Role of the Media in the Iranian Hostage Crisis

Introduction 

Terrorism is a universal challenge to which considerable political, financial and emotional investments have been made in order to fight the vice. Notably, since the 2001 September 11 terrorist attacks in the United States, the fight against terrorism has been up-scaled significantly (Nacos, 2016). The commitment of the international community to fight terrorism is evidence by the existence of 19 international legal instruments focusing on combating the menace. Such legal instruments include conventions, accords and treaties that facilitate commitment and cooperation of the international community in fighting terrorism. To show the importance of the topic of terrorism to the contemporary society, research in various dimensions of terrorism has been on an upsurge. The intensification in research is aimed at dissecting the issue of terrorism in order to understand the dynamics and factors playing around the occurrence of terrorist acts. Among the most studied aspect is the relationship between the media and terrorism (Fahmy, 2017).The relationship between the two domains been described by some scholar as being symbiotic (Rohner & Frey, 2007). Based on review of relevant literature, the media clearly played an important role during the terrorist incident of the Iranian Hostage Crisis, thereby influencing the outcomes of events surrounding the incident. 

The Iranian Hostage Crisis 

The Iranian hostage crisis occurred between November 4, 1979 and January 20, 1981 and it remains to be the longest standing hostage crisis in recorded history to date. The 444-day crisis that occurred at the United States Embassy in Tehran led to the holding hostage of 52 American diplomats and citizens within the Embassy compound (Farber, 2009). The events leading up to the occurrence of the hostage situation began about half a century before the incident. Case in point, there had been a lot of tension between Iran and the United States especially regarding the control and exploitation of the rich Iranian oil fields. Moreover, the then Iranian leader Mohammed Reza Shah Pahlavi of Iran who was a largely pro-western, secular, and anti-communist leader evoked a string of revolutionary movements to over throw the leader owing to his perceived collaboration with the Western countries. Following the successful revolt of the Iranian revolution that overthrew Shah of Iran in 1979, the United States increasingly became a target for the revolutionist (Christopher & Mosk, 2007). This culminated on November 4, 1979 when a group of Iranian students broke through the gate and climbed over the wall of the US embassy in Tehran and took captive of over 60 American hostages. 

Under the leadership US’s President Carter, diplomatic engagements failed to deliver any discernible result that would change the mind of the revolutionary groups. In addition to the talks, economic sanctions such as the seizure of Iranian assets within the United States still did not lead to any favorable resolution to the situation. Although the hostages were not injured, they were subjected to significant experiences that were demeaning to human dignity. Due to President Carter’s frustration from the slowed diplomatic processes, he commanded a military rescue operation named Operation Eagle Claw , which unfortunately was very unsuccessful and led to the death of eight American service men and one Iranian Civilian (Fahber, 2009). After a series of diplomatic efforts between the two countries, the hostages were finally set free on the 21 st of January 1981, coincidentally being a few hours after the inauguration of President Carter’s successor, President Ronald Reagan. 

Terrorist Propaganda and the Main Stream Media 

The main stream media was a significant avenue for the propagation of terrorist propaganda during the Iranian hostage crisis. The relationship between the media and terrorism had been described by Rohner and Frey (2007) as being a symbiotic relationship. In essence, reports of terrorism incidences are given much attention by the main stream media and sometimes even minor incidences are over reported (Nacos, 2016 ). By reporting such incidences, main stream media benefit as such news are viewed and read by a larger population of audience compared to other news which makes economic sense to the mainstream media owners. The symbiosis is completed as such wide publicity of terrorist incidences provides the much needed publicity for the terrorist groups. This fact is well known to the executors of terrorist activities and thus, most terrorist groups have sophisticated communication channels through which they spread their propaganda via the main stream media. Case in point, during the Iranian hostage crisis, America’s main stream media was used as channels for which such propaganda was spread. According to Nacos (2016), during the hostage situation captors repeatedly took video tapes of the hostages while they were blindfolded and harassed to depict the plight of the American hostages. Such video were then made available media organizations in the West. In some circumstances such media was aired unedited. The result was the instillation of fear among the Americans and the spread of the terrorist propaganda, which is a key aim for most terrorist groups. As such, the main stream media played a critical role of a being a channel through which propaganda was spread. 

