Quasi-Modernity, Iranian Modernization, and Communication
One of the enduring questions since the onset of quasi-modernity in Iran has been: if there is a close relationship between communication and culture, what are the implications of adopting quasi-modern mass communication tools for culture? And conversely, how does culture respond to these mass media instruments?
Most scholars, assuming the self-evidence of the modernization process, have regarded the interaction between culture and communication as predictable and natural. Consequently, they have focused their research on removing obstacles to the dominance of quasi-modern messaging. Alvin Toffler, in The Third Wave, presents the emergence of the third wave and its corresponding transformations in family and collective life as historical inevitabilities. He describes phenomena such as moral corruption, libertinism, and emotional excesses manifesting as vandalism and similar behaviors as “birth pangs” necessary for the arrival of a new societal order (Toffler, 2023).
However, the non-obviousness of modernity and the possibility of escaping the historical determinism of third-wave communication have been explored by many postmodern thinkers such as Michel Foucault, Jacques Derrida, Jean-François Lyotard, and Jean Baudrillard. The central issue is that many communication scholars in Iran have become passive in the face of quasi-modern communication models. Not only have they normalized communicative aggression against the public, but they have also framed resistance responses as traditionalism versus modernization or various forms of particularism. Yet, perhaps an alternative communication model grounded in civilizational resources could have been more fruitful.
To elucidate this issue, the editorial compares two paradigms of medicine. The dominant paradigm of modern medicine involves a more aggressive and compartmentalized (read: specialized) approach to diseases. Diseases are diagnosed and treated in isolation, and medications are administered in purified forms to maximize efficacy. In contrast, Iranian-Islamic medicine identifies diseases holistically, considering the organism and its environment, and uses remedies in their natural, integrated botanical forms. The efficacy of such treatments remains subject to laboratory verification.
This article does not aim to reinforce the traditional-modern dichotomy. In fact, this approach seems more inclined toward genuine modernization than modernists themselves. If tradition can be reinterpreted as a form of modernity, then modernists may be seeking a rootless tradition rather than true progress. Escaping the determinism of modernity could pave the way for a truly creative modernization. Regardless of one’s stance on the self-evidence of modernity, several realities merit reflection:
There is coherence among cultural and societal elements within a civilizational and historical framework. As Max Weber insists, diverse components of society and culture testify to a unified phenomenon, creating a unique whole intimately tied to its history. The function and meaning of each part are realized within its specific cultural context and differ fundamentally across domains. For instance, while Protestantism in the West facilitated capitalism under certain material conditions (Weber, 1994), proposing an “Islamic Protestantism” for capitalist development in Iran would be misguided. The ethical function of Protestantism in the West differs entirely from its potential meaning in Iran. The same applies to rationality, bureaucracy, and democracy.
In practical terms, Western civilization is not composed of isolated elements that can be selectively adopted. This does not negate cultural diffusion or civilizational borrowing. Civilizations have always exchanged experiences and products, but what is borrowed is never identical to its source. Just as a received message rarely mirrors the sent one, cultural elements undergo transformation to align with the recipient culture.
Thus, we face two realities: the interconnectedness of civilizational elements, where each part derives meaning from the whole, and the inevitable distortion and adaptation of cultural imports. This process applies to mass media as well. Media tools, originating with specific functions and meanings, have undergone significant transformation upon entering Iranian society.
The Kaghaz-e Akhbar newspaper, published less than two centuries ago by Mirza Saleh Shirazi, marked the beginning of Iranian journalism. Shirazi believed he was importing the same newspaper model as in the West, expecting similar benefits. Hence, he named it Kaghaz-e Akhbar, a literal translation of “newspaper.” However, the press in Iran evolved with functions and meanings quite different from its Western counterpart. While Western newspapers served as pillars of democracy and political party organs, Iranian newspapers largely operated as state apparatuses—and arguably still do. Initially representing national governments, they later aligned with global powers amid globalization. Today, most media—both in Iran and the West—serve global interests, though some still faintly represent national and Islamic values.
In cultural borrowing, societies emphasize certain features of the imported element while downplaying others. This is evident in Iran’s mass media, which have focused more on the goals and visions of Western media than on their epistemological and philosophical foundations. As a result, they have largely followed a non-democratic trajectory. Nevertheless, these media have contributed to intellectual discourse and social dialogue. The issue at hand, however, is the paradigm of cultural engagement.
The aggressive model of mass media, targeting culture and lifestyle, stems from modernity’s inherent hostility toward nature and its capitalist entanglements. When imported, this aggression intensifies due to cultural mismatches. Mass media, by virtue of their mass orientation, become inherently aggressive, and when embedded in developmental frameworks, they often clash violently with local traditions and civilizational resources.
This aggressive paradigm also applies to social media and virtual spaces, which have become profoundly anti-populist. The global media landscape now exhibits widespread hostility toward the public, mirroring the invasive approach of modern medicine. Just as modern medicine attacks the body to cure disease, mass communication systems target people to implement policy. In contrast, traditional medicine fosters a selective, organic relationship between the patient and natural remedies.
This comparison extends to bureaucracy, academia, banking, and other systems—topics ripe for scholarly exploration. Just as Iranian-Islamic medicine offers an alternative to modern medicine, an organic, people-centered media system stands in contrast to the aggressive, impersonal mass media. The mosque and pulpit, as indigenous media, possess a fundamentally different nature from newspapers, radio, and television. Despite suffering under modernity’s influence (Entezari, 2016), the mosque’s historical structure remains a vital, organic medium closely tied to the people.
The communicative model of the mosque and pulpit—observable in mourning rituals, pilgrimage, and Hajj—deserves scholarly attention. If communication departments and faculties approach this topic with empathy and without allegiance to aggressive modernity and globalization, they may uncover vast communicative capacities and contribute innovative theories to the field. This motivation led us to feature articles in this and the previous issue that present the mosque as a foundational element of the Iranian-Islamic communication system.
This subject should not be viewed through reactionary or traditionalist lenses. The Arbaeen pilgrimage, as a mega-medium within this paradigm, has proven its strength against all mass media of the aggressive paradigm. Despite media blackouts and virtual campaigns of doubt, Arbaeen—arguably the largest human gathering in history—demonstrates the power of organic, people-centered communication. Rooted in civilizational heritage, Arbaeen has transcended borders and challenged other forms of globalization.
References
Toffler, Alvin (2023). The Third Wave, trans. Shahindokht Khwarazmi, Farhang-e No & Asim Publishing.
Weber, Max (1994). The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism, trans. Abdolkarim Rashidian & Parisa Manouchehri Kashani, Scientific and Cultural Publishing Co.
Entezari, Ali (2016). “Prayer, Mosque, and Modernity: A Pathological Approach,” People and Culture Quarterly, 1(3), pp. 83–110.
—Ali Entezari
Editor-in-Chief