Jason Rezaian is a writer for the Washington Post’s “Global Opinions” section. He previously served as the Post’s Tehran Bureau Chief from 2012-2016. While in this position, Rezaian was unjustly imprisoned by Iranian authorities for 544 days from July 2014 to January 2016. Rezaian joined the Harvard Institute of Politics as a fellow in Spring 2023, leading a study group on international journalism.
The following interview has been edited for length and clarity.
Harvard Political Review: How has your journalism, the way you conduct your work, changed as a result of your experience being imprisoned in Iran?
Jason Rezaian: The first and most obvious change is that I haven’t been able to cover Iran from Iran anymore. And, I had been one of these people who thought to myself, “If I can’t be here on the ground, I don’t really feel comfortable writing about it.” Now that I’ve been forced into that situation of having to choose whether I should continue writing or not, I’ve taken what would have been an opposite stance for me on that. Because it’s either contribute to the conversation, or don’t. And the reason that I continue to do it is because so few reporters have actually been able to travel to Iran in recent years. Iran doesn’t let reporters in, and I still have a strong network of people there. But the vetting process of your reporting has to be very complete and thorough if you’re relying on people to be your eyes and ears. So that’s one part of it.
Second, I think, you know, I’m an opinions journalist. You know, I used to be a correspondent, a reporter, and my experiences of being imprisoned in Iran have informed my ability to write about repression in Iran, about hostage taking by authoritarian states, and the many and growing number of threats to journalists. And unfortunately, journalists in all countries, including democracies. So yeah, I mean, I took a pretty bad situation and have used it to forward the things that I can write about.
HPR: And talking about journalists, even in democracies, being targeted in recent years, journalists have been increasingly targeted here at home, in the United States. How do you think the world is viewing these attacks?
JR: It’s a really good question, and an important one that we have to think about because we are constantly telling other countries that they need to do better on so many issues. Press freedom is just one of them.
We had the case in 2018 of an armed person going into a newsroom in Annapolis, Maryland, just a few miles from my newsroom in Washington, DC, and killing several people and injuring many others because he was upset about the way that they covered him. And in another instance, more recently, just last year in Las Vegas, a reporter was murdered by someone he had covered critically.
This sort of thing has been happening in Mexico, in India, Pakistan, which I guess we would guess, kind of, democracies that are…on the case of India, it’s the world’s greatest democracy, right? It’s not supposed to happen in any country, specifically not in democracies. So I think the rest of the world looks at us and says, ‘Okay, you’re dealing with some of the same problems that we are now.’
But, I would say that it gives the US even more reason to focus on our own issues at home in terms of protecting free expression and trying to root out the causes of why people feel comfortable taking out this kind of excessive abuse on journalists. And I think part of the answer to that question is, we’ve gotten so comfortable online and on social media really dehumanizing journalists, right?
A lot of people, a lot of groups, get dehumanized online, and it’s not okay. But with journalists in particular, we see that happening more and more. So you know, when a leader, whether it’s president of the United States or, you know, unelected supreme leader in another country, calling journalists enemies of the state and the people, that kind of rhetoric takes hold, and we’re seeing the results: more journalists being killed last year than in previous years and more in jail around the world, for literally doing the job of informing the public about the truth.
HPR: Going back to social media, as you mentioned, technology and social media have become increasingly important in journalism today. How do you believe that digital platforms have particularly impacted the way journalists do their jobs, and what challenges, in addition to, you know, vitriol spewed online, as well as opportunities do you think journalists have with social media?
JR: I think social media and other forms of technological advancements have made it possible to create some of the best journalism that’s ever been created. What I do is traditionally write a column of 800 words to make an argument. Now we can fortify those arguments with data visualizations, with forensically analyzed videos of events that oftentimes tell a very different story than ones that people in power want told. So, I think we’re dealing with more resources than ever before, which has maybe brought us into a golden age of journalism.
What saddens me though, is that I think our work is maybe less effective than it’s ever been. And you won’t hear a lot of newsroom leaders or people in press freedom, organizations that I work with very closely, feel comfortable saying that out loud, but it’s the truth. And it’s not because people don’t subscribe, it’s not because people “don’t pay attention.” It’s happening because people subscribe and pay attention to the things that tell them what they want to hear. And I think that’s a problem that has been perpetuated and abetted by big corporations.
