Iran International
A mocking segment aired on Iran’s state television about the bodies of protesters killed in January has sparked public outrage and renewed calls, including from Islamic Republic loyalists, for the removal of the head of the national broadcaster.
The public anger erupted after a host on Ofogh TV, a channel operated by Iran’s state broadcaster IRIB and affiliated to the Revolutionary Guards, referred to reports that thousands killed during the January 8–9 crackdown were transported in refrigerated trailers.
Addressing viewers, he asked sarcastically: “What type of refrigerator do you think the Islamic Republic keeps the bodies in?”
He then offered mock multiple-choice answers, including a “side-by-side fridge,” an “ice cream machine,” and a “supermarket freezer,” before adding a fourth option in a joking tone: “I’m an ice seller—don’t ruin my business.”
For many Iranians, the episode has become a stark illustration of a state media apparatus increasingly detached from the pain, grief, and anger of the society it claims to represent.
The remarks were widely shared on social media and immediately drew condemnation from across Iran’s political and social spectrum. Many users accused the program of dehumanizing the dead and humiliating grieving families.
Removal of network director
Following the backlash, Iran’s state broadcaster announced that Sadegh Yazdani, the director of Ofogh TV, had been removed for what it described as “disrespect toward those killed in the January protests.” The program was pulled from the air.
Mohammad Reza Javadi-Yeganeh, a sociology professor at the University of Tehran, wrote that dissatisfaction with IRIB was one of the rare issues uniting an otherwise deeply polarized society. “In this organization,” he wrote, “neither human life nor blood has sanctity.”
Journalist Sina Jahani went further, writing: “For even one frame of this broadcast, not only the director of Ofogh TV but the head of IRIB himself must be immediately dismissed.”
IRIB, headed by Peyman Jebelli, is widely viewed as dominated by hardliners linked to the ultra-conservative Paydari (Steadfastness) Party and figures close to Saeed Jalili, the supreme leader’s representative on the Supreme National Security Council.
Calls for the removal of IRIB chief
While the Ofogh TV director was removed, the fate of IRIB’s leadership remains entirely in the hands of Iran’s supreme leader, who appoints and oversees the broadcaster’s chief. Many users expressed skepticism that deeper accountability would follow.
Journalist Seyed Ali Pourtabatabaei argued that even Jebelli’s removal would be insufficient. “If any other media outlet had done this, it would have been immediately shut down and prosecuted,” he wrote, adding that he held little hope such action would actually occur in this case.
Another user wrote on X: ‘The person who must order change—the leader—apparently believes any change demanded by people or elites is weakness.’”
Conservative alarm over public anger
The mocking tone of the Ofogh TV host also angered conservative figures who warned that such rhetoric risks inflaming public rage and prolonging unrest.
Conservative journalist Ali Gholhaki wrote: “By mocking the martyrs and those killed on January 8 and 9, state TV is setting fire to the hearts of their parents. What exactly must happen in Iran for officials to decide to change course? Do we want to see people back on the streets again?”
Strategic analyst Hossein Ghatib stressed that such broadcasts are never accidental. “An item like this passes through multiple editorial and supervisory filters,” he wrote. “When you knowingly air it, the aim is not a mistake or bad taste—it is a direct assault on the dignity of thousands of grieving families. This is not stupidity or moral collapse; it is betrayal.”
Ghatib compared the outrage to a pivotal media miscalculation before Iran’s 1979 revolution, when an article attacking Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini was published in the newspaper Ettela’at. Historians widely regard that piece as a strategic error that ignited mass protests and helped accelerate the fall of the monarchy.
“This program follows the same dangerous logic: provoking public sentiment,” Ghatib wrote. “Why deliberately mess with collective memory and pain?”
A crisis of trust
The incident has reignited long-standing criticism of IRIB, whose head is appointed and overseen directly by the supreme leader and which receives substantial public funding. Despite this, official surveys show that large segments of the population distrust its news coverage, relying instead on foreign-based Persian-language media.
Critics say IRIB routinely insults and discredits opponents, airs coerced confessions, and broadcasts allegations of foreign ties against dissenters. Recent attempts by the broadcaster to discredit a widely shared video showing a father searching for his son’s body among hundreds of victims instead backfired, further eroding its credibility.
