Emily L Blout
Dr. Emily L. Blout is a historian and media scholar. She holds a PhD in History, Iranian Studies from the University of St. Andrews and a M.A. in International Security Studies from the National Defense University.
Her book, "Media and Power in Modern Iran" is a historical study of mass communication in Iran, 1950 to 2019.
Dr. Blout's scholarship is enriched by over a decade of experience working on foreign policy and national security issues in Washington, D.C.. Her background includes advising and serving as spokesperson for a senior member of Congress, directing legislative affairs for a leading Iranian-American non-profit organization, and working on Turkey and Syria issues at the Pentagon.
Dr. Blout's research and teaching interests include: the history and politics of media in Iran, cyberwar and cyber conflict, terrorism, antisemitism, political communication, and propaganda studies.
Supervisors: Ali M Ansari
Address: Charlottesville, Virginia, United States
Her book, "Media and Power in Modern Iran" is a historical study of mass communication in Iran, 1950 to 2019.
Dr. Blout's scholarship is enriched by over a decade of experience working on foreign policy and national security issues in Washington, D.C.. Her background includes advising and serving as spokesperson for a senior member of Congress, directing legislative affairs for a leading Iranian-American non-profit organization, and working on Turkey and Syria issues at the Pentagon.
Dr. Blout's research and teaching interests include: the history and politics of media in Iran, cyberwar and cyber conflict, terrorism, antisemitism, political communication, and propaganda studies.
Supervisors: Ali M Ansari
Address: Charlottesville, Virginia, United States
less
Related Authors
InterestsView All (15)
Uploads
Books by Emily L Blout
This book addresses these questions by examining the institutions, policies, and discourses of two political regimes over the course of nearly eight decades. Drawing from over 3,000 primary source documents and digital artifacts in Persian and English, including formerly classified material hidden deep in the archives, this book offers a history of media in Iran across political regimes and media paradigms– from the public's first encounter with mass communication in the 1940s, to the dawn of digital media in the 1990s, to internet and mobile telephony today.
At the same time, the book trains a keen eye on contemporary politics. With foundations in sociology and political science, Media and Power in Modern Iran offers trenchant insight into the present ruling establishment– a political regime born from what has become known as the "first televised revolution."
This book addresses these questions by examining the institutions, policies, and discourses of two political regimes over the course of nearly eight decades. Drawing from over 3,000 primary source documents and digital artifacts in Persian and English, including formerly classified material hidden deep in the archives, this book offers a history of media in Iran across political regimes and media paradigms– from the public's first encounter with mass communication in the 1940s, to the dawn of digital media in the 1990s, to internet and mobile telephony today.
At the same time, the book trains a keen eye on contemporary politics. With foundations in sociology and political science, Media and Power in Modern Iran offers trenchant insight into the present ruling establishment– a political regime born from what has become known as the "first televised revolution."
Chapters by Emily L Blout
This chapter begins with the introduction of radio in the 1930s and its continued growth as a machinery of war and geopolitics in Iran during and after the Second World War. Next, I argue that the Shah’s decision to markedly expand radio broadcasting and infrastructure in the 1950’s was informed by the observed military and propaganda applications of the medium during the Cold War and occurred amid changing socio-economic conditions and large-scale government initiatives that punctuated the next two decades. The second half of the chapter looks at the influence of the US military in Iran’s nascent radio and television sector. Drawing from new primary research, it tells the story of the Armed Forces Radio and Television Service (AFRTS) in Iran, and the birth and short life of Televizion-e Iran (Iran Television), the nation’s first television service. It points to evidence that suggests that the US diplomatic and military mission played a role in the demise of Iran’s commercial television industry and in the regime’s decision to create the state television and radio monopoly, National Iranian Radio and Television (NIRT).
I begin with an overview of Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS) technology
and how it differed from Iran’s existing system of terrestrial broadcasting. As
a matter of background and context, I offer data points about the DBS market
and the challenge it posed for the state television monopoly. Following a brief chronology of the public debate, I examine the arguments of those opposed to legislation that would prohibit satellite ownership and broadcasting, as well as those of its champions. The champions prevailed and legislation prohibiting dish ownership was passed in 1994. The chapter concludes by considering the challenge DBS posed to the existing power dynamic and the reforms aimed at making IRIB products more competitive in Iran’s rapidly globalizing media marketplace.
Papers by Emily L Blout
That antisemitism exists at this scale is disturbing enough. But arguably worse is the largely unappreciated prospect that certain countries stoke the fires of hate in the media and online deliberately for their own benefit. The question is to what end. Could such activity not be simply ideological, but also strategic? When we look at the activities of Iran and other nations like China, the answer is yes.
The Tehran headquarters had continued to operate during the last throes of the revolution, and some staff had remained on the job to oversee a limited schedule of programming. Still others chose to quit in protest. They organized several days of general strikes, one of many public-sector strikes that brought the economy under the Shah to a standstill.
