Reporting from the Outside While Looking In: Iranian Diaspora Journalists and #WomanLifeFreedom

Abstract

Following the death of twenty-two-year-old Mahsa Jina Amini, tens of thousands of protestors took to the streets in Iran—and the whole world watched through their screens. Several Iranian diaspora journalists stepped up to cover the events in Iran for western news outlets. In this study, we interviewed fourteen Iranian diaspora journalists on how they define their role when reporting on Iran and how they navigate the balance between their personal experience and their reporting. Implications for this study include journalistic expectations for international news coverage and the role of the diaspora journalist within that coverage.

Introduction

In 2022, Iran witnessed its most significant political unrest since the 2009 Green Movement (Syed 2022). In recent years, the country has experienced multiple protests primarily triggered by economic challenges such as inflation and unemployment, but also demanding an end to human rights abuses, corruption, and theocratic rule (Al Jazeera 2022). However, the death of twenty-two-year-old Mahsa Jina Amini served as a trigger point for a series of nationwide protests.

On September 13, 2022, Mahsa Jina Amini was arrested by the morality police for wearing her hijab improperly. Amini was taken to a detention center for a reform class specifically for women who violate Iran’s Islamic dress code. However, some reports say the police tortured Amini on her way to the detention center, and she eventually fell into a coma. She died at a hospital in Tehran three days later (Amnesty International 2023). Tens of thousands of protestors took to the streets in Iran—prompting many Iranian diaspora journalists to step in and walk westerners through the events.

Repression and violence were used by the Iranian government in response to the protests. Protesters were dispersed by security forces, and the government shut down the internet to prevent communication between protesters and the international community (BBC 2022). Hundreds of protesters and dozens of security personnel were killed as a result of the government’s response (Perry and Evans 2022). The protests revealed the deep-seated economic and political grievances of the Iranian people. A worsening economic situation, compounded by U.S. sanctions and endemic corruption, has led to widespread frustration and anger among the country’s people (Askew 2023). The 2022 protests also highlighted the growing isolation of the Iranian regime on the international scene. The government’s response to the demonstrations resulted in widespread condemnation and calls for accountability (The Guardian 2022). Many experts consider the 2022 Iranian uprising as a potential precursor for a revolution. The demonstrations recalled the 1979 revolution which overthrew the Shah’s monarchy and inaugurated a new era in Iranian history. The critical role played by Iranian journalists has been widely acknowledged by scholars and experts (CPJ 2022). Despite the risks associated with covering the protests, many journalists working for news outlets remained committed to documenting the events and providing insights into the broader political and social context of the protests.

However, there is no single perspective on what is happening in Iran, and different journalists focus on different aspects of the events based on their own experiences and ideologies. Journalists’ varying experiences with Iran can, inevitably, influence their reporting, which can present complex understandings of a context the audience is not familiar with (Elahi and Hickerson 2019). Nevertheless, journalists within the Iranian diaspora can be an asset for western news outlets and help audiences lacking experience with Iranian politics interpret events on the ground and recognize the multidimensional perspectives of these events. Bringing language skills, historical context, and personal experience to the newsroom, diaspora journalists are placed in a unique code-switching role that can both enable their transnational framework while also challenging their own balance between journalistic duty and community identity.

Using in-depth interviews, the authors explore the relationship Iranian diaspora journalists had with their reporting on the 2022 uprisings through the framework of journalistic identity and transnationalism. While research on diaspora journalism networks exists, there is little scholarship focused on the tension within diaspora journalists reporting on events back home for mainstream news outlets.

Diaspora Journalists and Iranian Politics

Compared to the news reporting of the Iranian protests in 2017 and 2019, the coverage of the 2022 protests engaged a more diverse group of sources and journalists. The increasing amount of coverage brought more perspectives, agendas, and threats. In an interview with The Washington Post, Sanam Vakil, the deputy director of the Middle East North Africa program at the London-based Chatham House think tank, highlighted the number of credible threats against Iranian journalists living abroad. She says, “It really speaks to the state’s perception that the Iranians abroad are really stoking dissent” (Berger and Dehghanpisheh 2022, para. 6). Members of the diaspora are in a position where they can play a pivotal role in helping establish democratization in the homeland (Alinejad and Mutsvairo 2015). Specifically, the diaspora journalist may hold an even more strategic position in promoting secular democracy.

