The #MeToo movement has been a critical and necessary rebuttal to the decades of harassment, mistreatment and sexual attacks that women all over the world and across industries have endured. The stories and experiences of these women are important and need to be heard and understood so that they drive the necessary change in policies, accountability and societal norms to ensure a more equitable world.
The New York Times articles by Farnaz Fasihi appear to serve the interests of #MeToo but in reality cast dispersions on it. By publishing an article that she knew was inaccurate, by refusing to accurately quote her interviewees and by employing a source with the stated mission of destroying Mr. Aghdashloo (and who himself has actually been accused of rape), Farnaz Fassihi has perverted the focus of her article in efforts of raising her profile.
Such an extensive attack on an individual like Aydin Aghdashloo, if it were relating to someone in the country of Ms. Fassihi’s residence in the United States, would likely take months, and with strong fact-checking requirements. However, this article was produced in a matter of weeks, by a journalist with no access to the country in question, and the weakness and anonymity of her sources were justified by Mr. Aghdashloo’s non-existent ties to the regime.
Photo sourced from PBS.org
Mr. Aghdashloo provided pages of context to her questions related to this article, never once shying away from the issue. But the refusal to investigate and report this issue with the nuance and accuracy it necessitated has turned an attempt to focus on an important issue into a dangerous attack and hit-job on a family.
An Inherited Story of Misinformation
Per her own comments on the story, Farnaz Fassihi has confirmed that she learned of some of the supposed allegations against Mr. Aghdashloo from a social media post from Afshin Parvaresh, who is a known conspiracy theorist and has accused dozens of cultural figures of a myriad of baseless claims. The attacks from Parvaresh have been relentless towards Mr. Aghdashloo and have been persistent for more than five years. These attacks have not only be targeted to Mr. Aghdashloo, but many others in the Iranian arts scene.
After reading his post, Farnaz Fassihi admits that she retweeted the defaming information. Immediately after the sharing of Pavaresh’s post, the Aghdashloo family reached out to Farnaz Fassihi to correct the misstatements and inform her of Pavaresh’s documented history as a conspiracy theorist. It was at this time that Farnaz Fassihi began to double down on her story and realized a need to preserve her credibility by proving the tweet she shared from Pavaresh was not an error in her journalistic decision making.
As such, Faranaz Fassihi primilary built her stories on the lies and allegations of man who have been charged with defamation four times and has been accused of rape. Not coincidentally, in her resulting story Farnaz Fassihi mirrors the same language used in Pavaresh’s post and he served as a source of connection to the alleged victims. There is no story without Parvaresh and there is no truth in his lies, despite Farnaz Fassihi’s attempt to give them credence.
An Illusion of Power
As outlined above in the section “About the Allegations,” none of the accusations amount to rape or assault. However, to paint the picture that Mr. Aghdashloo is a predator with unlimited ability to attack as he desired, Farnaz Fassihi purposely fabricated a level of power that Mr. Aghdashloo never held.
Her claims that he is protected by the government are false at best, or at worse, serve the motives of the government that has continuously attacked him. Mr. Aghdashloo has been repeatedly interrogated by the regime. In state-controlled newspapers, he has been maligned and criticized. In fact, the government successfully sued a news organization for making positive comments about him and his daughter is currently exiled from Iran.
Creating this illusion of non-existent power fed Farnaz Fassihi’s self-serving narrative about Mr. Aghdashloo. While the lure of being the reporter “who broke the #MeToo movement story in Iran” is certainly a compelling motive, it should have never overshadowed her journalistic integrity or responsibility to the countless women who have made their voices heard in the movement.
Driving Fear Through Extreme Exaggeration
To further elevate the importance of her reporting, Farnaz Fassihi drew in the spektor of Harvey Weinstein. In her article, she claims that 19 people described Mr. Aghdashloo as the “Harvey Weinstein of Iran.”
Farnaz Fassihi would have readers believe that 19 people made this remark, unprompted or encouraged. Given that Mr. Aghdashloo has never been arrested nor accused of rape, it is highly unlikely he was independently described 19 times as an Iranian Weinstein. However, by invoking the image of a proven and convicted rapist, Farnaz Fassihi sought to manipulate readers and amplify her own importance.