Ali Hosseini was among the employees who refused to work under the military occupation. But on February 11, 1979, Hosseini, along with a band of armed revolutionaries, returned to NIRT and demanded the military relinquish control to the state. Tanks were filmed leaving the NIRT compound later that day. At 6 pm that evening, Hosseini took to the airwaves to proclaim their conquest: “This is the voice of Tehran, the voice of true Iran, the voice of revolution."
This was the voice of revolution, but was it an “Islamic” revolution?
As we look back at four decades of politics and change in the Islamic Republic of Iran, it is worth remembering (or perhaps discovering for the first time) the truly popular nature of the revolution at its origination. It is equally worth remembering how the people's revolution was co-opted by Khomeini’s faction of religious nationalists — a process that Michael Fischer once dubbed “the second revolution” of 1979.
It will argue that the Iranian regime, as represented by the Supreme Leader, has used anti- Zionist and anti-Semitic mass communications for the purpose of "strategic influence." This study defines “strategic influence” as: affecting or attempting to affect the political behavior of an adversary through systematic transmission of ideas and opinions to a target audience, foreign or domestic.
Last year, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei appointed Raisi custodian of the shrine of Imam Reza and chairman of the foundation that manages its extensive complex. This is no minor post. The foundation nets the regime billions of dollars.
The shrine of Imam Ali Reza in Mashhad, Iran. Iahsan, CC BY-SA
Before this year, Raisi had never campaigned for public office or debated in the national political spotlight. His inexperience has shown. In the three live nationally televised debates, he lacked charisma, sticking closely to his talking points.
While highly visible with the ability to influence public opinion and steer some aspects of national and foreign policy, the Iranian president’s power is limited. The majority of power, including that over foreign policy, national security and media, rests with the supreme leader.
Given the little he has to gain from the uncertain venture, why would Raisi decide to join a crowded field to run against the relatively popular incumbent Hassan Rouhani?
This book addresses these questions by examining the institutions, policies, and discourses of two political regimes over the course of nearly eight decades. Drawing from over 3,000 primary source documents and digital artifacts in Persian and English, including formerly classified material hidden deep in the archives, this book offers a history of media in Iran across political regimes and media paradigms– from the public's first encounter with mass communication in the 1940s, to the dawn of digital media in the 1990s, to internet and mobile telephony today.
At the same time, the book trains a keen eye on contemporary politics. With foundations in sociology and political science, Media and Power in Modern Iran offers trenchant insight into the present ruling establishment– a political regime born from what has become known as the "first televised revolution."
This book addresses these questions by examining the institutions, policies, and discourses of two political regimes over the course of nearly eight decades. Drawing from over 3,000 primary source documents and digital artifacts in Persian and English, including formerly classified material hidden deep in the archives, this book offers a history of media in Iran across political regimes and media paradigms– from the public's first encounter with mass communication in the 1940s, to the dawn of digital media in the 1990s, to internet and mobile telephony today.
At the same time, the book trains a keen eye on contemporary politics. With foundations in sociology and political science, Media and Power in Modern Iran offers trenchant insight into the present ruling establishment– a political regime born from what has become known as the "first televised revolution."
This chapter begins with the introduction of radio in the 1930s and its continued growth as a machinery of war and geopolitics in Iran during and after the Second World War. Next, I argue that the Shah’s decision to markedly expand radio broadcasting and infrastructure in the 1950’s was informed by the observed military and propaganda applications of the medium during the Cold War and occurred amid changing socio-economic conditions and large-scale government initiatives that punctuated the next two decades. The second half of the chapter looks at the influence of the US military in Iran’s nascent radio and television sector. Drawing from new primary research, it tells the story of the Armed Forces Radio and Television Service (AFRTS) in Iran, and the birth and short life of Televizion-e Iran (Iran Television), the nation’s first television service. It points to evidence that suggests that the US diplomatic and military mission played a role in the demise of Iran’s commercial television industry and in the regime’s decision to create the state television and radio monopoly, National Iranian Radio and Television (NIRT).
I begin with an overview of Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS) technology
and how it differed from Iran’s existing system of terrestrial broadcasting. As
a matter of background and context, I offer data points about the DBS market
and the challenge it posed for the state television monopoly. Following a brief chronology of the public debate, I examine the arguments of those opposed to legislation that would prohibit satellite ownership and broadcasting, as well as those of its champions. The champions prevailed and legislation prohibiting dish ownership was passed in 1994. The chapter concludes by considering the challenge DBS posed to the existing power dynamic and the reforms aimed at making IRIB products more competitive in Iran’s rapidly globalizing media marketplace.
That antisemitism exists at this scale is disturbing enough. But arguably worse is the largely unappreciated prospect that certain countries stoke the fires of hate in the media and online deliberately for their own benefit. The question is to what end. Could such activity not be simply ideological, but also strategic? When we look at the activities of Iran and other nations like China, the answer is yes.
