Poodles and Revolution 1970-1979

Full text below

Iran enters the new decade with largely favorable coverage in the pages of Time. The first article (May 25, 1970) presents Iran positively as a good investment, citing Iran's "stability" and progressive Shah as key attractions. Time reports that Iran recently hosted the "largest array of US businessmen ever to assemble in a developing country for an investment conference," and that Iran's Shah is "determined at all costs to transform Iran into a modern state." The use of the phrase "all costs" is perhaps a hint of criticism, but unless you really deconstruct the writing the early coverage seems wholly positive.
The next mention of Iran is a year later (Oct 25, 1971) for the 2,500th anniversary celebration at Persepolis. This massive spectacle gets Iran a series of full color photographs in this issue and again mostly positive publicity. The Shah does however receive mixed praise over his economic progress as well as criticism for hints of megalomania and wasteful spending on the celebration, but these occupy a very small amount of text space in comparison with the grandiose descriptions of the event.
Iran enjoys a vacation away from the pages of Time, excepting a few articles of archeological interest, until 1974. In the April 1st issue, an interview with the Shah is published. This is one of a number of interviews in which the Shah is given the opportunity to speak without any probing questions nor chance for rebuttal. Furthermore, the introduction to the interview (probably out of a need to please the Shah in order to secure the interview) romanticizes the Shah and the work that he does. Time introduces the interview by naming the Shah "the inheritor of Persia's ancient throne" and mentions that he appears in the interview "as though betraying the burden he feels [in running the country]." The Shah gains a cover story in Time months later (Nov 4, 1974) entitled "The Emperor of Oil" in which Iran is said to have "almost unlimited future potential." The Shah is said to have a troubled history but is currently well loved - he's compared in the feature to Cyrus the Great! Time goes on to claim that "no other oil power has a leader quite as visionary and energetic." Some problems are mentioned like the country's increasing wealth gap and the Shah's zero tolerance for dissent, but the ruling family is painted as absolute but benevolent rulers. Interviews with the Shah and the Empress further support this romanticized notion.
In the following years the pages of Time see another personal interview as well small articles reporting on the slight slippage of Iran's economic progress. Articles in 1976 mention the economic troubles, especially a May 10th article citing corruption and profligacy in the government, but the Shah is always presented as being pro-active and decisive in remedying the situation.
Two years later in 1978, Time's point of view shifted. After an absence in coverage Iran exploded back into the pages of Time with a June 5th article and a Sept. 18th article (cover story) describing the anti-Shah riots that have erupted throughout Iran. The Shah is clearly criticized for his swift and violent responses to the demonstrations in which Time very specifically states that mostly women and children were killed. The mullahs are introduced to Time's readers quite favorably as being "non-violent," "kindly" and "gentle" scholars calling for democracy against the failed economic programs and repressive rule of the Shah. The Shah is portrayed as a ruthless and spoiled dictator, and while the June 5th article rebuffs the possibility of his overthrow, by September Time is acknowledging the danger of full-scale revolution.
By January of 1979 the Shah's fall is complete both physically and in the eyes of Time. In the wake of the Shah's vacation/escape from Iran, a feature article describes the Shah as "hated, vilified [and] denounced." Time prints pictures of Iranian citizens and soldiers dancing and cheering in the streets, and the Ayatullah Khomeini is treated favorably as the "architect of the revolution." The article juxtaposes the description of the Ayatullah as "stoic" and powerful with inventories of the Shah's numerous mansions. By March, however, Time began to portray Khomeini poorly citing fake trials and executions as well as affronts on women's civil liberties. Come August, Khomeini's regime was called "increasingly repressive," but the biggest condemnation came in November when the US embassy was stormed and the hostage crisis began. November 19th's cover story was understandably harsh on Iran's regime and people, citing the situation as "madness, mob rule," but it was also seemingly harsh on the US government for its perceived helplessness. This feeling, though of course just reflected not created by Time, continues through to the end of 1979 along with a continued antagonistic tone toward the Ayatullah and Iran.