Political Media Literacy Survey

Age Range

Gender

Education Level

Connection to Iran

Current Residence

Living in Iran (never lived abroad) Living in Iran (previously lived abroad) Living outside Iran (diaspora) Living outside Iran (not Iranian)

Country of Current Residence

Years Outside Iran

1. Trust in Iran International

A breaking story appears on Iran International. You haven’t seen confirmation elsewhere yet. What do you do?

A. I don’t follow Iran International — I have no access, no interest, no familiarity with it, or I actively distrust it as a source.
B. I’m sceptical of Iran International’s editorial independence — I’d seek out the story from sources I consider more credible before engaging with it.
C. I take it seriously but wait for confirmation from at least one independent source before forming a view.
D. I’d share it cautiously — they have reporters on the ground and usually get the key facts right, even if they have a perspective.
E. I accept it fully — Iran International is the most reliable source on Iran.

2. Unverified Social Media Claims

A viral post claims Reza Pahlavi has secured major international support. It has 50,000 likes but no linked source. Your reaction?

A. Viral posts without sources are unreliable by definition — I’d ignore it or flag it as unverified.
B. It’s an interesting claim, but I need a verifiable source before I believe or share it.
C. I’d browse comments and reactions to gauge credibility, but I wouldn’t form an opinion without a real source.
D. The monarchist community wouldn’t rally behind something baseless — I’d lean towards believing it.
E. Viral engagement means it’s probably true — I’d share it with a hopeful comment.

3. Media Ecosystem — Manoto TV

How would you describe Manoto TV’s political coverage?

A. I don’t watch Manoto TV and have no basis to assess its political coverage.
B. It’s entertainment with a noticeable political slant — not a source I’d rely on for news.
C. It has good cultural programming but heavily one-sided political coverage — I watch critically when I watch at all.
D. Manoto is one of the more trustworthy Iranian media outlets, despite some editorial leanings.
E. Manoto is one of the most trustworthy Iranian media outlets available — I rely on it regularly.

4. Competing Military Claims

Western governments report a precision military strike with minimal casualties. Iranian sources report widespread civilian damage. How do you assess this?

A. I distrust both accounts equally — all governments weaponise information in conflict. I suspend judgement entirely until independent verification exists.
B. I consider both sceptically — governments on all sides distort information, and I withhold judgement until independent investigators verify the facts.
C. I lean towards Western accounts but acknowledge significant uncertainty — their media operates more freely, though no source is beyond scrutiny.
D. I lean towards Iranian and regional sources — Western governments have a record of minimising civilian casualties to justify military operations.
E. I accept Western military accounts at face value — free-press democracies have no reason to fabricate such claims.

5. The Pahlavi Era: Modernisation and Development

When someone says “life was better under the Shah,” how do you assess the claim in terms of economic development and modernisation? (If you are not Iranian, answer based on what you know of this period.)

A. Modernisation claims are overstated — development was concentrated in urban centres while rural communities and marginalised populations saw little benefit.
B. There was genuine economic growth and modernisation, but benefits were unevenly distributed between urban and rural areas, and between social classes.
C. On balance, Iran was developing rapidly — urban-rural gaps existed but were being addressed through land reform and infrastructure programs.
D. Iran was clearly modernising and prosperous — the economic gains were substantial and broadly shared.
E. The Pahlavi era was Iran’s economic golden age — anyone questioning the modernisation record has an ideological agenda.

5b. The Pahlavi Era: Human Rights and Governance

Continuing with the Pahlavi era — how do you assess the record on political freedoms and human rights?

A. The Pahlavi era included severe political repression, including SAVAK’s systematic targeting of dissidents — this cannot be separated from any assessment of the period.
B. Political repression was a serious and well-documented feature of the era — it must be weighed alongside any economic achievements.
C. There were human rights concerns, but they should be understood in the context of Cold War geopolitics and the challenges of rapid modernisation.
D. Human rights problems have been exaggerated by the revolution’s beneficiaries and those with an ideological opposition to the monarchy.
E. The Pahlavi government maintained order and stability — criticisms of its human rights record are largely politically motivated.

