Blogs and Stories

Dan Rather

Tehran, Twitter, and Tiananmen

Iran protest SIPA / AP Photo Massive protests, government crackdown, and media blackout—Tehran today sounds like Tiananmen Square two decades ago. But Dan Rather, who covered the China massacre, says the shift in the media landscape over the last two decades means there’s no comparison.

When protests against the official results of Iran’s presidential election were accompanied, almost immediately, by a media crackdown, thoughts turned inevitably to Tiananmen Square. On June 4 of this year, the world marked the 20th anniversary of the Chinese government’s brutal crackdown of the student protests in Beijing. It was a milestone that prompted me to go back over my memories of that time, of covering the remarkable student movement from within the square for CBS News, and of having the government pull the plug on our coverage on the evening of May 20, 1989.

With these memories fresher than they had been for years, the Iranian government’s move to control information within Iran and the information that left Iran brought reflexive associations and deep concerns.

Despite the surface similarities, this is not Tiananmen in 1989. The proliferation of information technology and the phenomenon of citizen journalism have made it much harder now to turn the lights out.

When a regime exercises its power to repress, it first turns out the lights: If it can’t control the story, it tries to make the story disappear. Internally—and this is as true of Iran today as it was of China 20 years ago—it seeks to keep its citizens from connecting with each other, tries to keep the freedom cries originating with students and in cities from spreading to rural areas and the general populace.

A repressive regime wants to be able to push its own version of events, without competition. Externally, governments of this sort know the world is watching and will do whatever they can to preserve the fiction that they enjoy the support of the people.

When, in the wake of the disputed vote that returned President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to power, Iran’s government shut down the Internet, texting, and out-of-country calls, blocked access to social-networking sites, and imposed tight restrictions on foreign journalists, it was making a strong, if inadvertent, commentary on the legitimacy of its claim to popular support. If the people are truly behind you, you don’t need to carry out your business in the dark.

Within hours, and despite the blackout, we began to hear ominous reports of government forces entering universities in Tehran, of beatings, arrests, and even killings. And we have seen, every day since then, a steady stream of video and pictures delivered via Internet proxy servers on sites such as YouTube and Flickr, and small bursts of text—like old telegraph dispatches—by way of Twitter that, taken together, give us an incomplete but vital window into what is happening on the streets of Iran, a necessary complement to the reports of mainstream-media correspondents who must operate within the constraints of Iranian state censorship.

Despite the surface similarities, this is not Tiananmen in 1989. The Christian Science Monitor references the equation, seen on blogs such as Read Write Web, that “Tiananmen + Twitter = Tehran.” The proliferation of information technology and the phenomenon of citizen journalism have made it much harder now to turn the lights out than it was two decades ago. Oral history once kept alive for generations the stories unsanctioned by official propaganda; now social-networking tools have the power to spread the people’s story around the world, instantly.

It is too soon to know or to say how the situation in Iran will turn out, but there are lessons in this for our own country, for a democratic system more fragile than we at times like to believe. One of these lessons is the centrality of freedom of the press to the entire enterprise of democratic government: You cannot have the latter without the former. And the other is the lesson that citizen journalism is a way for the people to hold on to freedom of the press, even in times of oppression. In a turn of phrase that seems to be cropping up everywhere, the revolution may not be televised…but it very well could be Twittered.

Dan Rather is anchor and managing editor of HDNet’s Dan Rather Reports, which this week, beginning Tuesday night, is airing and investigative report on the problem of private prisons. For 24 years, he served as anchor and managing editor of the CBS Evening News with Dan Rather. His books include The American Dream, Deadlines and Datelines, The Camera Never Blinks, and The Palace Guard.


Back to Top
June 16, 2009 | 11:39pm
Facebook
|
Twitter
|
Digg
|
|
Emails
|
print
Comments ()

AiriqS

Does freedom of the press include reporting on fabricated documents about Presidential candidates?

|
|
Reply
|
8:21 am, Jun 17, 2009

bigwurzz

"Fabricated documents" that were, in essence, true? or "Fabricated documents" that were later found to not necessarily have been fabricated? You will have to be more specific.
Some people still love to drink the George Bush kool-aid even though it went sour a long time ago. Yeah GW the draft dodger was so much more of a hero than John Kerry with all those ill begotten purple hearts and bronze stars.

|
|
Reply
|
12:45 pm, Jun 17, 2009

Ozone69

The truth hurts some people. Dan Rather used a forged document (a bad one at that) to call into question President Bush's service in the National Guard. He also timed it before a presidential election. However, when this fraud was revealed, Rather's career came to an abrupt and embarrassing halt. I still love that mantra of Rather defenders "the evidence may be faulty but the story is true." How CBS stuck with him all those years of his coming in last in the nightly news market I'll never know. Even Walter Cronkite questioned Rather being tapped as his replacement.

|
2:39 pm, Jun 17, 2009

Zugzwang

That would be poor journalism, which Dan Rather is guilty of.

