top of page
Search

How the BBC Became an ‘Ayatollah’: From Mossadeq to Mahsa Amini

  • Writer: Bahar Almasi
    Bahar Almasi
  • Sep 26, 2024
  • 5 min read

Media outlets have long played a significant role in shaping political discourse, especially in regions undergoing major socio-political changes. The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) has been a prominent international player, often viewed as an objective source of information. However, in countries like Iran, the BBC’s involvement has often sparked debate about its impartiality and its influence on key political events. From the 1953 coup against Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadeq to the ongoing 2022 “Woman, Life, Freedom” movement, the BBC has been both a critical source of information and a controversial figure accused of shaping narratives that align with Western interests.

ree

The 1953 Coup: A Turning Point in British-Iranian Relations


The first significant instance of the BBC’s influence in Iranian politics dates back to the 1953 coup that ousted Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadeq. Mossadeq had sought to nationalize Iran’s oil industry, which was under British control, posing a threat to British economic interests. As Ganjian and Zanuddin (2018) explain, the BBC Persian Service played an essential role in disseminating anti-Mossadeq propaganda, contributing to his eventual overthrow. “The BBC acted as a colonial tool,” they argue, aligning its messaging with British geopolitical objectives in Iran, such as protecting British access to Iranian oil. The role of media, particularly foreign media, in orchestrating the coup is often cited as a prime example of how information can be weaponized in favor of Western powers.

This event left a deep scar in Iranian collective memory and reinforced a sense of distrust toward Western interventions. For many Iranians, the coup symbolized a turning point where Western media outlets, including the BBC, became vehicles for Western powers to exert control over Iran’s political destiny. Mossadeq’s downfall is not only a cautionary tale about the fragility of national sovereignty but also a reminder of how media outlets can play pivotal roles in shaping political outcomes that have long-lasting impacts.


The 1979 Iranian Revolution: Supporting Khomeini’s Narrative


Another significant chapter in the BBC’s involvement in Iranian politics occurred during the 1979 Iranian Revolution. During this period, the BBC Persian Service was instrumental in broadcasting Ayatollah Khomeini’s anti-Shah speeches while he was in exile. According to Ganjian and Zanuddin (2018), the BBC gave a platform to Khomeini’s narrative, effectively amplifying his voice and contributing to the collapse of the Pahlavi monarchy. The BBC’s role in this context was seen as critical in shaping the public discourse, which many argue helped install an Islamic regime rather than the democratic republic that many protesters initially sought. The revolution’s slogans — “Independence, Freedom, and a Republic” — highlight the aspirations of many Iranians for a government free from both foreign influence and authoritarianism. However, the outcome was the establishment of an Islamic Republic, a reality that diverged significantly from these broader goals.


The Green Movement (2009): Reform vs. Revolution


The BBC’s role in Iranian politics did not end with the 1979 revolution. In fact, the broadcaster played a significant part in shaping the narrative during the 2009 Green Movement, where many Iranians were advocating for reforms within the Islamic Republic. The movement, sparked by claims of electoral fraud in the re-election of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, saw millions of Iranians protesting in favor of reformist leaders like Mir-Hossein Mousavi. The BBC Persian Service, as Monshipouri and Zamiri (2023) point out, became one of the primary sources of information for Iranians and the international community alike.


However, critics argue that the BBC’s coverage focused too heavily on the reformist agenda, sidelining more radical voices that sought systemic change beyond the Islamic Republic. This focus on moderate reform rather than revolution led to the first use of the term “Ayatollah BBC.” This derogatory label reflected frustrations with the perception that the BBC was promoting reform as a way to preserve the status quo rather than acknowledging the growing radical sentiment among Iranians.


“The BBC played a pivotal role in disseminating information during the Green Movement,” Monshipouri and Zamiri (2023) note. “Yet, its focus on reformist voices alienated those pushing for more radical, revolutionary change, thereby contributing to a narrative that seemed to favor incremental reform over deeper, structural transformations.” This perceived bias created a divide between those who believed in working within the system to effect change and those who felt that the system itself needed to be dismantled.


The Woman, Life, Freedom Movement (2022): Revolutionary Voices Sidelined


The 2022 “Woman, Life, Freedom” movement represents the latest chapter in the BBC’s contentious relationship with Iranian politics. This movement, which was triggered by the death of Mahsa Amini while in custody of Iran’s morality police, quickly escalated into widespread protests demanding fundamental political change. Unlike the 2009 Green Movement, where reform within the system was the central goal, the “Woman, Life, Freedom” protests rejected incremental reforms in favor of revolutionary change. Slogans like “Death to the dictator” have reflected the protesters’ rejection of both the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, and the regime he represents (History Today, 2022).


Critics argue that despite the radical nature of these protests, the BBC has continued to downplay revolutionary voices by focusing on reformist narratives. “The BBC’s coverage has largely ignored the growing calls for systemic change,” asserts Dissent Magazine (2023). “Instead, it has often focused on moderate factions within the movement, downplaying the more radical aspirations of protesters who seek to fundamentally change the political landscape.”

Polling data from the Group for Analyzing and Measuring Attitudes in Iran (GAMAAN) highlights this disconnect between media narratives and the realities on the ground. A 2022 GAMAAN poll found that a significant majority of Iranians, 81%, opposed the Islamic Republic, with 84% favoring a secular democratic government, indicating that calls for reform are largely out of step with public sentiment (GAMAAN, 2022). This radical rejection of the regime contrasts sharply with the more moderate voices often amplified by outlets like the BBC.

ree

This perceived alignment with reformist voices, rather than broader revolutionary demands, has led to accusations that the BBC is acting in favor of maintaining regional stability — a priority that aligns with Western geopolitical interests. Some critics suggest that “not having another revolution in the Middle East works in favor of the West,” implying that the BBC’s selective focus may be driven more by strategic considerations than a commitment to impartial reporting.


Neo-Colonialism and Western Media: A Broader Context


The BBC’s involvement in Iranian politics reflects a broader pattern of neo-colonialism, where Western powers maintain influence over former colonies or regions through evolving tools like economic, political, and media channels. Although the colonial era has formally ended, these mechanisms of influence have persisted. Media outlets, including the BBC, have been instrumental in shaping public perception and discourse in regions like the Middle East, often advancing narratives that align with Western interests.

While the BBC has provided valuable information to both Iranians and the international community, its alignment with Western geopolitical goals has attracted criticism. As Ganjian and Zanuddin (2018) point out, the BBC has frequently acted as a tool of influence, shaping narratives to support British and Western strategies. This has has contributed to its reputation as “Ayatollah BBC,” a label symbolizing its complex and controversial role in Iran’s political landscape.


References


 
 
 

Comments

bottom of page