Diaspora journalists are those who consciously work to collect and distribute news and information about social, political, and cultural interests within the contexts of the home and host countries (Oyeleye 2017). While much of the research on diaspora journalism focuses on media outlets either exclusively created by the diaspora—likely an online publication—and for the diaspora, research focused on diaspora journalists who work for western, mainstream news platforms and whose audience is mostly made up of the host country, is lacking. These journalists can serve as both the broker and the storyteller. Iranian diaspora journalists are critical to the interpretation of the uprisings in Iran—especially because they understand the nuances within western and Iranian culture and politics. However, while journalists are expected to be objective in their reporting, there is potential for journalists’ positions to be compromised and challenged.

The term “diaspora consciousness” describes a dual reality made up of the diaspora’s collective memory of their homeland coupled with the mentality of their host land to reimagine the homeland (Keles 2016). The diaspora’s relationship with the homeland is complex, especially when conflict takes place, and possibly motivated by “a desire for transformation, contestation, and political change as it is by nostalgia, continuity and tradition” (Adamson 2002: 155). Journalists are not immune to this complex relationship between the diaspora and the homeland. Yet, their need to balance that relationship with their reporting is an imperative one. However, that is not to assume that professionally trained diaspora journalists ignore the ideals of professional journalism but rather lean on those values to add credibility to their reporting. Consider Skjerdal’s (2011) study on Ethiopia’s diaspora online community. Regardless of the unsteady state of the homeland, Ethiopian diaspora journalists favored “a journalism approach which defines them as a professional community, largely in contrast to citizen-driven, participatory journalism initiatives” (p. 729).

Yet, recent debates challenge the practice of journalists reporting on their own communities. Wesley Lowery takes up this debate in his New York Times article, “Reckoning Over Objectivity, Led by Black Journalists,” by challenging the idea that journalists of color cannot cover their own communities while remaining objective. However, there is an assumption that a white journalist can cover any community objectively. Lowery (2020) argues:

Since American journalism’s pivot many decades ago from an openly partisan press to a model of professed objectivity, the mainstream has allowed what it considers objective truth to be decided almost exclusively by white reporters and their mostly white bosses. And those selective truths have been calibrated to avoid offending the sensibilities of white readers. (para. 6)

Lowery argues that this practice does the audience a disservice by depriving readers of “telling hard truths” for fear of being perceived as imbalanced. On the other hand, there are questions regarding the line between journalism and activism, including whether the binary actually exists.

In a study on the practices of Iranian diaspora journalists, Wojcieszak et al. (2013) surveyed forty-one journalists who shared the advantages and disadvantages of working as a journalist outside of Iran. One of the disadvantages highlighted by 15 percent of respondents was “lack of journalistic objectivity and independence,” including “challenges of remaining objective about events in Iran” and “public expectations from journalists outside of Iran to be political activists, to support certain political groups and oppose the other ones” (p. 26). However, the specifics of those challenges and expectations are unclear in the survey. This study aims to further explore these challenges and expectations Iranian diaspora journalists encounter.

While many Iranian diaspora journalists expressed support for the Woman Life Freedom movement, the success of such movements is somewhat dependent on transnational support beyond journalists Therefore, the international news coverage of the event relies on a journalist’s ability to communicate the significance of the protests to the domestic audience (Andén-Papadopoulos and Pantti 2013). Though, to what extent does advocating for coverage of an event constitute activism versus a journalist’s duty? LA Times reporter Matt Pearce admits that, to some extent, journalism does mimic activism because “choosing what you want people to know is a form of activism, even if it’s not the march-and-protest kind” (Blanding 2019, para. 7). In terms of how diaspora journalists balance their identity as both a reporter and an advocate for coverage of protests in Iran can shed light on the complexity of journalistic identity that negates static notions. Furthermore, diaspora journalists can increase the proximity between the observer and the observed.

Transnationalism and Journalistic Identity

The concept of journalistic identity, pivotal to media studies, has experienced notable transformations over the past decades. It underpins how journalists view their societal roles, their professional responsibilities, and their interpretation of daily practices. This construct is closely tied to socio-political, economic, and technological dimensions (Hallin and Mancini 2004, 2017; Hanitzsch and Vos 2017; Shoemaker and Reese 2013).