The main stream media was a tool through which terrorism during the Iranian hostage crisis achieved its media related goals. According to Nacos (2016), irrespective of short- or long-term political objectives, terrorist groups have three main media related goals that they aim to achieve. The three goals are to seek attention, to have the demands and grievances recognized, and to win respect or even gain legitimacy. The main stream media was useful to the achievement of these goals by the terrorist group during the Iranian hostage crisis. According to Farber (2009), three main stream media TV channels namely ABC, CBS and NBC reported and provided update about the hostage situation. The three TV stations respectively had 54 %, 50% and 48% of their evening news devoted to airing about the crisis during the first two months of the crisis (Nacos, 2016). Clearly, making news headlines in three major TV channels and Newspapers in the United States for a whole 444 days draw the American’s attention to the terrorist group, thereby achieving their first goal. Although it is the role of the media to keep the public informed, the content aired during the coverage and duration of coverage are important aspects that should be well thought beforehand (Altheide, 2007). Through sharing videotapes showing the plight of the hostages, the terrorist groups were able to weigh in their grievances during the diplomatic talks and place their demands. Evidently, the mainstream media played a crucial role that enable the terrorist group achieve their media related goals during the Iranian hostage crisis. 

During the Iranian hostage crisis, the main stream media played an important role in defending the media which worked to reduce the impact of the hostage situation. Notably, when the US embassy in Tehran was taken captive, a total of 66 hostages were initially held within the compound. However, 14 hostages were later released by the captors and sought refuge at the Canadian embassy leaving the 52 who stayed for the whole 444 days. However, although the 14 hostages were released, news about their release was kept under cover by the main stream media and reported only after the freed hostages had left Iran for America (Nacos, 2016). In this respect, the main stream media acted in a manner to defend the media and facilitate the rescue of the freed hostages. Although, the adherence to stipulated guidelines on reporting about horrific situations such as terrorism incidents is in most cases faulty, in this particular scenario the main stream media acted in a manner that protected the lives of the freed hostages. 

Terror and Hate in Cyberspace 

The Cyberspace, which succinctly refers to the notional environment over which communication through computer networks occurs, is an important are for propagation of terrorist agenda (Goodman, Kirk & Kirk, 2007). According to Narcos (2016), the Cyberspace is a rich avenue through terror, fear and hate can be spread by group of terrorists and organized criminal gangs. With the daily advancement in technologies and the growth in sophistication and access to online communication, terror groups have equally made use of such networks to propagate their agenda. Although during the 1979-1981 Iranian hostage crisis the level of technology sophistication was not to the level that it is now, the organizers of the terror group used organized media technology to propagate their agenda. 

Media channels provide terrorist groups with opportunities to further their agenda by increasing the number of members of the terrorist groups. Such is achieved through use of media to facilitate radicalization, recruitment, and incident of terrorists (Gilmour, 2014). The Cyberspace and associated technologies such as the World Wide Web have proven in recent years to be a fertile ground on which new members of terror groups can be recruited. However, it suffices to reiterate that the Iranian hostage crisis occurred a few years before the actual invention and rolling out of the internet and the World Wide Web. As such, there was no aggressive usage of the media channel to spread the terror agenda. However, that notwithstanding, the Iranian Revolutionists still managed to use the media as a channel of increasing their numbers. Notably, the activities and revolts of the revolutionists that occurred before the hostage crisis were widely aired via other forms of media. For instance, the eventual over throw of the pro-western Iranian leader Shah of Iran in 1979 was widely publicized via the media (Christopher & Mosk, 2007). Expectedly, such publicity provided the chance of convincing other people who were pro-revolution to be recruited and join in the group. This is evident by the fact that the Iranian hostage crisis was staged mainly by students who had been radicalized by the terrorists group through among other means, use of media. As such, the media such as the Cyberspace has been widely used by terror groups in spreading its membership through recruitment and radicalization. 

