UK media twist Iran nuclear success

[Arian]

The British media have tried to downplay Iran’s recent civilian nuclear achievements with a range of tactics ranging from imposing partial blackout to giving coverage only to question the reliability of Iran’s announcement.


Iran announced on Wednesday that it successfully loaded the first domestically-made nuclear fuel rods containing 20-percent enriched uranium into its research reactor in Tehran, which produces vital radioisotopes for cancer and other patients, and incidentally could stop operating because western countries refused to sell Iran its needed fuel.

Iran also announced that it has installed thousands of highly efficient and faster centrifuges at its Natanz nuclear enrichment facility.

The state-run BBC, which normally allocates ample space on its website to stories featuring international concern at Iran’s 20-percent uranium enrichment, avoided any reference to the enrichment level of the fuel rods Iran loaded into Tehran reactor as well as the name of the reactor or for what purposes it is used.

The BBC story ran in a fashion as if mentioning those details could compromise the outlet’s former efforts to pretend 20-percent-enrichment under the close supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency’s inspectors - who were also present in Tehran on Wednesday -- is a provocative step toward building nuclear bombs.

More interestingly the BBC which usually ensures any nuclear news from Iran supplies its news writers with material for at least a few days of anti-Iranian propaganda, removed the story from its main page altogether on Thursday and the topic was present on its news main page only in the form of a video report.

The Independent in its story “Nuclear stunt shows Iran's uncompromising mood” only mentioned what the achievements were in the fifth paragraph after a lengthy effort to pretend that the announced advances are no big deals and only serve as public stunts for domestic population.

Then came the story in a few lines and yet again diversion to the Israeli and the US talks of military option against Iran over what they term the country’s intention to build nukes.

The paper did not refer to the western nuclear accusations against Iran, nor did it mention Iranian achievements were unveiled at the presence of the IAEA inspectors or that the inspectors have been keeping a close look at Iran’s nuclear activities all along.

There was also no talk of Iran’s repeated declarations that it wants 20-percent-enriched uranium for civilian and medical purposes, as loading of fuel rods into Tehran reactor clearly showed, still less the fact that making fuel plates in itself represents a technological leap that the US and its allies saw Iran incapable thereof, thus accusing Iran of wanting the uranium for other hidden purposes.

The Guardian gave a wider coverage to the story but tried to question the factuality of Iran’s developments.

“Experts, however, have questioned Iran's ability to make such sophisticated machines in industrial quantity,” the paper said in reference to the announcement of new generation of centrifuges at Natanz facility.

Other British media also followed a more or less similar plotline in their stories on Iran’s nuclear achievements unveiled on Wednesday, including The Times which kept its readers waiting for the details on the nuclear advancements of Iran for more than a dozen paragraphs.

Even there the story was surrounded by all the disparate subjects including the US and Israeli military threats against Iran, French accusations of an “Iranian military nuclear programme” and Tehran’s letter to the EU to express readiness to hold talks on its nuclear program.

The latter was especially of interest for The Times as it tried to pretend that the offer of talks contradicts what the paper called Iran’s “driving home its resolve to pursue a nuclear programme.”

The paper let the paragraph on the letter immediately follow a singled out quotation from Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad who said on Wednesday “our nuclear path will continue.”

PressTV - UK media twist Iran nuclear success

 

[longbrained]

These people are shameless and a quick search on internet exposes them. See how this dude who is the founder and director of ISIS, has been reacting with regard to this Iranian achievement:

" Hypocrite David Albright now claims that the fuel plates for TRR “are not hard to produce” LOL, of course Albright has the military establishment’s support to use the state supported media at will.

“David Albright, a nuclear physicist and former international weapons inspector in Iraq, said in an interview that the fuel plates aren’t hard to produce and have no military implications.

“They’re so far behind that it sounds like they’re trying to play catch-up, which makes me think it’s more for a domestic audience than an international one,” said Albright, founder of the Institute for Science and International Security in Washington.”

:U.S. Says Iran’s Nuclear Claim Is ‘Hype;’ Oil Pares Gain - Businessweek

Now compare to what Albright said to WP back in 2/9/2010
Analysis: Iranian plan will put nation a step closer to having material for bomb

By Glenn Kessler
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, February 9, 2010; A10

“Indeed, Iran does not have the expertise to build the specialized fuel rods needed for the research reactor — only France and Argentina are expert at it — so the main consequence of Iran’s decision appears to be moving up the enrichment ladder. If Iran tried to fuel the reactor itself, absent international assistance, it would be risky to the reactor and for public safety, according to David Albright, president of the Institute for Science and International Security in Washington.”

:Analysis: Iranian plan will put nation a step closer to having material for bomb "

 

[Donatello]

I hated US media, but UK is even worse.

I am glad i gave up watching television altogether!

 

[Alchemy]

If BBC is downplaying Iran's achievement , it straightaway means diplomatic victory for Iran .

 

[xdrive]

Iran state media is ignored. It is not independent and is simply a mouth piece for the Iranian government. Nothing it reports can be taken seriously.

It would be like taking North Koreas state media seriously.

I don't even know why Iranian members bothering posting state media reports on here because no one would honestly take them seriously.

 

[Arian]

Iran state media is ignored. It is not independent and is simply a mouth piece for the Iranian government. Nothing it reports can be taken seriously.

It would be like taking North Koreas state media seriously.