Historically, journalistic identity stemmed from the Fourth Estate theory. Journalists saw themselves as gatekeepers of information, offering a counterpoint to governmental power (Schudson 2003, Shoemaker and Vos 2009). The growth of print media solidified journalism’s role as the “public watchdog,” prioritizing objectivity, neutrality, and factual reporting (Tuchman 1972). During this period, a distinct boundary separated journalists from the general populace, largely due to exclusive access to mass communication. Yet, with the emergence of broadcast media, especially television, norms and routines underwent significant shifts. Despite these changes, the core journalistic identity as informers remained largely untouched (Zelizer 1992).

Globalization further influenced perceptions of roles and identities. Journalists continually shape their professional identities, navigating between globally accepted values and local constraints (Rao 2009; Waisbord 2013). This ongoing dialogue straddles traditional professional paradigms and evolving norms molded by shifting socio-political landscapes (Hotho 2008). Globalization’s influence complicates matters as journalists strive to appeal to both local audiences and a broader global readership (Zelizer 2015). Within this intricate setting, journalists often craft “hybrid identities,” reflecting their ongoing negotiations within varying societal domains (Moon 2019). Sometimes, the roles they adopt might be marginalized within their own profession, shedding light on prevailing societal power dynamics and the obstacles they encounter (Shah et al. 2021). The swift rise of digital technologies heightens this identity crisis. As traditional media models get disrupted, journalists grapple with their role, redefining their unique contribution in a world where their specialized knowledge and preeminence are continually challenged (Bruno and Nielsen 2012; Sherwood and O’Donnell 2018).

The paramount importance of a journalist’s identity in shaping journalism’s trajectory is undeniable. For instance, during transitional periods within a single news organization, journalists’ professional identities—whether conventionally anchored or innovatively recast—determine their journalistic reactions (Grubenmann and Meckel 2017). In times of substantial upheaval or uncertainty, journalists often lean more into their self-conceived identities (Aldridge 1998). This reliance on stable professional identifiers emphasizes the importance of trust, credibility, and distinctiveness in an era flooded with information (Ferrucci and Vos 2017).

A critical aspect of comprehending this fluid identity is the ideological perspective it is viewed through. By considering identity as “a collection of values, strategies, and formal codes” (Deuze 2004, p. 277; 2005, p. 445), we can better understand how journalists find purpose in their profession. Specifically, regarding social movements, journalists can be motivated by their own personal identity to guide their journalistic identity or journalistic personal identification—“the belief of a reporter or editor that a certain claim is true and deserves strong standing and legitimacy in the media” (Shultziner and Shoshan 2018: 55). Personal identification can also look like a journalist who identifies with a similar life experience to the protesters.

In the backdrop of the evolving landscape of journalistic identity, the coverage by journalists on someone like Mahsa Jina Amini becomes particularly salient. Just as the broader journalistic community grappled with identity amidst the unique challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic, coverage on Amini showcases a microcosm of this phenomenon. The nuanced narratives and distinctive challenges faced by diaspora and expat journalists, especially from the Iranian community, mirror the broader tensions and reconceptualizations of the profession. The intricacies of their roles, the resilience strategies they adopt in the face of cyber and physical threats, and the unique ways in which they approach fact-checking in the age of social media all serve as poignant reminders of the multifaceted nature of journalistic identity in contemporary times—not to mention the impact of their own Iranian identity. Such instances underscore the importance of understanding and appreciating diverse perspectives and complexities within the journalistic domain.

As a result of globalization, transnationalism emerged as a way of connecting people across national borders. Furthermore, transnational journalism enables the shift between different cultural, historical, and geographical contexts. The ability to shift between and within these different contexts is what differentiates the transnational from the global, specifically because the global is seeking to appeal to a universal audience while the transnational fluctuates and engages with nuance depending on the target audience. Diaspora journalists are in a prime position to practice transnationalism as they possess the unique ability to bridge cultural and shifting contexts. Nevertheless, one cannot homogenize the diaspora or their experiences.