The Cyberspace is a potential channel that is usable in terrorism to spread hate and messages of atrocities. According to Narcos (2016), the online platform has been in recent years been an avenue of sending messages to enemies with an aim of spreading fears and hate. Citing the example of a poster posted on a pro-Al Qaeda website, messages to instill fear and hate between different religious groups can be sent via online platforms. Also, a video of the brutal execution of an American journalist James Foley by ISIS was posted on YouTube. Although the video was pulled down on YouTube, the members of the public who had watched it as well as its publication through main stream media definitely drove fear down the lives of many Americans. Insofar as the Iranian hostage crisis is concerned, it has been aforementioned that it occurred at a time when there was little development of the online communication platform. However, the terrorists still managed to put out their message by taking video footage of hostages in deplorable conditions and sending it to Western media channels. Such footages did spread fear and aggression among Americans (Nacos, 2016). The hate that such communication caused is evident by the President Carter’s frustration with the diplomacy talks and opting for Operation Eagle Claw, which unfortunately failed terribly. The Cyberspace has also been used by terrorist groups to raise funds from sympathizers and supporters. This is done through invitation of donations from such factions into accounts managed by the terror groups. Since the Cyberspace was not as developed during the Iranian revolution as it is now, the revolution did not rely on it as the major source of income. As such, the media such as in Cyberspace is an avenue that terrorist groups utilize to spread fear and hate, and for sourcing funds to finance terror activities. 

Counterterrorism in the News 

The war against terrorism forms an important role for administrations and governments across the globe. It is the responsibility of the authorities to protect its citizens within and outside its borders from acts of terrorism (Fahmy, 2017). More importantly is the role that the governments play to counter acts of terrorism that have been perpetuated against its citizens both locally and abroad. Given the universal need to combat terrorism evidence by the commitment by several countries to the international conventions and treaties against terrorism, counterterrorism measures more often than not require the cooperation of administrations of two or more countries. This is the basis for the military reprisal or preemption that is occasionally carried out by nations such as the United States (Nacos, 2016). In all these actions, the main stream media has an important role to play in linking the government and its effort to counterterrorism with the general public. It is the responsibility of the media to keep the general public informed on the government’s efforts to counter terrorism (Ian Ross, 2007). Such information creates awareness in the public and enables to weigh on such matters from an informed point of view. Accordingly, the media has a pivotal role to play in their reporting of counterterrorism measures. 