6. Substance vs. Charisma in Leadership

Figure A has millions of followers but no detailed policy platform. Figure B has published a comprehensive democratic transition plan but has a small following. Who should matter more?

A. Figure B without question — substance and policy detail are the only legitimate basis for leadership. Popularity without substance is dangerous.
B. Figure B — substance and policy detail matter more than popularity for genuine democratic leadership.
C. Both matter — visibility and substance are equally important in political movements.
D. Figure A — broad public support is essential for any real political change, even without detailed plans yet.
E. Figure A — someone with that much public support clearly has what it takes to lead.

7. Reza Pahlavi as Opposition Leader

How do you view Reza Pahlavi’s role in the Iranian opposition?

A. I’m not invested in the monarchist opposition — I either don’t follow it closely or don’t consider Reza Pahlavi particularly relevant to Iran’s democratic future.
B. I actively oppose his leadership role — hereditary political claims are incompatible with genuine democratic principles, regardless of his personal qualities.
C. He is one voice among many — his vision should be debated and scrutinised like anyone else’s, and he needs a concrete, inclusive policy platform to be taken seriously.
D. He is the most credible unifying figure — the opposition should rally around his leadership.
E. He is the rightful unifying leader — questioning him only fragments the movement and helps the regime.

8. Critique Within the Opposition

An anti-regime activist argues the monarchist opposition lacks a clear policy platform. How do you react?

A. This is a legitimate and important observation — movements that cannot tolerate self-criticism are not credible democratic alternatives.
B. Internal critique is healthy — movements strengthen when they address weaknesses honestly.
C. The timing is questionable — unity against the regime should take priority, though the point has some merit.
D. Internal critique is unhelpful right now — unity against the regime matters more than policy details.
E. Criticising the opposition from within does the regime’s work — such voices should be marginalised.

9. Foreign Military Intervention

In light of recent and ongoing military conflicts in the region, some voices — within the diaspora and beyond — call for foreign military action as the only way to remove the regime. What’s your view?

A. Military intervention would devastate civilians and create chaos — I oppose it categorically, regardless of who is in power. Recent conflicts in the region reinforce this position.
B. Foreign intervention rarely leads to democracy — I’m deeply sceptical based on historical precedent (Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan) and the devastating consequences of recent regional wars.
C. I’m conflicted — the regime is brutal, but military intervention carries enormous risks for ordinary Iranians and regional stability, as recent conflicts have demonstrated.
D. Targeted military strikes may be necessary if all diplomatic options are exhausted — the regime won’t leave willingly.
E. Full military intervention is necessary — nothing short of that will achieve regime change.

10. Sanctions & Civilian Suffering

Broad sanctions on Iran have contributed to medicine shortages and economic hardship. Some argue sanctions primarily target the regime; others say civilians bear the brunt. How do you assess this?

A. Sanctions that harm civilians are morally unacceptable — target regime officials and assets, not the population.
B. The humanitarian cost deeply concerns me — sanctions should be restructured to minimise civilian harm while maintaining pressure on the regime.
C. Sanctions are painful but necessary — the regime leaves few other options, though I wish civilians were not affected.
D. Sanctions primarily target the regime and its apparatus — civilian suffering is largely caused by the regime’s own mismanagement and diversion of resources.
E. If sanctions bring regime collapse, civilian suffering is a necessary price worth paying.

11. Coherence & Intellectual Consistency

Pick the statement that best matches your overall outlook:

A. I can oppose the regime, criticise the opposition, question Western policy, and support Iranian self-determination — all at once, whether or not I am Iranian. Holding multiple critiques simultaneously is intellectual honesty, not contradiction.
B. I try to evaluate each issue independently, though I acknowledge my own biases and blind spots — no one is fully immune to tribal thinking.
C. I believe in supporting the most viable opposition, even if imperfect — pragmatism is more useful than ideological purity when facing a regime like this.
D. The monarchist movement is the best realistic hope for Iran — people should rally behind it while maintaining constructive dialogue.
E. I broadly trust sources like Iran International and Manoto, and I believe the Pahlavi-led opposition offers the most credible path forward — while I remain open to constructive discussion, I find most criticisms of this position unpersuasive.