Journalistic identity is composed of multiple aspects—news values, lived experience, local and global influences (Rao 2009; Waisbord 2013). These different components inevitably produce tensions between multiple perspectives, experiences, and conditions (Shah et al 2021). Moreover, journalists can develop dual identities that require moving between different communities and developing code-switching skills (Moon 2019; Shah et al. 2021). These identities are imperative to how journalists build their narratives and bring meaning to their work. This study explores Iranian diaspora journalists’ identity using a transnational approach to journalistic identity that focuses on their values, processes, and understanding of not only professional journalism but also excellent journalism. The authors will pursue the following research question:

• RQ1: How do Iranian diaspora journalists define their role when reporting on the 2022 Woman Life Freedom protests in Iran?

Method

This study utilized in-depth interviews with Iranian diaspora journalists working for Western, mainstream news outlets (including national and international outlets based in the United States and the United Kingdom) to explore their roles, experiences, and challenges. Recognizing the sensitive nature of the subject, especially in light of the Iranian government’s history of repressive actions against journalists, we approached participant recruitment and data collection with utmost care. We employed a snowball sampling method, as suggested by Handcock and Gile (2011), which facilitated rapport building with our target population, often wary of external scrutiny due to security concerns. This approach proved essential, particularly given the known instances of the Iranian government targeting dissidents and journalists, exemplified by the case of Ruhollah Zam (Gambrell 2023).

The interview guide was meticulously designed to capture the rich and varied experiences of Iranian diaspora journalists. It was divided into thematic areas corresponding directly to the research questions, aiming to uncover how these journalists define their roles, navigate safety issues, manage the balance between political activism and journalism, and ensure the accuracy of their reporting, especially in politically sensitive contexts like the women’s life freedom movement in Iran. Questions ranged from their experiences and self-perception in their roles to specific strategies for dealing with cyber and physical threats, the intricacies of fact-checking in the age of social media, and the challenges of reporting on sensitive political movements. The guide was designed to be adaptive, allowing for deep dives into each journalist’s unique experience, thereby facilitating a nuanced understanding of the diaspora journalist’s role, the ethical and safety considerations they navigate, and their impact on public discourse about Iran.

We prioritized confidentiality and used Zoom for all interviews, which was selected for its security features and accessibility, to allay any worries and guarantee the safety of the participants. We were able to conduct interviews with participants from the United States, the United Kingdom, Germany, Canada, and the Czech Republic thanks to this platform, and after fourteen interviews, we had gathered sufficient data. Our understanding of the diaspora journalist experience has been enhanced by the diversity of backgrounds among our participants, which has brought to light the complex ways in which they manage their roles and obstacles.

The foundation of our analytical framework was thematic analysis, which aimed to find and analyze recurrent themes in all of the interview data (Braun and Clarke 2006). To guarantee a comprehensive and nuanced analysis, this method was supplemented with strategies such as saturation and constant comparison. Zoom conducted the interview transcripts automatically, and our research team carefully examined and corrected each transcript to guarantee accuracy and dependability.

The interview guide was designed to elicit in-depth insights, covering topics such as role definition, audience engagement, ethical considerations, and safety measures. Flexibility was integral to our approach, allowing us to adapt questions based on the flow of conversation and explore areas of significant interest more deeply (Brinkmann and Kvale 2015). Ethical considerations were paramount throughout the study, with measures in place to protect participant confidentiality and ensure informed consent.

Through this methodological approach, the study offers valuable insights into the complexities faced by Iranian diaspora journalists, contributing to a deeper understanding of their experiences and the implications for journalism practice and research.

Results

The Role of the Iranian Diaspora Journalist

“Vazifeh”—an obligation

Before the September 2022 protests, several of the journalists interviewed shied away from covering Iranian affairs, specifically stories regarding human rights abuses. For some, their reporting interests remained domestic, covering politics in the United States, the United Kingdom, or Canada. For others, they wanted to keep the door open to return to Iran without getting arrested or killed—which would be difficult to do if they highlighted human rights abuses in their coverage. However, despite the sacrifices required of Iranian diaspora journalists, several agreed to report on the protests in Iran. Some even pitched the story themselves out of what one journalist called vazifeh—a Farsi word for duty or obligation. Specifically, Iranian diaspora journalists felt compelled to report on the protests to promote accuracy, whereas, in the past, coverage of Iran has often been homogenized with other Middle Eastern countries.