Construction of a Defaming Article Based on Falsehoods
Given the less than professional way that facts and sources were handled in The New York Times article, Farnaz Fassihi wrote the article in such a way as to obscure the flimsiness of the reporting while manipulating the reader into thinking the worst of Mr. Aghdashloo.
- First , the article introduces Mr. Aghdashloo through the claim that 13 people have accused him of sexual misconduct. The specifics of the misconduct are not defined and are not described as rape or assault.
- But the highest-profile person to face such allegations so far is a nearly 80-year-old, internationally acclaimed artist with ties to the ruling elite. Thirteen women, in interviews with The New York Times, accused the artist, Aydin Aghdashloo, of sexual misconduct over a 30-year span. Most are former students, and some are journalists who have reported on art and culture.
- Next, the outlet significantly reduces the statement Mr. Aghdashloo provided, which shared deeper insight on the issue. The outlet was specifically asked to use the full statement in publication.
- Mr. Aghdashloo declined requests for an interview but strenuously denied wrongdoing, and according to his lawyer has already taken legal action against one accuser. In a written statement provided to The Times, Mr. Aghdashloo described himself as an independent artist whose career was built on creative achievement. “The allegations of sexual abuse against me are full of significant inaccuracies, mischaracterizations and fabrications,” he wrote. “To be clear, I have always sought to treat people with respect and dignity and I have never abused, assaulted nor taken advantage of anyone.” Still, he wrote, “I am not a perfect man,” and that if his behavior had offended or distressed anyone, “I deeply apologize.”
- Following this, the article notes three other men in Iran who have been accused of sexual assault and liken Mr. Aghdashloo to Harvey Weinstein. By listing stories of other accused and convicted abusers, Farnaz Fasihi is suggesting that Mr. Aghdashloo is just like these men — which is far from the truth.
- How the authorities treat the perpetrators and victims of sexual misconduct has become a test of the #MeToo movement’s durability in Iran, a country of more than 80 million. Compared with the impact in the United States after the accusations against Harvey Weinstein, the imprisoned Hollywood mogul, the fallout in Iran is only beginning to unfold. But there are signs that the male-controlled power structure in Iran has started to respond to accusations like those made against Mr. Aghdashloo.
- Tehran’s police chief announced on Oct. 12 that the bookstore owner, Keyvan Emamverdi, had confessed to raping 300 women, after 30 took the brave step of filing legal complaints. The police said he would be charged with “corruption on earth,” a capital offense.The e-commerce company Digikala opened an investigation into its former manager and apologized to female employees. Iran’s sociology union expelled the accused professor and called for a zero-tolerance policy at universities. A painting by Mr. Aghdashloo was pulled from the cover of a famous literary collection, and at least three women have said they are considering legal action against him.
- The article then goes on to claim that 45 people confirmed that his behavior was known among art circles. It is not clear if these 45 people claim to have seen misconduct or heard of it through rumors. The behavior is not defined but given the preceding overview of predators, readers are left to assume it was abusive behavior.
- In telephone interviews, 45 people — including former students, a longtime teaching assistant, art gallery owners, actresses, a Tehran art agent and journalists covering art and culture in Iran — all said Mr. Aghdashloo’s behavior toward young female students had been known in Iran’s art circles
- Following the stories of accusers, which are serious and worthy of investigation but do not amount to assault or rape, Farnaz Fassihi makes claims of Mr. Aghdashloo’s government connections, despite being provided numerous examples of attacks and interrogations from the regime. By overblowing his cultural consultation and not acknowledging the pervasiveness of the regime in all aspects of Iranian society, Farnaz Fassihi purposely gives the appearance that Mr. Aghdashloo is protected from bad behavior. However, in reality, given the regime’s feelings of Mr. Aghdashloo, these accusations are literally dangerous to his wellbeing.
- Mr. Aghdashloo’s influence in Iran’s art world seemed to only grow after the revolution. He often boasted about connections to government and religious officials and said he was invulnerable because of them, former students and the teaching assistant said — a description he rejected in his statement to the Times.