Iran And The Shah What Really Happened Analysis

The article “Iran and the Shah: What Really Happened” by James Perloff is biased as the article lacks coverage of the other side and how discontent they were. The author identifies the Shah to be a long-term ally of the United States explaining that while the Shah was in power, he made his country have a well established economic growth even though not everyone seemed to enjoy the growth, and he made women have the equal amount of rights as male citizens of Iran. However, he doesn’t include the fact that it pissed off many top Shia religion members such as Ruhollah Khomeini, which thought that fundamentalism was the best for the country. The language Perloff uses in the article is very favorable to the Shah as Perloff makes the Shah seen as a great influential leader who had great ideas for Iran to become a …show more content…
This article was written to convince the readers that the Shah wasn’t that bad after all. The article was written about 30 years after the conflict occurred, in the United States. The author published his article on the website “The New American” which focuses on foreign and local conflicts, where news are written by a bunch of different authors across the United States. According to the article “Iran and the Shah: What Really Happened” by James Perloff it states “Two major events propelled the revolution in Iran. On the afternoon of August 19, 1978, a deliberate fire gutted the Rex Cinema in Abadan, killing 477 people, including many children with their mothers. Blocked exits prevented escape. The police learned that the fire was caused by Ruhollah Khomeini supporters, who fled to Iraq, where the ayatollah was in exile. But the international press blamed the fire on the Shah and his "dreaded SAVAK."