When the events in Iran occurred, I did feel some sort of responsibility. A word that was thrown around a lot among Iranians in the diaspora was “vazifeh,” so you felt some sort of obligation of sorts to do the right thing and report on what’s going on. Because coverage of Iranian events in Western media usually take a political lean, you don’t see a lot of the humanitarian angles shining through. (Anonymous Journalist 1) ¹

Several reporters conveyed the need to advocate for the stories happening in Iran to be told and to communicate that what was happening on the ground was important. This speaks to the expectation for diaspora journalists to communicate the significance of events in the homeland to colleagues who may not recognize their importance, including their connection to domestic affairs.

Every time I’ve had to advocate in a newsroom, it’s like I’ve had to be both the reporter and, like, the advocate for the coverage. And no one has had my back on that ever. And so, it’s a very, like, consuming position to be in, because you’re trying to do the work and also trying to justify to editors like why it’s important to do this work. (Anonymous Journalist 2) ²

I think the biggest challenge of it is me trying to convince reporters, media who doesn’t understand Iran or doesn’t normally cover Iran. I have to put everything in context, explain how everything feels important. (Anonymous Journalist 3) ³

Recalling Shultziner and Shoshan’s (2018) journalistic personal identification, the reporters above felt responsible for not only promoting coverage of the WLF movement but, more specifically, authentic coverage that focused not only on the political implications of the protests but also the humanitarian aspect. In some cases, journalists were told if they wanted those stories to be covered, they would have to produce them on their own time. In a way, diaspora journalists took on a collective role to advocate for Iranian coverage and communicate the gravity and unique element of the movement and why it is different from past protests.

In addition to advocating for coverage of the protests throughout Iran, members of the diaspora often felt a responsibility and expectation to code-switch or be a bridge between multiple cultures. While this can be a challenging role, many of the journalists interviewed saw this as their purpose in reporting on the 2022 protests. However, this was not based simply on being an Iranian, but rather an Iranian who is also a professionally trained journalist rather than a citizen journalist. The professionalism of their job resonated deeply with all the journalists, especially in the current age of globalization and the ubiquity of digital tools. Many journalists felt compelled to distinguish themselves from citizen journalists.

So, I’m sort of a translator between the two worlds, but also one that has journalism credibility, journalistic integrity. I’m not a citizen journalist. I’m not a translator. I’m not a fixer. I am a reporter. And you bring in a set of skills that you [would] covering anything. (Anonymous Journalist 4) ⁴

We are the ones who are trying to provide them, professionally, this kind of information. This is not some random tweet or social media post not being fact-checked, not going through the actual process that journalistic work is done. (Anonymous Journalist 5) ⁵

Furthermore, the journalists recognized that their Iranian background, coupled with their journalistic training, was invaluable to newsrooms covering Iran.

So, being an Iranian American journalist reporting on Iran, it’s imperative to know this bit of background when reporting because you’re able to dilute down to the main issue at hand instead of getting tangled up in other things that may seem interesting to an outsider. (Anonymous Journalist 1) ¹

I think there are few Iranian Americans or people in the diaspora who’ve had the ability to go back and forth, who understand modern day Iran, understand how things work, understand the people, the young people. (Anonymous Journalist 6) ⁶

To understand the language, the culture the country, there are very few non-Iranians who have that and being part of that, having that lived experience, I think, gives you or me as a journalist more insight into what I’m covering, which, then it becomes a balancing act of how much of that internal knowledge you use without making yourself really too much part of the story. (Anonymous Journalist 7) ⁷

However, some journalists also recognized that their own experiences could also manipulate their approach to reporting on a country they think they know but that has changed since they have last visited Iran.

You might have experiences which slowly become irrelevant because it’s a new world out there, and you can see that. You listen to schoolgirls and boys, you listen to university students and you’re like who are these people? What are these aspirations? (Anonymous Journalist 5) ⁵

The comment above speaks to the dangers of “diasporic consciousness” (Keles 2016) that retains a specific memory of the homeland while also attempting to mobilize support for change in the homeland, changes that may or may not align with where the country is now versus their last visit. Additionally, there were other issues mentioned that any journalist might face, including prioritizing stories that they most identify with. For example, one journalist mentioned the competing coverage of attacks on student protestors at Sharif University with attacks on an underserved population of Iranians in Balochistan. While no one was killed in the attacks on Sharif University, at least eighty-two protestors and bystanders were killed in Balochistan (Amnesty International 2022). The journalist highlighted their own ability to identify with the student protesters at Sharif University and expressed regret for not producing coverage of Balochistan.

