Policies for Realizing a Revolutionary Political Culture in Mediatized Iran

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 Department of Political Studies, Baqir al-Olum University, Qom, Iran

2 Department of Political Sociology, Baqir al-Olum University, Qom, Iran

Abstract

The realization of a revolutionary political culture—as one of the foundational pillars
of legitimacy and national cohesion in the Islamic Republic of Iran—has encountered complex challenges in the face of a mediatized society. These challenges include intense competition among rival discourses, the emergence of undesirable political attitudes, political anomie, and difficulties in attracting and sustaining public satisfaction and active participation. In such an environment, the design and implementation of effective cultural and media policies appear essential for establishing and promoting a revolutionary political culture. The present study, drawing on Laclau and Mouffe’s framework of discursive hegemony, posits that the establishment of a hegemonic discourse of revolutionary political culture hinges on fulfilling four key conditions: universality, accessibility, credibility, and support capacity. This theoretical framework—grounded in the concept of hegemony as the attainment of hegemonic status through persuasion and consent rather than coercion—provides a suitable foundation for devising effective policies within Iran’s mediatized environment. To this end, the research adopts a qualitative approach and employs semi-structured interviews to collect and analyze the perspectives of ten elites from the fields of communication, political sociology, and cultural policy. In the realm of universality, the findings indicate that for the discourse of revolutionary political culture to become pervasive, revolutionary concepts and values must be redefined in contemporary language to address the needs and concerns of all societal generations. Employing indigenous dialects and current cultural idioms, while respecting the linguistic and cultural diversity
of the nation’s various ethnic groups, is of particular importance. Furthermore, linking messages to national cultural roots—such as myths, history, and literature—plays an effective role in strengthening collective morale and fostering a sense of belonging to revolutionary political culture. Replacing top-down and one-sided approaches with the creation of platforms for dialogue and active public participation represents a crucial step toward achieving universality and broad dissemination of the discourse. Providing tangible evidence and practical examples of the efficacy of revolutionary values in resolving social issues helps demonstrate the practical viability of this culture and enhances public trust. The second condition, accessibility, emphasizes the necessity of an active and widespread presence of the discourse within a diverse media ecosystem. Messages of revolutionary political culture must be disseminated through various media outlets, beyond any media monopoly, to reach the general audience. Utilizing diverse and engaging content formats—such as text, images, videos, and micro-content—collaborating with trusted societal cultural authorities, operating on global platforms, and producing multilingual content
are key policies for expanding audience reach. Additionally, developing communication infrastructure, particularly in deprived areas, to ensure equitable access to high-speed internet and digital tools, as well as empowering media actors through modern media literacy training and communication skills, are critical factors in enhancing the quality and impact of messages. The third condition, credibility, emphasizes honesty, truthfulness, and transparency in messaging. Messages must be grounded in facts to earn public trust. Consistency between words and actions—that is, alignment between proclaimed messages and practical measures—is another key factor in enhancing credibility. Relying on verifiable evidence, leveraging expertise, clearly distinguishing objective reporting from value-based analysis, maintaining relative media independence from political factionalism, and designing messages with a national perspective beyond partisan biases all foster broader audience trust. Engaging socially trusted figures who enjoy high public credibility plays an effective role in conveying messages and bolstering media legitimacy. Finally, transparency in operations and the provision of clear, accessible reports on activities and achievements strengthen the media-audience relationship and boost public confidence. The fourth condition, support capacity, refers to the development of communication and cultural infrastructure alongside the adoption and enforcement of supportive legislation. In this domain, prioritizing the enhancement of content quality in aligned media outlets over merely increasing their quantity holds particular importance. Empowering civil society through support for non-governmental organizations, cultural associations, and media actors; providing financial and intellectual resources for producing engaging, indirect educational content aimed at internalizing revolutionary values; and establishing a strategic coordinating institution to oversee and harmonize media policies are essential measures to ensure the continuity and effectiveness of the discourse of revolutionary political culture. Encouraging spontaneous public support by clarifying policy objectives and outcomes, as well as designing a dynamic support system grounded in continuous feedback and adaptability to social and technological changes, are further requirements in this area. Ultimately, this study argues that the path to realizing revolutionary political culture in today’s mediatized Iran should rely less on hard power instruments and more on processes of persuasion, securing voluntary participation, and earning the active consent of society. The four identified hegemonic conditions and their associated policies provide an operational and practical roadmap for navigating this path. The findings of this research can serve as a guide for policymakers, cultural planners, and media activists in formulating and implementing more effective strategies, thereby contributing to the strengthening of revolutionary political culture amid the challenges and rapid transformations of the media landscape.

