Radio is a device for distributing ignorance, not knowledge!

Charso Press: Book readers know Ahmad Zeidabadi by his book collection, politicians remember him by his political criticisms, and press and newspaper readers know him by his articles. A writer who wrote his life story in several volumes, a political critic who said goodbye to the political arena less than a week ago, and a journalist whose notes and articles we still read.

As a writer who has been writing for years, how much self-censorship do you have?

Of course, I also make many considerations when writing, you cannot write in such a way that these conditions are not maintained and we do not criticize as we should, however, we have to measure the conditions.

How do you evaluate the authority of the media in the current situation?

Regarding the authority of the media, the story is clear, in countries where democracy has been institutionalized, we have news and information companies that have a long history of 150 years and have adapted themselves to technological developments in the field of communication, newspapers such as Kahan and Information, which are state-owned and They existed in Iran since long ago, they still remain, but their managers have changed in different periods due to political developments and their limitations are clear, these people could not be a reference. Sedavsima somehow could not and cannot find such a position.

Why can’t he reach this position?

First of all, because it does not have independence, secondly, even as a state media, it has not respected professional parameters at any level and has become more of a device for distributing ignorance than a device for distributing knowledge. In the meantime, we have a series of private newspapers that gained authority in a period, i.e. the middle of 1377 to the beginning of 1379, and it didn’t take two years before they were closed and their authority ended. Next, there were some newspapers that had relative authority, but they were no longer newsmakers.

With this account, it was very natural for minds to move outside the borders of Iran. In the beginning, it was the BBC network, which was heard a lot in a period, and when its TV channel and Radio Farda were launched, people followed the news from them. In the meantime, people outside the borders took advantage of this situation, so that they no longer follow the same professional frameworks, and the political forces against this government established media to influence public opinion through it, and they do not adhere to professional principles. ; Finally, whatever they say is accepted.

Simultaneously with these issues, the virtual world has also entered, and there, due to the level of dissatisfaction, some people became active and prominent. Virtual space is accessible to the public, in fact it is for everyone, and on the other hand, we have a large Iranian population who appeared in this space and became, in a sense, active in the virtual space. On the other hand, the virtual space is in the hands of the opponents of this system, its supporters also want to make an effort, but they do not enter properly, and their work is not valid.

Therefore, we faced a situation where the entire reference is either to the virtual space, which is entirely in the hands of the opponents of the system, or in the hands of the television networks that are completely in favor of this system, one case is the domestic newspapers, websites and news agencies that are scattered They feed some.

You said that the virtual space is mostly in the hands of the opponents of this system, do you think that the same system intends to return authority to the domestic media by limiting and filtering the virtual space? And can he do it?

Authoritativeness is never found by limiting, and it happens to be the opposite. Currently, Instagram is blocked and Telegram has been blocked before, but have there been any restrictions on accessing and using these media? No, by the way, the trend has increased and the filter breaker market has become hotter. If anyone in this world thinks that they can do such a thing by creating internet restrictions, it is not the case at all. Suppose they cut off the entire internet, what do they want to do with the satellites? Are they going to collect the dishes again? This is worse, because this is how they are more or less present and reasonable moderate forces are also in the field.

This is a futile and futile effort and there is no other way except that the entire news policy of the Islamic Republic and its approach to the media and governance will change so that this does not happen and authority will not return, except that the hand of the domestic press to expand, expand and Let the development open, which is also time-consuming; But the return of authority is only possible in these ways.

There is a problem; Some say that the intellectuals are lagging behind the people, and some say that if no one says what the people say, they will be accused of supporting the government. At many points in history, people went to dark places. The issue of whether the intellectuals are standing behind the people or if they are really telling the truth and the people have become heavy on their ears again, has become a dilemma and where is it possible to hear the voices of the intellectuals as sources who have ideas and opinions?

The people means the 85 million population of Iran, all these people do not think the same way, they do not have the same way of life, they do not have the same political orientation, and everyone calls a part of these people the people. The government, opponents and protesters also call another part the people, that’s why there is always the question that when we say the people, which people are we talking about? And where does the public will crystallize? Second, by the way, intellectuals, especially left-wing intellectuals, play the main and essential role in creating this thought, which always sought to mobilize a class of society. All this time, whenever mass movements have been formed, all the people have felt so defeated that they have run after that group. Currently, intellectuals are divided into two groups, either they support what people say in the street, or some remain silent and do not dare to say anything, or they are worried about the consequences.

In fact, a culture has been formed that has taken the real independence of intellectuals from them, independence is not only from the government, it is a condition, but it is not necessary and sufficient. A person should also gain independence from the mass of people. The same objection that the late Motahari makes to the clergy and says that the Sunni clergy are dependent on their governments. We still don’t have a group of intellectuals who say a single word. They are usually scattered and speak against each other, so here we don’t have anything called intellectual authority.

A kind of sanctification, that is, sanctifying a part of the mass of people and their desires, has always been the basis of the story, so whatever the intellectuals say, others believe that the intellectual is always backward and the intellectual does not dare to make a dispute, because the crowd that enters is always a The political owners believe that this story itself will ruin the work.

In my opinion, these political forces are always the main problem, the problem of ordinary people is better life, more suitable conditions, more trouble-free livelihood and higher dignity, but the problem of politicians is the fight for power, and my problem is that intellectuals are not bold. We don’t have anyone who says that violence is good, but the intellectuals did not even dare to say that violence is good in a theoretical matter, and in the end they are accused of supporting violence when they are against it; But because a number of political forces are in favor of violence and the intellectuals think that if they speak, they will be attacked by these people, so they say, why should we hide a secret that doesn’t hurt.

///.