Counterterrorism measures as covered by the media have the potential to cause fury and frustration among the general public. This is particularly true in the event that such response through military response or otherwise, becomes largely unsuccessful. Case in point, the attempted military response to the Iranian hostage crisis under the leadership of President Jimmy Carter through the Operation Eagle Claw , was a huge failure (Farber, 2009). The operation was informed by what President Carter saw as slow and non-yielding diplomatic efforts to end the hostage situation and set free the 52 American captives. In the operation, the plan was to conduct a surprise rescue mission at the embassy compound by an elite military squad using the US’s arsenal in order to rescue the victims and get them back home. However, on the day of the planned attack a wild desert sandstorm caused several helicopters to malfunction including one that crashed into a large transport plane during takeoff. The result was a massive failure of the mission and death of eight American servicemen and one Iranian civilian. The operation is seen as a major failure for the Carter administration. For instance, Mitt Romney in response to what was seen as President Obama taking too much credit for the operation that killed Osama bin Laden sarcastically said that “it was a mission that even Carter would take” (Narcos, 2016). This failed counterterrorism mission was a major focus for all the media houses with lots of criticism arising concerning the President’s move to conduct the mission. Fear was instilled among American citizens at the thought that the captors would retaliate by harming or even worse executing the hostages. Given that this operation was the only cause of deaths during the entire 444 days of the hostage situation, the media’s coverage of the incident and criticism of the same as being poorly planned and executed, stirred up much aggression and skepticism of the masses towards the Carter administration. Through the media, the public saw President Carter to have more blood on his hand more than the captors in Tehran (Farber, 2009). The American media thus made it more difficult for the Carter administration to deal with the hostage situation. The unduly long duration of the hostage crisis and failure of the Operation Eagle Claw as covered by the media had an impact on the public opinion about the Carter administration as seen in the 1980 general elections. During the run-up to the election, the Iranian hostage crisis was a hot discussion topic and featured conspicuously in the Carter-Reagan presidential debates (Christopher & Mosk, 2007). The Republican candidate, Ronald Reagan capitalized on the failures to the Carter administration including the Operation Eagle Claw to influence the public opinion and eventual votes. Although the voting in the1980 Presidential elections was largely based on the local economic challenges that the nation faced, the spillover effect of the Iranian hostage crisis definitely had a hand in President Carter failing to secure a reelection. Evidently, the media’s portrayal of counterterrorism during the Iranian hostage crisis not only made it more difficult for the government to deal with the crisis, but it also informed a negative public opinion of the government by the general public. 

Living with Terrorist Threat 

The threat of terrorist attacks is a concern for any national administration. Accordingly, a lot of resources both financial and intellectual have been vastly invested as a means of to counterterrorism. In recent decades, more emphasis has been laid on intelligence in order to track the plot of terrorism and intercept the incidences before they actually occur. The United States is particularly a major target for terrorism not only based on its previous counterterrorism military measures but also its undoubted establishment as the sole superpower and exported of western culture and influence. As such, the threat of terror attack is an everyday fact that faces the United States which has informed the heavy investment in intelligence to counter terrorism. For instance, according to Nacos (2016), as of 2015 over 1271 governmental as well as 1931 private institutions were directly involved in programs that work on counterterrorism, homeland security, and intelligence. The Iranian hostage crisis, which was seen by many quotas and a heinous act of terrorism, played an important role in the concept of living with terrorism threat in the years that followed. 

The Iranian hostage crisis’s portrayal by the main stream media became a continuation as well as new insights on the threat of terrorism. The reasons for which terrorism is conducted are varied and cut across political, economic and social aspects such as religion. For the Iranian hostage crisis, the causative factors were multifactorial as it was learnt through the media. Politically, the Iranian revolution that master minded the hostage situation was opposing the Iran leader Shah of Iran, who was anticommunist and pro-Western. The hostage situation therefore was to send a message to America that the pro-revolution Iranians did not want meddling with their political dealing. Economically, the pro-revolution Iranians were not pleased with America’s “excessive” involvement in their economy more so through the exploitation of the rich Iranian oil fields (Farber, 2009). The media in the United States including TV stations, Newspapers and radio station communicated these reasons to the general public. The relevance of this was that given the well spread American foreign policy; this was a call for more alertness especially in countries that deemed the United States involvement in their affairs as interferences. 

