Thousands turn out in Melbourne to stand in solidarity with protests that have broken out in Iran following the death of 22-year old Mahsa (also known as Jina or Zhina) Amini at the hands of the country’s brutal dictatorship and its ‘morality’ police, September 24, 2022. Photo by Matt Hrkac via Wikimedia Commons (CC BY 2.0). Iranian authorities have arrested 79 journalists in a harsh crackdown since Mahsa/Zina Amini’s death in September 2022. This wave of arrests is just another event in a continuous repressive and censorship policy against media since 1979. For decades, because of censorship and the harsh repression of journalists in Iran, millions of Iranians have turned to Persian-language media outlets operating outside of Iran and social/citizen media to get their information, from the violation of human rights to the protest movement. These media outlets also invite commentators and experts to challenge the official discourse on various topics. In the meantime, many Iranians, including journalists, criticize these Persian language media for having double standards for the coverage of opposition activities and personalities, especially during the last 12 months. In other words, these media outlets are roaring “tigers” against the Iranian state, but when it comes to the opposition, they become silent “Persian cats.” Almost all these media outlets are financed directly and indirectly by foreign money, from liberal democracies — such as the USA, the UK, and Germany, which financed among others VOA, Radio Farda, BBC, and DW — to the authoritarian Saudi State. Global Voices invited four experts to share their opinions on this topic, by asking them if there is a double standard in how the foreign-funded big Persian media cover the Iranian opposition, such as by neither criticizing them nor demanding transparency. Chahla Chafiq, sociologist and writer of “Femmes sous le voile” (Women under the hijab), holds the insignia of Chevalier de la Legion d’Honneur. She says: From a general perspective, the analysis and criticism of the speech and actions of the opposition have never had a significant place in the popular media to which you refer. Yet in identifying the reason for these conditions, it is necessary to consider several points. First, shortcomings exist in the culture of criticism among the majority of us, leaving generally no place to look at oneself. The problem is that we mainly think that criticizing ourselves means losing to our opponent. We forget that ignoring the shortcomings and mistakes in our speech and actions can lead to their reproduction. Therefore, the losses are on us. Second, as the Islamic Republic’s only reaction to any right-seeking is repression, logic naturally suggests that criticizing the opposition ends up benefiting the oppressors. According to such logic, it is better to avoid such criticism. Finally, most of us think of criticism as a synonym for hostility. This common idea naturally makes criticizing the opposition a troublesome task. In other words, the lack of critical dialogue with the opposition makes the work of the media more difficult in this field. Reza Moini, journalist and former head of the Iran/Afghanistan desk of Reporters Without Borders (RSF), also emphasizes the impact of censorship and harsh repression in the last four decades on the journalists and even, in many cases, their approach to the profession. Moini explains: One side of the suppression of media freedom in authoritarian governments is arrest and imprisonment, as well as censorship of journalists. The other side is preventing the emergence and growth of independent media. Killing the independent media is a cultural ruin stemming from decades of no freedom or support for the media, dominating the training and professional field of journalism. This long-lasting culture impacted and shaped both outside and inside the country. Amir Mosadegh Katouzian, broadcast journalist and former co-director of the RFE/RL Persian Service (Radio Farda), believes “the foreign-based Persian-language media have not challenged the Iranian authentic or self-proclaimed opposition leaders or characters.” He explains: Having said that, over the past decades and years, the output of those outlets that hide their funding source(s), engage in propaganda, and employ political activists under the guise of directors, editors, and journalists has been different from the media outlets with transparency in funding.