Slashdot Mirror
The Satellite Subversives
SomeoneYouDontKnow writes: "The New York Times (free registration reguired, blah blah blah) has a fascinating article about a former Iranian rock star who has launched a pirate TV station broadcasting back into Iran from, of all places, L.A. From reading the article, I can't help but compare Narional Iranian Television to U-62 from the movie "UHF" because of its ultra-low-budget operations and programming, but, like the fictional station, it's wildly popular. OK, I know this is a little off the beaten track for Slashdot articles, but it's nice to see that there's a broadcaster out there more interested in providing a meaningful service than figuring out ways to squeeze more and more money out of viewers."
http://archives.nytimes.com/auth/login?URI=http:// www.nytimes.com/2002/02/24/magazine/24NITV.html
Here is the registration-free link.
karma whoring is fun for the entire family!
The world moves for love. It kneels before it in awe.
Since UHF has been mentioned in the writeup, it can't hurt to say that plans to release the movie on DVD are set to go this summer, with a large number of extra features that Al is helping to arrange.
"Pinky, you've left the lens cap of your mind on again." - P&TB
"I can see my house from here!" - ST:
"Pirate" implies a lack of license to broadcast on a particular medium. This station is not "pirate" in any traditional sense of the word; they are abiding by the communications laws of the countries that contain their uplinks, and are paying whatever fees are necessary to the owners of the bird. The only place they can be considered 'pirate' may be within Iran's borders, presuming the Iranian equivalent of the FCC has attempted to legislate away such signals. (It sounds like they've simply chosen to ban the receiving equipment, instead- and perhaps organized a small holy war against the station.)
Remember, to be 'pirate,' you have to have regulations in the first place, and it sounds like the Iranian regime (which we in the US helped put in place) just isn't scientific enough to be regulating particular spectra. Misrepresenting the station as violating US broadcasting law doesn't do them any favors.
They speak Farsi in Iran and Aimaq, Tajiki, Ashkun, Azerbaijani, Balochi, Brahui, Darwazi, Farsi, Gawar-Bati, Gujari, Hazaragi, Jakati, Kamviri, Karakalpak, Kazakh, Kirghiz, Malakhel, Mogholi, Pashto, Pashayi, Sanglechi-Ishkashimi, Tanshewi, Tatar, Tirahi, Turkmen, Uyghur, Uzbek, Waigali, Wakhi, Warduji, and Wotapuri-Katarqalai in Afghanistan.
I wonder why Afghan culture is so fragmented...
It's never as easy as that. Here's three potential problems, and there are more:
(1) We already have a broadcast means to present American opinions and points of view -- it's called the Voice of America, it's got editorial independence, and it's been broadcast in Farsi for several years.
(2) While I don't know the editorial leanings of this station in particular, whoever chose to support it (state department?) would have a tough time maintaining their support once some politician started complaining that their views didn't exactly match American foreign policy -- and I bet they say some things about Israel that would sure piss off a Congressman. Before you cry "censorship", remember that the U.S. doesn't have to support unpopular views, it just can't forbid them.
(3) The U.S. has enough problems with "Street Cred" as it is. Iran has already banned the station, but they'll lose more viewers, I think, if it turns out that this is just bought and paid for by the U.S.
Of course, if the new "Office of Strategic Influence" decided to underhandedly throw a little money their way, especially if they didn't try to assert editorial control, I'd certainly support it.
But don't automatically assume they don't 'cause we'd rather blow shit up.
Just a little footnote to what nomadic said, since it bears on the impression most people have about Iran: Farsi is an Indo-European language, meaning it's in the same language family as English, French, Russian, and most of the languages spoken in Western Europe. The notable exceptions are Basque, Hungarian, Finnish, and Estonian; Basque is a language 'isolate', meaning there are no known related languages, the last 3 belong to the Finno-Ugric family of languages. This all means that Iranians speak a language much more closely-related to English than Finnish, etc.
Arabic, is relevant for Islam in the same way Latin is for the Catholic Church, which is why many (most?) people in dominantly Muslim countries can speak Arabic... as a second language, in the case of Iran, Afghanistan, and others.
Disclaimer: I studied Linguistics, but I know *very* little about the countries and cultures in question.
-chris
San Francisco values: compassion, tolerance, respect, intelligence