But ultimately, it’s like giving up cigarettes: you have to make the decision yourself. We can blame big companies for all of our problems as much as we want, but a part of it is being informed and responsible consumers of information.
There are things that we can do to help people become more media literate. But ultimately, people need to want to have to do that. I can’t create that desire. These are choices that people have to make and, I think, unfortunately, there’s been such a decline in the value of education and that hasn’t helped the prospects.
HPR: Going back to your own work, in your view, what is the role of opinion journalism in today’s world. What power do you feel that opinion journalism has?
JR: So much. There’s so many opinions out there, right? And a lot of them are being voiced by people who may or may not have authority in the things that they are talking about. And I’m not going to come here and say that everybody needs to have lived experience in the things that they write about, but it certainly helps. And the role of opinion journalism in a moment where everything is, you know, all of our conversations are so divisive. It’s hard to quantify but with the right opinion piece that captures something, an idea or a trend that isn’t obvious to the naked eye or a personal story that illuminates an issue, that kind of journalism can move mountains. So, you know, when I write about something like hostage taking, or the murder of a journalist, or the effect that economic sanctions have on a country, I’m always looking for a character, because they’re out there. And I think if you can put your reader in the shoes of a person and build an argument around that experience, what we do can be incredibly impactful, and can even change policy.
HPR: The ongoing protests in Iran have shown us a lot of activism from a lot of everyday people. As a journalist and as an Iranian-American, what do you see the relationship between journalism and activism being, and how do you navigate any potential overlaps or conflicts between the two things?
JR: There should be a clear divide. But in a country like Iran, journalism is seen by many as one of two things: either activism, or the flip side, which is propaganda. And so a big part of the discussions that I have with Iranian journalists who have left Iran and are now trying to work here is that the values and the expectations of your work are different.
Your job is to inform, right? And it may be to sway opinions, and change hearts and minds, but it’s certainly not to do that by perpetuating falsehoods, which is something that I’ve seen, unfortunately, from some activists who I think have pretty good intentions. And it spills over into their journalism.
I think that people just need to be upfront about what it is that they’re doing. And oftentimes when I’ve called out people for doing this, their response is, ‘well, the other side does it too.’ That’s not going to help us gain more trust from readers. So there’s no real easy answer to that. And I find myself in my columns when it comes to Iran, trying more and more to offer a sense of an experience.
When you’re talking about a country of 85 million people of different ethnicities, different languages, different faiths, and then a huge divide between the experience of Iranian men and Iranian women — I’m not equipped to do that. No human is equipped to do that.
But what I can do is say, ‘here’s a representation of a handful of things that people are concerned about. And here are ways that American policymakers might approach those challenges.’ And in small ways, I think I’ve been pretty effective at doing that. I’ve been more effective than I would have been if I just said, ‘this is what all Iranian people want, and this is what the US government should do about it.’ Nobody listens to that.
HPR: Last question: What’s something you wish I’d asked you, but didn’t?
JR: I’ve been asked that question a lot over the last couple of years and I’ve always just thought to myself, “Well, I don’t know. I don’t know what she has in mind that she wants to write about.” I guess one question for your audience that might be worth asking and answering is, ‘Why should I consider a career in journalism? If it’s such a toxic and dangerous endeavor, why would I put myself in that position?”
And I guess the answer is going to be personal to every single journalist, and it might change over the course of your career.
When I was first starting out, it was a combination of two things: I loved to travel and wanted to see the world, and I recognized, you know, late in my college years, that I actually enjoyed sitting down and something. So you know, “What’s the thing that I can do to do those two things?” And the first time I got paid to write something, I think I got a check for 125 bucks. You know, 125 bucks is not a lot of money now and it wasn’t a lot of money back then.
But it was thrilling. And I try and bottle up and save some of that, that thrill, still. But now it’s more, it’s different. Now it’s, I’ve invested a lot of my life, my time and energy, my freedom, and I wasn’t gonna let people take that away from me. I’m not sure what else I could do, and now at this stage of the game, whatever ability to influence conversations, big important conversations that I have, the best way for me is through the written word. And I got a pretty darn good outlet to do that.
And so, you know, it’s a double edged sword. I don’t know if it was Spider-Man’s uncle or someone else who said it, but it’s privilege and a responsibility, right? And I take both pretty darn seriously.