But he's also offering some very decent insight here.

|
|
Reply
|
9:19 pm, Jun 17, 2009

aliciadogz

what do want from Dan Rather he's for socialism as well the rest are news except for fox news. when Iranian people stand up throw out there government .May GOD be with them and protect them. Then when your done in Iranian help us throw out obama he's taking AMERICA down.

|
1:43 am, Jun 21, 2009

jimemery

It never fails. You can't refute the message, so you defame the messenger. Who cares if Dan Rather made a mistake on a completely different issue than the one in this story? Tell me that Rush or Hannity never made mistakes. But trashing one event in Rather's past sure does distract from the message in this story. Nice job.

|
|
Reply
9:23 pm, Jun 17, 2009

GM2009

Not fabricated. Bush's war record was fabricated. Draft dodger.

|
|
Reply
11:59 pm, Jun 17, 2009

Hawnzz

I love this. The Iranian people are 150 years ahead of it's government. The youth will inherit the nation and their weapon... the "cell phone."

Hillarious.

|
|
Reply
10:16 am, Jun 17, 2009

mission-completed-obama

Somebody please twitter those courageous students in Iran for me and tell them we remaining Patriot NON-Globalist Americans support them fully and that we have the same illegitimate-dictator,Islamocommunist issues here.when they finish there please help liberate us here in the USA.

|
|
Reply
11:44 am, Jun 17, 2009

drmarkklein

This article on Al Jazzera today is an excellent analysis of the situation.

http://english.aljazeera.net/focus/2009/06/200961781431119985.html

|
|
Reply
11:45 am, Jun 17, 2009

donkichi

"One of these lessons is the centrality of freedom of the press to the entire enterprise of democratic government"
So how does this relate to the fact that our press in the US is now squarely in the liberal camp? Is this still the freedom of the press that you refer to? Freedom to try to push a statist agenda?

|
|
Reply
12:00 pm, Jun 17, 2009

bigwurzz

So in regards to the Iranian censorship, would you equate it to how when I leave a comment I have to wait for it to get "approved" by the editors of this blog?

|
|
Reply
12:47 pm, Jun 17, 2009

smdunne

Tina,

When you edited it, Tatler was a guilty pleasure. Vanity Fair was never more fun than when you edited it. The New Yorker was a lean, mean writing machine when you edited it. Talk was a magnificent failure. But I think I've finally figured out what's going on here.

Whereas with Tatler, VF, the NYer and Talk, you were always ahead of the curve, with TDB you are flogging the dead old horse of the culture wars and explaining the 21st Century to aging Boomers. TDB is what the AARP Magazine would be if you were editing it.

Dan Rather is explaining social media? Really? Really? To my parents. I never thought I would ever say this, but you are for the first time ever, behind the times.

If as I suspect from the position your editorial took on Letterman, you are content with high page views, rather than analyzing the data to see if, like Letterman, you are driving the key 18-49 demographic away, then I suppose this is working for you.

I just never thought the day would come when I would no longer really be that interested in what a magazine of yours has to say.

:(

|
|
Reply
|
1:54 pm, Jun 17, 2009

piktor

smdunne -- Have you seen today's TDB's top story- "Shopping with Levi Johnston" You would say "geezer fodder" I say poppycock.

Dan Rather is a pathetically bad writer. Don't blame Tina for this decrepit piece of awful "reporting".

The fun reading on this site are the comments. Once in a while you will encounter really good stories. Sometimes even from Tina's contributors.

|
|
Reply
6:48 pm, Jun 17, 2009

Zugzwang

"In a turn of phrase that seems to be cropping up everywhere, the revolution may not be televised...but it very well could be Twittered."

That would be "Tweeted."

|
|
Reply
|
9:20 pm, Jun 17, 2009

GM2009

So, that's how you get seven Peabody's. Bad writing. Have another teabag, dipshit.

|
|
Reply
12:02 am, Jun 18, 2009

mike-mike

You do a disservice to both Tehran and Tianenman Square victims by saying there are only surface similarities. If anything, the similarities are at the deepest level imaginable. Two supreme sovereign powers are challenged or feel threatened. Dictatorships derive legitimacy ultimately through the use of violence. People ultimately do not like dictatorships. This has been shown in both cases.

|
|
Reply
1:08 pm, Jun 22, 2009

PatrickRiot

Mr. Rather,
I have to say that my local cable company (Time Warner) canceled HD Net but your in depth reporting is excellent and timely. It's the kind of thing they don't have time to devote to in other formats and you are a real reporter the likes of which there just aren't many left. I complained about the loss of HD Net (including cancelling my premium services in protest) but I don't think the execs at TW give a damn.

Anyway thanks for the new show and hopefully my cable provider will bring it back. Excellent work.

|
|
Reply
2:44 pm, Jun 30, 2009
Leave a comment

Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.

View Comments

Tehran, Twitter, and Tiananmen

by Dan Rather

Info
RSS
Dan Rather
Emails
|
print
text
-
+
Facebook
 | 
Twitter
 | 
Digg
 |