Scott Lucas mit einer Analyse der Wahlen im Iran:
What we do know is that Iranian authorities went to great lengths to set up and control the show. State and semi-official media were on a tightly-defined script. Print and internet outlets proclaimed the queues of voters that had gathered from 4 a.m., while State TV went to polling stations in photogenic, well-known locations which, being photogenic and well-known, would have the required numbers of people to be televised.
Meanwhile, foreign journalists, far from reporting the show, became part of it. They were put on buses and taken to three showcase stations. Given the necessary interviews with voters and areas to be filmed (and, to add an element to the Iranian presentation, asked to comment on their experience of the great Election Day), the journalists were then bused back to hotels and told to stay inside.
As blunt as this propaganda instrument may appear, it had some success, aided and abetted by unlikely allies. The significance of former President Mohammad Khatami’s vote in the afternoon, caught and highlighted by State media, was not that it split those challenging the regime — those persisting in opposition have probably set Khatami aside. Instead, Khatami’s contribution was to give his political rivals and the Supreme Leader the recognition that they craved. This former President, who had previously complained about political prisoners and unfair elections, had now given the consent of his ballot. So how can anyone else dismiss the Iranian system?