The Iranian hostage crisis provided ground for the occurrence of other terrorism incidences and continuation of terrorist threat. The media coverage of the incident was enormous throughout the 444-day hostage situation and this gave enabled the terror groups the publicity they much needed. The result in the immediate years after the hostage crisis was a series of other terror incidences that seemed to receive backing from the perpetrators of the Iranian hostage crisis. A notable incident was the suicide bombing of the US Embassy in Beirut on October 23, 1983, barely 2 years after the end of the Iranian hostage crisis. The perpetrators who were the Hezbollah, a Lebanese based militant and terror group received backing from the Iranian revolutionists (Byman, 2008). The incident resulted in the death of 220 American marines. The Lebanon hostage crisis was yet another incident that the Hezbollah were involved in that was right after the Iranian hostage crisis. In this incident, a total of 96 hostages were taken captive by the militant group from the period of 1982 to 1992. Although 21 nationalities were represented among the hostages, 25 of them were Americans making America the most targeted nation. The motive for the hostage crisis was again to counter America’s involvement and retaliation in Lebanon. In all these instances, the media was conspicuously involved in reporting to detail as much information to the public. Whereas this was in line of duty, it also brewed fear among US nationals especially those working as diplomats in the Middle East and other areas that seemed to be more prone to terror attack. The pressure from the media contributed to the Regan administration to back down on its “no negotiations, no concessions” policy as the administration and negotiate terms for hostage release (Byman, 2008). Although, the efforts on counterterrorism has intensified and resulted to the interception of several planned terror plots in the United States, the involvement of the media has a two pronged effect. It could provide useful information that enables civilians to take precautionary measures but if even minor threats not backed with substantial evidence is over reported, then undue fear and interference with the normal lives of Americans is a major concern. 

Conclusion 

Terrorism and associated acts of violence continue to pose a big social and security problem. Its effects are felt in myriad of sectors from negative impact on the economy and strain on relationship with specific foreign countries to emotional effect on the affected individuals and families, and spread of hate and terror. As a result, much effort is put in place to counterterrorism through intelligence and military action. At the centre of all these is the media, which plays an important role of disseminating information not only from the anti-terror government and private agencies but also information shared by the terrorist groups to the general public. The Iranian hostage of 1979-1981 is a clear demonstration of the niche that the media holds with regard to terrorism. In essence, during the crisis the media was used as publicity tool by the terrorists in order to obtain attention, make their demands known and to spread fear among citizens. The media’s coverage of the incidence also shaped the public opinion on the President Carter’s administration and that was reflected in the outcome of the 1980 Presidential elections. Although, the Cyberspace was not as developed during the Iranian hostage crisis as it is now, the perpetrators still managed technological tools of communication to spread radicalization and recruit members into the group. Notably, after the occurrence of the Iranian hostage crisis the threat of more terrorism was real and the years that followed saw the occurrence more terrorist attacks that were extensively reported on by the media. As such, the media clearly played an important role during the terrorist incident of the Iranian Hostage Crisis, thereby influencing the outcomes of events surrounding the incident. 

References 

Altheide, D. L. (2007). The mass media and terrorism. Discourse & Communication , 1(3), 287-308 

Byman, D. (2008). Iran, terrorism, and weapons of mass destruction.  Studies in Conflict & Terrorism ,  31 (3), 169-181. 

Christopher, W., & Mosk, R. M. (2007). The Iranian Hostage Crisis and the Iran-US Claims Tribunal: Implications for International Dispute Resolution and Diplomacy. Pepp. Disp. Resol. LJ, 7, 165 

Fahmy, S. (2017) Media, Terrorism, and Society: Perspectives and Trends in the Digital Age Journal of Mass Communication and Society 20(6); 735-739 

Farber, D. (2009). Taken hostage: The Iran hostage crisis and America's first encounter with radical Islam . Princeton University Press 

Gilmour, S. (2014). Policing crime and terrorism in cyberspace: An overview. European Review of Organised Crime , 1(1), 143-159. 

Goodman, S. E., Kirk, J. C., & Kirk, M. H. (2007). Cyberspace as a medium for terrorists. Technological Forecasting and Social Change , 74(2), 193-210. 

Ian Ross, J. (2007). Deconstructing the terrorism–news media relationship. Crime, Media, Culture, 3(2), 215-225 

Nacos, B. L. (2016). Terrorism and counterterrorism . Routledge. 

Rohner, D., & Frey, B. S. (2007). Blood and ink! The common-interest-game between terrorists and the media. Public choice , 133(1-2), 129-145