We all have blind spots, you know? We all have things that move us and rile us up a little bit more than others, based on our lived experiences. (Anonymous Journalist 8) ⁸

It is important to recognize that the issue this journalist highlights is not limited to the diaspora journalist. Rather it reflects the need for every journalist to recognize their unconscious bias in their reporting based on their own lived experience.

Navigating the Balance

Diaspora Backlash against Objective Reporting

The most popular point of contention mentioned in each interview was the criticism reporters received from the Iranian diaspora for what they describe as objective reporting. All the interviewees reported backlash from Iranian diaspora protestors for not showing enough support for the opposition to the Iranian regime. One journalist said:

Right now, there’s this sort of moment where if you don’t say what’s in the leading activist’s heart, then, somehow, they will corral a very large segment of the internet and whip up a lot of emotion in them by, you know, using rhetorical devices that have sometimes been used by autocrats in the past to then attack you. (Anonymous Journalist 8) ⁸

Additionally, there were several instances where any reporter that did not explicitly denounce the regime was accused of being a sympathizer with the Iranian regime. Several journalists mentioned a disconnect between journalistic expectations for reporters in Iran, or working for Iranian outlets, versus those working for western outlets, with some journalists reporting pressure to serve specifically as a mouthpiece for the opposition.

With Iran, there’s such weird expectations with Iranian journalists by the diaspora. Like they expect you to be blasting the mullahs left and right any chance you get. They don’t understand that a journalist doesn’t do that. A journalist covers stories. They report the facts. They tell. They put things into context. They add nuance. They add texture. And, in that, there’s merit. In that, there can be incredible, powerful storytelling. (Anonymous Journalist 4) ⁴

Another reporter shared that the Islamic Republic of Iran made it very difficult to present two sides of a story, specifically because the regime wouldn’t speak with them.

The challenge with Iran is once you become a reporter or a journalist who puts out stories, stories that should be seen as normal journalism, that the regime will not like, 99.9% of the time, they refuse to speak with you. So, it’s really difficult to bring balance. (Anonymous Journalist 9) ⁹

While the journalists, like the one mentioned above, maintained their loyalty to traditional journalistic principles, some reporters did not see the narrative surrounding the protests as a two-sided situation—an expectation often incorporated in balanced reporting. However, certain events can convert a journalist’s values or boundaries, negating any sort of static understanding of journalistic identity (Gulliver et al 2023).

There’s two sides to every story, right? So, I mean, a lot of people who defend the regime will kind of belittle or dismiss journalists like myself by saying that we’re activists. There are two sides to every story, except when it comes to moral depravity [. . .] what the regime in Iran is doing is morally wrong. I don’t think that there’s any defense for beating a girl to death because she’s not wearing her hijab properly. So, when I tell that story, and if I tell it and I say the people want regime change, that is entirely accurate, and it’s entirely telling it. (Anonymous Journalist 6) ⁶

The lack of moral depravity expressed above also reflects another journalist’s contentment with their disdain for the Islamic Republic of Iran as a grounding point for how they choose to report on the protests. The journalist compared giving the Islamic Republic of Iran a platform to that of Hitler in 1938:

If I had been covering the news in 1938, would I have wanted to do a lovely feature piece on Hitler taking, you know, a trip to the U.S., or would I want to be the type of reporter that would have actually done my work and would have actually said in pretty simple sentences what was happening with the rise of the Third Reich? (Anonymous Journalist 3) ³

Regardless of whether the journalists managed to get an interview with someone in the Iranian regime, all the reporters stood by their coverage as being objective and accurate. Each reporter shared their verification practices and processes for ensuring accurate coverage, including consulting their non-Iranian colleagues:

In moments where I had a question of the way I was portraying something, I would consult my colleagues, both non-Iranian and Iranian colleagues. And I’d talk it out to see what their take was and if they were perceiving it as a biased opinion or if they were perceiving it as background information, because the two can get convoluted very quickly. (Anonymous Journalist 1) ¹

Additionally, the journalists who published pieces focused on human rights received the most resentment from members of the diaspora as opposed to those focused more on foreign policy issues, leaving many journalists to consistently negotiate their identity as both an Iranian and a journalist.

