go this way. No demand is formed and on the contrary a tribune is provided where the person comes and reports the program.

* Of course, at the same time, apart from the “marginal text”, we had political programs that were challenging ….

We had “Yesterday, Today, Tomorrow” which was seen a lot and the reason was not the challenge but more because of his debates and Vahid Yaminpour also managed the debates well. To be more precise, Yaminpour opened the atmosphere of political challenge on television. We also changed this shape and image in another way and broke the formal and permanent forms. For example, I myself tried to break the image of the ironic and admirable performer of the other side and use more slang literature instead of harsh political words and heavy words.

The I tried to break the image of the ironed and admiring performer of the other side One point that political programmers are often accused of is partisanship. You were sometimes accused of these orientations.

I basically deny that I had an orientation and I have a reason for it. At the same time, in one of the episodes, Sardar Naqdi appeared on TV as the commander of the time, who is routinely praised in the programs, but I told him that he was wearing a personal dress and asked questions that might be considered a red line. Or Mr. Zakani, who was the head of the special commission of Borjam, came to our program and we had a difficult challenge with him about how to run the commission. There are many of these examples, and we have invited officials from every front and current, and we have not given in to the usual tribunes. Of course, keep in mind that when I was in the margins of the government, I was assigned to a certain current, and I had to invite the people in charge.

* How much did the “margin text” communicate with the audience?

During the performance of “Marginal Text”, I used to take the subway to work twice a week and come back to get feedback and find out if it has a social effect and can be seen or not, and this feedback was quite obvious to me. People talked about the program and the guests and told me their opinion.

The * I think there were other programs at the time.

At that time, it was “Soraya”, “Yesterday, Today, Tomorrow”, “Signature”, “One Look” and …. شد.

The “Look One” program has been on the air for more than a decade and also brings high-ranking officials from the Minister, the Vice President and the Vice President, and so on. But do you know the name of the host? * I return to my first question, why do we not have a brand presenter for such programs yet, why there has not been training for these people during these years?

The organization did not train specialized executives for the political arena, and even if there were executives who specialized in these areas, they would not have entered the political arena and social demands.

In any case, in the political arena, you have to make demands and act. If you do not have them, you will join many of the same neutral presenters. The “Look One” program has been on the air for more than a decade now, bringing in high-ranking officials from the minister, vice president, vice president, and so on. But do you know the name of the host? Do you remember him? Implementing neutral programs, in my opinion, even has religious problems, because it costs money from the treasury money, and you should have the demands of the people, but this does not happen.

* Many people easily go in front of the antenna due to their relationship and perform a live program overnight. Did you get into this job with a party?

I entered the performance in 1987. At that time, it was not like going in front of the TV when you first entered the TV and being the host, even if you were on stage. The applicant had to go through a series of steps, one had to start from reporting, as many TV presenters today have started from reporting. All those who have a name have started step by step and have been destroyed. At one time, people valued literacy. The facilitator must be articulate, have complete aristocracy, be literate and have general knowledge, and have minimal knowledge of current affairs. On average, each person speaks 4,000 words a day. At that time, managers wanted us to speak 14,000 words and increase data and information. Where are these professional presenters today? Farzad Hassani, Dr. Ahmadi, Ali Dorostkar, Mohammad Reza Shahidifar, who has a high level of mastery in doctrinal issues and many other presenters do not have programs on the air right now.

The * Sometimes we see that the presenters, like the actors, are chosen based on the number of their followers.

They may even choose someone because he was a good Twitter user, which is also wrong. A person may be a good reporter, but the performance space and the antenna are different. The same reporter, however, has experienced so many encounters with guests and news interviews that he can be a professional presenter.

* Especially in programs such as social demands, he must be a full-fledged media presenter and has not come to these programs from the sentimental space.

Demanding is not about shouting why something happened or did not happen? Make fun of it or just “toss” our conversations in cyberspace to go viral. A demanding executor must explore the various dimensions of each subject and research the originality of that subject. TV is not an Instagram account. We are going to create a flow, an issue and a challenge and deal with its different layers. This space can be learned on TV. Mohammad Delavari is currently one of the few presenters who knows such a demand, and it is necessary to sit at his feet and learn how, by not being afraid and asking respectfully, recognizing the exact boundaries of his demands also raises his challenges.

If they are challenged by a political presenter, they do not write a letter to him that it is forbidden and say over the phone that it is better not to use him. * The performance environment on TV is always facing challenges, and I think in the political environment these challenges are both multiplied and inflamed. Why?

The atmosphere of political programs has always been inflamed in the current sensitive situation that has lasted for 43 years. Such conditions cause political programs to have more consideration and censorship and to be overshadowed from the tone of the performance to the guests and everything. Even if they are challenged by a political performer, they do not write to him that it is forbidden and say over the phone that it is better not to use him. Even if a producer insists on working with the same performer, they will prolong the discussion of the program approval process and the producer will see that it is not in his best interest. And there is nothing worse for a performer, whether professionally or socially, or the consequences for society.

Q: How do you think it is possible to maintain the brand of political programs that have dominant and non-conservative executives in this field?

In previous years, in the name of revolution and the use of carbalds, those who caused the loss of the image of television as the most important media in the country were used.
One of the things we saw on TV was that the window was filled with ineffective presenters. A presenter who does not, because being a television presenter, has technical and physical conditions that many of them did not even have the minimum. Or they turned influential presenters, known as TV showcases, into ineffective people by cleverly changing the genre of programs. Despite the fact that Rashidpour is not like me intellectually and visually, but he is an expert and capable, and now from that influential presenter in the morning program who was demanding, we see only a humorous character who runs a contest and seeks to entertain people!

The * Maybe he is interested in running the competition himself.

No, is not it? Who does not like to be ineffective ?! People enter the media to make an impact. In my opinion, Rashidpour’s position is not to run a competition, he should talk, and although I may not like his approach, he is a very professional performer in dialogue. Today, we are dealing with presenters who have not seen the implementation period and have not understood how to deal with the guests, which is partly due to the way the organization’s policy-making during these years. During these few years, he was a manager at the head of the national media who did not have media literacy, and this damaged the media. However, in the new era, with the wisdom and media knowledge that Dr. Peyman Jebli, the director of the Radio and Television, has, and in his media studies, I am sure that these damages will be eliminated.