Tehran’s unveiling of a towering statue depicting the Roman Emperor Valerian kneeling before pre-Islamic Persian King Shapur I has renewed criticism of the Islamic Republic’s appeal to nationalist sentiment following the June war with Israel.
For over forty years, the theocracy purged ancient Persian history from schoolbooks, replacing it with post-Islamic narratives. But after the 12-day conflict with Israel, officials have turned to the distant pre-Islamic past to rally a divided society.
From murals of ancient kings and soldiers to patriotic songs added to Shi’ite mourning ceremonies performed before Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, Tehran now embraces imagery once deemed heretical by its own revolutionary ethos.
'Kneel before Iran' campaign
Tehran’s Revolution (Enghelab) Square was the scene of an unusual spectacle on Friday as officials unveiled a massive bronze statue depicting Roman Emperor Valerian kneeling in submission before Sassanid King Shapur I, commemorating Iran’s victory at the Battle of Edessa (260 AD).
The event was held under the slogan “Kneel before Iran,” part of what authorities describe as a campaign to project “national unity and historical pride” following the June war with Israel.
Tehran Mayor Alireza Zakani, a staunch ultraconservative, said on X: “Enmity with Great Iran can only end in kneeling before this historic nation.”
Municipal official Davood Goodarzi said the installation would be accompanied by visual displays depicting “other victories of Iranians over foreign aggressors,” including the defeat of British forces by local commander Rais-Ali Delvari, Mirza Kuchak Khan’s resistance against Russian troops, and Surena’s triumph over Rome at the Battle of Carrhae in 53 BCE.
The goal, Goodarzi said, is “strengthening concepts such as national dignity, social unity, and Iranian identity.”
The statue, he said, would remain temporarily at Revolution Square before being moved to a city gateway “where it will stand as the first emblem of Iran before diplomats and foreign visitors.”
Unveiled women were allowed to attend the unveiling ceremony—an uncommon scene at events organized by Tehran’s ultra-hardline municipality.
The turn to the pre-Islamic past
The sharp reversal also recalls remarks once made by Khamenei. In a 2011 speech, he asserted that “all the great military victories of this nation came after Islam,” dismissing pre-Islamic accounts as “things that are not documented.”
In 1987, he had said that prophets triumphed over kings such as Cyrus and that “nothing remains of these monarchs in history but names remembered with derision.”
Nevertheless, pro-government social media accounts have now gone so far as to circulate posters equating Khamenei himself with Shapur, showing him standing with a staff as Benjamin Netanyahu and Donald Trump kneel before him. The caption reads: “You will kneel before Iran.”
'Hypocrisy'
Pro-government figures have hailed the move as a patriotic success. Conservative political reporter Hossein Saremi posted: “Today’s grand Iranian gathering showed that people and the state share one essence: Iran itself. Nothing can take our homeland away.”
Others, however, called the spectacle “hypocrisy.” Journalist Gholamhossein Pashaei wrote on X: “Every year you close Pasargadae to stop people from celebrating Cyrus Day, yet you unveil Shapur’s statue in Enghelab Square with drums and fireworks during Fatimiyya (mourning period)!”
Dissident commentator Hamid Asafi called the ceremony “a perfect snapshot of the Islamic Republic’s contradictions.”
On Telegram he wrote: “A week ago they closed Cyrus’s tomb out of fear of the crowds, and now they glorify Shapur in the same breath. The Islamic Republic fears living history but poses for selfies with its corpse.”
He added: “They know people no longer respond to rosaries and sermons. That’s why they’ve brought history back to the stage—in a controlled costume. If they can’t erase the past, they’ll try to own it.”
The irony deepened as UNESCO formally recognized Cyrus’s Charter as one of the earliest human-rights documents.
President Masoud Pezeshkian wrote on X: “Iran, the cradle of dialogue, justice, and coexistence, can still inspire peace today.”
Users swiftly replied, questioning how such pride could coexist with a government that blocks access to Cyrus’s tomb each year to those wishing to visit it on his birthday.