Keywords


Alem, A. (2012). Bunyād-hāyi ʿilm-i siyāsat [Foundations of political science]. Tehran: Nashr-e Ney. [In Persian]
Babbie, E. (2000). Harās-i bunyādīn: Urūpā-madārī va ẓuhūr-i Islām-girāʾī [The sociological spirit: Eurocentrism and the rise of Islamism] (M. Anbari & Gh. R. Jamshidiha, Trans.). Tehran: Tehran University Press. [In Persian]
Ball, A. R. (2005). Modern politics and government (7th ed.). Red Globe Press.
Ball, A.R. (2005). Modern politics and government (7th ed). London: Red Globe Press.
Baudrillard, J. (2002). Dar sāyi-yi akthariyyat-hāyi khāmūsh [In the shadow of the silent majorities] (P. Yazdanjou, Trans.). Tehran: Nashr-e Markaz. [In Persian]
Fairclough, N. (1979). Language and power. London: Longman.
Fairclough, N. (1989). Language and power. Longman.
Fairclough, N. (2002). Naẓariyyih-yi intiqādī-yi guftimān [Critical discourse theory] (F. Shayesteh Piran, Trans.). Tehran: Markaz-e Nashr-e Rasaneh-ha. [In Persian]
Fazeli, N. A. (2014). Jahān zīr-i sayṭarih-yi midiyātīzayshin [The world under the dominance of mediatization]. Farhang-e Emrooz.    
URL= https://www.farhangemrooz.com/news/25843 [In Persian]
Fereydouni, M. R., & Pashaei Alizadeh, M. (2024). Jāmiʿih-yi shabakih-yī va masʾalih-yi tarbiyat-i maʿnavī dar niẓām-hāyi siyāsī-yi dīnī [Network society and the issue of spiritual education in religious political systems]. Pizhūhish-hāye Jāmiʿih-shināsī-yi Muʿāṣir, 13(25), pp. 207–267. https://doi.org/10.22084/2024.29234.2283 [In Persian]
Foran, J. (1997). Discourses and social forces: The role of culture and cultural studies in understanding revolutions. In J. Foran (Ed.), Theorizing revolutions (pp. 203–226). Routledge.
Foran, J. (1997). Discourses and social forces: The role of culture and cultural studies in understanding revolutions. In: J. Foran (ed.), Theorizing revolutions (pp. 203–226). Routledge.
Ghasemi, S., Bay, A. R., & Motallebi, M. (2020). Ulgū-yi maṭlūb-i siyāsatguzārī-yi rasānih-yī-yi Jumhūrī-yi Islāmī-yi Īrān dar muvājihih bā jang-i rasānih-yī-yi Āmrīkā [The ideal model of media policymaking in the Islamic Republic of Iran in confronting the U.S. media war]. Jāmiʿih-shināsī-yi Siyāsī-yi Īrān, 3(4). [In Persian]
Howarth, D. (1998). Naẓariyyih-yi guftimān [Discourse theory] (S. A. A. Soltani, Trans.). ʿUlūm-i Siyāsī, 1(2), 156–183. [In Persian]
Laclau, E. & Mouffe, C. (1985). Hegemony and socialist strategy: Toward a radical democratic politics. London: Verso.
Laclau, E. (1990). New reflections on the revolution of our time. Verso.
Laclau, E. (1990). New reflections on the revolution of our time. London: Verso.
Laclau, E., & Mouffe, C. (1985). Hegemony and socialist strategy: Towards a radical democratic politics. Verso.
Marsh, D., & Stoker, G. (2005). Ravish va naẓariyyih dar ʿulūm-i siyāsī [Theory and methods
in political science] (A. M. Haji Yousefi, Trans.). Tehran: Strategic Studies Research Center. [In Persian]
Nazemi Ardakani, M., & Zargar, A. R. (2018). Ṭartāḥī-yi ulgū-yi farhang-i siyāsī-yi maṭlūb dar mudīriyyat-i rāhburdī-yi farhangī-yi kishvar [Designing the ideal model of political culture in the strategic cultural management of the country]. Muṭāliʿāt-i Mudīriyyat-i Rāhburdī-yi Difāʿ-i Millī, 2(8), pp. 133–157. [In Persian]
Razani, A., & Mohammadzadeh, A. (2021). Guftimān-i hizhimunīk-i inqilāb-i Islāmī va khurdih-guftimān-hāye darūnī-yi niẓām-i Jumhūrī-yi Islāmī-yi Īrān dar dawrān-i rahbarī-yi Imām Khumaynī [The hegemonic discourse of the Islamic Revolution and internal sub-discourses of the Islamic Republic of Iran during the leadership of Imam Khomeini]. Pazhūhishnāmih-yi Inqilāb-i Islāmī, 11(38), pp. 91–113. [In Persian]
Rezaei, A., & Khojasteh Bagherzadeh, H. (2021). Ulgū-yi rāhburdī-yi muhandisī-yi niẓām-i rasāniʾī-yi Jumhūrī-yi Islāmī-yi Īrān dar nigāh-i khabarigān-i rasānih [The strategic model of engineering the media system of the Islamic Republic of Iran from the perspective of media experts]. Mutāliʿāt-i Mudīriyyat-i Rāhburdī-yi Difāʿ-i Millī, 5(18), pp. 41–72. [In Persian]
Salehi Najafabadi, A., Khosravi, B., & Sanei, R. (2015). Barrasī-yi dalaʾil-i hizhimunīk shudan-i guftimān-i Īrān-harāsī va Shīʿih-harāsī bar asās-i naẓariyyih-yi Lāklāʾū va Mūfih [Examining the reasons for the hegemonic status of Iranophobia and Shiaphobia discourses based on Laclau and Mouffe’s theory]. Pazhūhish-hāyi Siyāsī-yi Jahān-i Islām, 2(5), pp.185–209. [In Persian]
Shahrara News. (2024). Ākharīn guzārish-i Īspā az mīzān-i istifādih-yi mardum-i Īrān az shabakih-hāyi ijtimāʿī va payām-rasān-hā [The latest ISPA report on the extent of Iranians’ use of social networks and messaging apps].   
URL= https://shahraranews.ir/fa/news/291150 [In Persian]
Skocpol, T. (1988). Social revolutions and mass military mobilization. World Politics, 40(2),
pp. 147–168.
Van Dijk, T. A. (2022). Jāmiʿih-yi shabakih-yī: Abʿād-i ijtimāʿī-yi rasānih-hā-yi nuvīn [The network society: Social aspects of new media] (A. Azadi Ahmadabadi, Trans.). Tehran: Imam Sadiq University. [In Persian]
Yousefian Ahari, H. (2024). Hizhimūnī-yi guftimān-i Islām-girāʾī dar inqilāb-i Islāmī [Hegemony of the Islamist discourse in the Islamic Revolution]. Tehran: Jahān-i Siyāsat. [In Persian]