The Tehran headquarters had continued to operate during the last throes of the revolution, and some staff had remained on the job to oversee a limited schedule of programming. Still others chose to quit in protest. They organized several days of general strikes, one of many public-sector strikes that brought the economy under the Shah to a standstill.
Ali Hosseini was among the employees who refused to work under the military occupation. But on February 11, 1979, Hosseini, along with a band of armed revolutionaries, returned to NIRT and demanded the military relinquish control to the state. Tanks were filmed leaving the NIRT compound later that day. At 6 pm that evening, Hosseini took to the airwaves to proclaim their conquest: “This is the voice of Tehran, the voice of true Iran, the voice of revolution."
This was the voice of revolution, but was it an “Islamic” revolution?
As we look back at four decades of politics and change in the Islamic Republic of Iran, it is worth remembering (or perhaps discovering for the first time) the truly popular nature of the revolution at its origination. It is equally worth remembering how the people's revolution was co-opted by Khomeini’s faction of religious nationalists — a process that Michael Fischer once dubbed “the second revolution” of 1979.
It will argue that the Iranian regime, as represented by the Supreme Leader, has used anti- Zionist and anti-Semitic mass communications for the purpose of "strategic influence." This study defines “strategic influence” as: affecting or attempting to affect the political behavior of an adversary through systematic transmission of ideas and opinions to a target audience, foreign or domestic.
Last year, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei appointed Raisi custodian of the shrine of Imam Reza and chairman of the foundation that manages its extensive complex. This is no minor post. The foundation nets the regime billions of dollars.
The shrine of Imam Ali Reza in Mashhad, Iran. Iahsan, CC BY-SA
Before this year, Raisi had never campaigned for public office or debated in the national political spotlight. His inexperience has shown. In the three live nationally televised debates, he lacked charisma, sticking closely to his talking points.
While highly visible with the ability to influence public opinion and steer some aspects of national and foreign policy, the Iranian president’s power is limited. The majority of power, including that over foreign policy, national security and media, rests with the supreme leader.
Given the little he has to gain from the uncertain venture, why would Raisi decide to join a crowded field to run against the relatively popular incumbent Hassan Rouhani?
This special issue of The Communication Review will address issues relating to hypermedia in the production of history and news in political and military conflict. Of particular interest is how digital media products and activities may be testing the boundaries—or exploiting the changes—in popular conceptions of “news” and “primary source” information.
We borrow the term “hypermedia space” from Ronald Deibert (1997) and Marwan Kraidy (2006, 2010, 2016) to describe today's near instantaneous, highly networked, trans-mediated, global communication environment.
From Tunisia to South Korea, from the United States to Russia, today's communication technology is allowing individuals to watch and participate in political developments occurring continents away. Equipped only with a mobile phone, an eyewitness can make an audio-visual recording of an event and disseminate it around the world, semi-anonymously and within minutes. Yet the same communication technology that is serving as the great equalizer in society and politics is also vulnerable to more nefarious usages. It is enabling individuals, groups, and states to wage war, execute violence, and alter the historical record on a whole new scale.
Contributing papers will address questions related to hypermedia in the production of news reports, historical narratives, and outcomes in domestic, national, and international conflict. Of particular interest is how hypermedia products and transactions may be testing the boundaries-- or exploiting the changes—in traditional standards of “news” and “primary" evidence. Related lines of inquiry include (but are not limited to):
- How communication practices relate to concrete, material situations and notions of trust and authenticity
- Distinctions between propaganda and public relations
- Distinctions between news and political spectacle
- Representations of progress and stasis in protracted and/or asymmetrical conflict
- Efforts of states and/or non-state actors to alter the historical record and/or collective memory in hypermedia space
- Consequences of ”new media" and "new war” for state sovereignty and international law
The deadline for full manuscript submission is February 1st, 2017.
Submissions, abstracts, and inquiries should be sent via email to Dr. Blout at [email protected] or [email protected]
In Persian Service: The BBC and British Interests in Iran, media scholar Annabelle Sreberny and former BBC producer Massoumeh Torfeh describe a delicate dance between the BBC Persian Service and the Iranian government. The history of the Persian Service is presented through a number of flashpoints in Iranian history in which the broadcaster played, or was accused of playing, a role in the outcome: the occupation of Iran and removal of Shah Reza Pahlavi in 1941; the crisis over the nationalization of the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company and the CIA-orchestrated coup of 1953; the fall of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi and the Islamic Revolution of 1979; the Soviet, and later NATO, occupation of Afghanistan; and finally, the contested 2009 presidential election and its aftermath. Using primary sources, including Foreign Office papers, BBC Written Archive documents and personal interviews, Persian Service presents the untold story of the BBC Persian Service at critical junctures in Anglo-Iranian history.