Addressing the Journalism/Activism Binary

A conversation that consistently took place in each of the interviews was the journalist/activist binary. Many of the interviewees refuted an activist identity and made clear their loyalty to the principles of professional journalism.

There are plenty of activists in the world. The world doesn’t need more activists. The world needs journalists of sound intelligence and good background and to understand nuance and who are critical thinkers. So no, not once have I seen myself in that way. (Anonymous Journalist 9) ⁹

I’ve always drawn the distinction between being a journalist and being an activist. Some people identify themselves as activist and journalist. And we have so many of them. Very prominent ones. And I’m not sure how it is possible to reconcile being a journalist and at the same time being an activist. They are totally on opposite streams. It’s just impossible to be two things at the same time. (Anonymous Journalist 4) ⁴

Nevertheless, all the journalists hope that their coverage inspires positive change, with one reporter stating that this is, after all, the purpose of journalism:

I don’t consider myself an activist. Obviously, the job that I have can result in empowering the civil society. There is no question about that. And this is journalism and press freedom around the world is doing the same thing. (Anonymous Journalist 5) ⁵

While most of the interviewees denied being an activist, some explored a more nuanced perspective on the bridge between journalism and activism and their ability to stand on both ends of the spectrum.

I think that journalist/activist binary is also used to discredit people who cover the communities they’re from. And so, like, that’s also why I don’t buy into it, because also, like journalists are activists. Like, we’re activists for truth. We’re activists for transparency. I kind of see myself as both. Like, I’m absolutely standing with the Iranian people. If that makes me an activist, fine. I think that’s also part of our job, right? Like, we have to as journalists. My perspective is that we have to stand with oppressed people in order to, you know, hold power to account. (Anonymous Journalist 2) ²

The comments made by this journalist reflect concerns expressed in Wesley Lowery’s (2020) article highlighting the unspoken exception that white reporters can be the most objective in their coverage—especially in international news. However, this journalist also reflects on the evolving paradigm of journalism and taps into journalists’ “hybrid identities” (Moon 2019). Journalists’ professional identities are shaped by their audiences, their sources, and their own personal experiences and values, and they regularly need to negotiate their purpose in stories that involve human rights in their homeland within the paradigm of the countries where they currently live.

Discussion

The interviews conducted for this study highlight important questions, challenges, and considerations for global journalism practice and pedagogy. Given the current lack of foreign correspondents and international bureaus, the journalism industry needs to more effectively fill in the gaps. However, while the industry works on developing better international coverage, newsrooms must learn to value and utilize diaspora journalists. The journalists featured in this study underscore their perceptions of their role in the newsroom within their identity as diaspora. While their journalistic identity and news values are established, they are not necessarily fixed but rather adaptable to the given situation.

Several journalists mentioned their conviction in reporting on the 2022 protests and felt compelled to “do the right thing.” But how are diaspora journalists able to recognize “the right thing” in a way that non-diaspora journalists do not? Delving into that space of recognition is crucial to efficient and ethical global reporting. Global journalistic labor is central to many diaspora journalists, but their diaspora identity is not all encompassing. Rather their diasporic self is a part of their skillset as a reporter, not necessarily their identity. Above all, journalists interviewed identified as journalists—their identity and purpose embedded in good journalism. Developing their skills as a diaspora journalist is an extension of cultivating stronger skillset as a professional journalist, similar to the Ethiopian diaspora journalists in Skjerdal’s (2011) study.

Additionally, diaspora journalists should not be expected to have a shared vision or unified understanding of what is happening in Iran, which can make the reporting more robust in exploring how different journalists interpret events based on their own lived experience with the homeland. Someone who experienced Iran pre-revolution may differ in their analysis from someone who experienced Iran post-revolution. A woman who can relate to Amini’s run-in with the morality police may offer different insights than a man who is not required to wear a hijab. Incorporating these nuances is how the audience learns about the heterogeneity of countries they are unfamiliar with or have only received homogenous narratives about. Professional journalism prides itself on accurate reporting, and these diaspora journalists are working to do just that without newsrooms depending exclusively on citizen journalist content (Ferrucci and Vos 2017).