I don't even know why Iranian members bothering posting state media reports on here because no one would honestly take them seriously.

Do you have any thing to say about what longbrained posted?
No one expects 'you' to even read the report xdrive, it's for other forumers, but as a member of the forum, you're free to say what you want, although no one takes what you say seriously either.

 

[xdrive]

The fact still remains that Iranian state media is not a credible news source and posting reports on here from it and pretending that it is credible is wrong. No one actually takes Iran state media seriously as it is just a propaganda news service and does not impartially report things without bias.

 

[Developereo]

Under some regimes, a handful of dictators control the media and the population.

In other countries, a handful of media moguls control the government through public opinion.

 

[xdrive]

Entirely different things and your analogy is wrong.

Independent free media may be owned by "media moguls" but they are still independent because they have self imposed system and regimes to insure independence.

Iran state media shouldn't even be considered a source of news because it has turned in a propaganda machine plain and simple. It doesn't actually report news, instead it reports fiction fairytales with a few non fiction elements added in.

 

[Developereo]

Independent free media may be owned by "media moguls" but they are still independent because they have self imposed system and regimes to insure independence.

Western societies are controlled by a handful of media moguls. They decide what issues will be pushed, and which ones ignored. They decide what slant to give news. By controlling public opinion, they control the agenda for a country.

I suggest you take a class in media matters, or propaganda 101, to understand how carefully "news" stories are worded and pushed by the media to "manufacture" consent.

The US media and BBC have lost any shred of credibility after their sycophantic pandering to their government's propaganda.

 

[Gautam]

Entirely different things and your analogy is wrong.

Independent free media may be owned by "media moguls" but they are still independent because they have self imposed system and regimes to insure independence.

Iran state media shouldn't even be considered a source of news because it has turned in a propaganda machine plain and simple. It doesn't actually report news, instead it reports fiction fairytales with a few non fiction elements added in.

well
lets say Iran media is a propaganda machine and is controlled by the state. but that doesn't change the subject - right?
lets say that Iran media is just telling their side of the story - but what is wrong in that?
as per the thread - UK is tryin to downgrade Iran's achievement , would you call it a state propaganda of UK?
though i do not appreciate any country developing nukes (and that includes India too) but i don't see anything wrong if a news paper is merely tryin to convey their side of the story.
but yeah - you are entitled to your opinion.
you have a good day sir!

 

[xdrive]

Western societies are controlled by a handful of media moguls. They decide what issues will be pushed, and which ones ignored. They decide what slant to give news. By controlling public opinion, they control the agenda for a country.

Not true, as my post said above. What you said is a typical conspiracy theory rubbish and couldn't be further from the truth.

The people who own the newspapers don't set the newspapers agenda or tell them what to report. They can't because of the way the companies are structured ie independent editor, self imposed guidelines etc not to mention if the owner tried walking in and saying "oh report this and this" half the journalists would resign.

The investment ownership is kept separate from day to day operation for a reason.

 

[xdrive]

well
lets say Iran media is a propaganda machine and is controlled by the state. but that doesn't change the subject - right?
lets say that Iran media is just telling their side of the story - but what is wrong in that?
as per the thread - UK is tryin to downgrade Iran's achievement , would you call it a state propaganda of UK?
though i do not appreciate any country developing nukes (and that includes India too) but i don't see anything wrong if a news paper is merely tryin to convey their side of the story.
but yeah - you are entitled to your opinion.
you have a good day sir!

A media organization is not suppose convey 1 side of a story. That's biased and partial. The whole purpose of a news service is to report a story exactly how it has happened with all the facts so the viewer can make up their own mind. Theres suppose to be no sides.

Presenting propaganda dressed up as a "news report" full of misinformation and false facts isn't impartial at all.

 

[Gautam]

A media organization is not suppose convey 1 side of a story. That's biased and partial. The whole purpose of a news service is to report a story exactly how it has happened with all the facts so the viewer can make up their own mind. Theres suppose to be no sides.

agreed. but don't you think its applicable to UK media too- which by the way is twisting Iran's achievement and presenting their side of the story ?

Presenting propaganda dressed up as a "news report" full of misinformation and false facts isn't impartial at all.

right sir.
but its not false. Iran media is just reporting what the UK media is sayin !
dear-
UK media is reporting their side and so did the Iran. we can say both are wrong or both are right.

i'm actually with you with all of your points. but i object your view of holding responsible Iran media alone.

 

[Developereo]

Not true, as my post said above. What you said is a typical conspiracy theory rubbish and couldn't be further from the truth.

The people who own the newspapers don't set the newspapers agenda or tell them what to report. They can't because of the way the companies are structured ie independent editor, self imposed guidelines etc not to mention if the owner tried walking in and saying "oh report this and this" half the journalists would resign.

The investment ownership is kept separate from day to day operation for a reason.

Nonsense. The unfolding drama about News Corp. phone hacking and other scandals lifts the lid on how the media works in real life. The top leadership has an immense impact on the type of people dominating the editorial levels of a media empire.

Most "free" media is blatantly partisan. In Australia, for example, News Corp. tends to be predictably pro-Liberal, whereas Fairfax tends to be pro-Labor. Similar biases are glaringly obvious in most media outlets throughout the "free" media. The only redeeming grace is that, for domestic matters, many media balance each other out. There is no such balancing when it comes to foreign affairs. Western media tends to be almost entirely in sync when it comes to Russia, China, Pakistan, Israel, etc.