My project focuses on the uses of the Internet in Iran. In particular, I will be examining how the Iranian public uses the Internet to express dissent or communicate about subjects that would violate the government's strict moral code. In order to focus the project more, I plan to focus on the incredibly-large Iranian blog community. In this annotated bibliography, I am hoping to discover how Iranians are using the internet, how blogs affect political discourse, and the particular methods used by the government to censor dissident speech.

OpenNet Initiative. Internet Filtering in Iran in 2004-2005: A Country Study. 9 Apr. 2009.

This repotr by the OpenNet Initiative is a thorough analysis of the internet filtering technology used in Iran. The study begins with a detailed description of the regulation and censorship restrictions in place both in print media and online. Then, the ONI attempts to study the Iranian filtering system. Through accessing remote computers behind Iran's firewalls, the ONI tested a list of websites to see whether they would be accessible or not. They try this technique on multiple computers and do it several different times in order to get an understanding of how consistently a certain website is blocked. Through analyzing the content of HTTP headers and web site loading time, researchers separated sites into four categories: unfiltered, possibly filtered through redirection, possibly filtered with a possible network connection error, and definitively filtered. In Iran, researchers concentrated on two ISPs: the private ParsOnline and the state-owned TCI. Results showed that only one-third of websites tested were blocked. Sites with pornographic material or that provided access to circumvention tools was filtered more successfully. Over the testing period of a year, filtering increased, particularly the filtering of blogs.

This study is perhaps the only empirical study that tests the regulation mechanism in Iran. By providing details of the filtering software and giving empirical data, readers get a clearer picture of the breadth of content that the Iranian government seeks to block. The filtering in Iran appears to be at a sophisticated level, moving beyond pornographic content that violates Islamic law and focusing on more personal forms of expression, such as blogs. One interesting result, however, is that non-Iran specific sites or non-Farsi content is harder for the filtering software to block. Still, the software in place results in an "overbreadth" of sites being blocked, censoring more forms of expression than needed/

Reporters Without Borders. Reporters sans frontières - Internet - Iran. 2004. 8 Apr. 2009.

This report by Reporters Without Borders (Reporters sans frontieres, or RSF) is part of a series of studies that examines obstacles to the flow of information over the internet. RSF's main concern with blogs is that they provide a more-objective source of news than the traditional Iranian media and that they allow for the organization of anti-government protests and demonstration. The RSF report also details the history of Internet regulation in the country, naming the bureaus responsible for controlling access and content on the internet. RSF reports cases of both reformists and conservative hard-liners using government in order to control the Internet. It then details the stories of three cyber-dissidents who have suffered harrassment at the hands of Iranian government officials.

The RSF report provides great background on internet regulation. While efforts at regulation were intensified after the report was published, RSF's concerns remain valid and many of the government policies remain the same. The report also situates the Iranian case in a larger context of internet censorship, which helps by providing opportunities for comparison and contrast. Furthermore, the report demonstrates that both factions of the Iranian government are taking steps to control the spread of information free from government control, perhaps presenting an argument to the idea that this new technology will inherently lead to democratization.

Van Buren, Chris. "Morozov: The Internet No Democratic Cure." Weblog post. Internet & Democracy Blog. 3 Apr. 2009. Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University. 7 Apr. 2009 .

In a post on The Berkman Center's Internet & Democracy Blog, Van Buren responds to Evgeny Morozov's piece in the Boston Review on cyber-utopianism. He agrees with Morozov's assessment that intellectuals tend to overestimate the Internet's power to democratize, pointing to the fact that access to the Internet has not removed human rights abusers from power. Van Buren is concerned that online dissidence has led to a wave of heavier repression and authoritarianism that opposes the democratization many intellectuals seek to promote. Yet while believing that intellectuals' idea of technological determinism is naive, he also sees a possiblity for the web’s influence on democratic reform to exist, but in a subtle and slow manner. In order to defend this point, Van Buren examines the Iranian case. The sheer number and variety of Iranian blogs mean that total censorship is impossible, and this promotes the free speech necessary for democratic change. By doing so, Van Buren argues, freer speech becomes more of a norm, and this slowly will defeat censorship. Van Buren also notes that the blogosphere gives a voice to moderates who would otherwise be excluded from the traditional media's emphasis on polarized viewpoints.

Van Buren examines the implicit effects of the existence of so many Iranian blogs. While there is a dispute as to whether or not all Iranian bloggers seek to effect political change, the fact remains that the forum to discuss virtually anything remains open and free to access. Van Buren is suggesting that a social norm will be transferred from the Internet to the real world. At the same time, however, Van Buren ignores the recent efforts of the Iranian government to curb blogging through legal consequences such as imprisonment.

Doostdar, Alireza. "'The Vulgar Spirit of Blogging': On Language, Culture, and Power in Persian Weblogestan." American Anthropologist 106.4 (2004): 651-662. 7 Apr. 2009 <http://www.doostdar.com/articles/vsob.pdf>.

Doostdar, a blogger himself (writing in both English and Persian), opens his article by providing background on the vulgarity debate (bahs-e ebtzeaal) among Iranian bloggers. The debate concerns whether it is important to observe standard orthography and grammar, and whether the use of colloquial Persian is appropriate. Doostdar argues that the debate sparks mostly from the increasing separation of blogging from "offline" media, as well as a political clash between intellectuals and a larger group of people who use the internet to be free from any kind of authority or "intellectual pretense." He also challenges the naive assumption that the emergence of the internet will necessarily result in social, cultural, or political revolution. Doostdar points to many orthographic traits of blog writing to hint at the oral tradition of blogs. He continues on this idea to explain the "dialogic" nature of blogs; that is, blogs engage other texts (and other blogs and bloggers) in a dialogue about material. Part of this dialogue is an established custom of reciprocity that obliges the host blogger to comment on a visiting blogger's recent entries (the practice is known as did-o baazdid: "seeing and re-seeing"). He then discusses the use of "vulgarity" as a form of resistance.

While Doostdar doesn't address the larger social context of Iranian blogging, choosing instead to focus on the blogging community, many of his arguments can be extended from a linguistic debate to a larger social issue. Most importantly, the questions of linguistic authority and legitimacy reflect the dissidents view that the Islamic Republic and its moral code are illegitimate. While Doostdar speaks of resistance in terms of social practices, that resistance can be extended to a more subversive resistance against political authority as well. It is interesting that Doostdar chooses to connect blogging to oral speech traditions; in many ways, Iranian blogs are the discussions that the Iranian public is unable to engage in. Doostdar also ignores the occasional need to misspell in order to avoid censorship or filtering. Still, by examining this debate among bloggers, Doostdar further examines the diversity of Iranian bloggers and demonstrates how impassioned they are about the issues. He also shows how established they are becoming as a community.