As journalists, the interviewees see their role as “public watchdogs” keeping the government in check (Schudson 2003; Shoemaker and Vos 2009). But to what extent do these watchdogs include foreign governments? All the interviewees acted on conviction to report on the Iran protests to highlight the abuses of the Iranian regime, consciously or unconsciously. However, were they acting on their impulses as part of the Iranian diaspora, as professional journalists, or both? Recalling Shultziner and Shoshan’s (2018) professional personal identification, a journalist only needs to recognize when an event deserves media attention, and in this case, diaspora journalists were the ones to grant that recognition and legitimacy because of their contextual knowledge of Iran. Granted, this is not limited to diaspora journalists. Another journalist with extensive knowledge of Iran could make similar decisions. The absence of non-diaspora journalists is a limitation of this study. Future studies comparing diaspora coverage to non-diaspora coverage could shed more light on the professional personal identification aspects as well as the extension of global journalistic labor.

Finally, the journalists highlighted issues regarding objectivity that all journalists face. Yet, audiences nor editors/news directors called for diaspora journalists to stop covering Iran, but rather balance their Iranian knowledge and experience with their trained skill set as a journalist. Diaspora journalists are crucial to accurate reporting because of their access and rapport with community sources, their contextual knowledge, and their language skills (Oyeleye 2017). However, not all journalists of Iranian descent should be expected to cover a single country. Moreover, not all diaspora journalists can effectively use their experience in their reporting just as non-diaspora journalists can use their own contextual knowledge to report effectively. Both are critical to global journalistic labor, especially in an era of parachute reporting and the closing of foreign bureaus across the world due to budget cuts.

This study also reiterates the imperative need for professional journalism in a digital world filled with citizen journalists. While coverage from citizens is valuable, and necessary in areas where journalists do not have access, the fact-checking and verification processes that all the journalists interviewed practice are invaluable to newsrooms and audiences alike. Indeed, each journalist expressed care for Iran, but their loyalties tend to lie with the principles of good journalism, even as those tenets change. That said, each reporter’s definition of good journalism varied depending on the given situation. Furthermore, there is a gap in literature regarding the relationship between activism and journalism when covering human rights issues. Human rights coverage, as opposed to foreign policy coverage, is where the journalists interviewed appeared to struggle most with objectivity and focused more on accuracy and transparency in the face of the Islamic Republic of Iran. The current study did not expand on human rights coverage exclusively as not all of the journalists reported from this perspective. While this study only included fourteen interviews, the insight from these journalists is important to how western journalism continues to approach international coverage. This study is meant to be a starting point for addressing the challenges diaspora journalists face while working for western news outlets as well as understanding their unique roles and skillsets and how to best support them. A future transnational study would be beneficial to the current project as this paper was limited to one country.

Conclusion

The devotion these journalists have to their home country is as rich as their dedication to their craft. These journalists do not put their country above their calling as a reporter, but rather their commitment to excellent journalism is reflected in the way they choose to highlight the protests happening in Iran. Furthermore, these journalists possess the unique ability to code-switch between cultures, which is a valuable skillset that lends itself to producing transparent and accurate journalism. In fact, every single journalist expressed their purpose not to necessarily liberate the Iranian people but rather to represent the condition of the Iranian people well. The experience of the journalists featured in this study is reminiscent of a first-generation person trying to navigate one culture for the sake of the other. Diaspora journalists fixated on the importance of context and their ability to provide that context, especially within a media culture that often conflates coverage of Middle Eastern countries. Reporters without extensive knowledge of Middle Eastern geopolitics may not be able to convey the events in a way that is not only understandable to the audience but that also provides the best possible coverage. That is not to say that a non-diaspora journalist cannot provide sufficient coverage of those events, given their own cultural knowledge. With the decline of international news bureaus and foreign correspondents as well as the increasing difficulty with getting “boots on the ground,” diaspora journalists are a unique asset to media organizations. Furthermore, those members of the diaspora who are professionally trained journalists could, arguably, be the best person for the job.