The White Line: The Intersection of Media and Power
The White Line: The Intersection of Media and Power
According to Iran Gate News Agency, revelations about the use of the ‘white line’ internet — a special, unrestricted, and unfiltered access amidst extensive limitations — by some government affiliates and a number of media activists have sparked a wave of serious questions about digital justice, governance transparency, and media independence, once again exposing the deep divide between the official internet and the real internet used by the people.
Implications of the White Line Internet for Government Affiliates and Journalists
The term ‘white line internet’ has entered the public and media lexicon in Iran in recent years. This phrase refers to special access to the internet that is unfiltered and completely free from restrictions. According to reports, this access is provided only to a specific group of government managers, government affiliates, and some media activists.
Raising this issue in the public sphere has led to important questions about digital justice, governance transparency, and media professional ethics. This report examines the implications of this unequal access structure.
What is the White Line Internet and How Did It Emerge?
Within the framework of extensive internet restrictions in Iran, ordinary users face a multitude of filters and limitations. Yet, in this context, there are reports that some individuals or institutions benefit from unfiltered internet access, known as the ‘white line’.
These lines can provide unfiltered access to blocked social networks, bypass restrictions and monitoring imposed on ordinary users, and are usually activated as an organizational, security, or managerial privilege.
This issue became more serious when signs of some social media accounts operating from within Iran, but using unfiltered internet, were observed. This was in contradiction to the public stances of these individuals regarding filtering and sparked many critical discussions.
Broad Implications for Rights, Trust, and Media Justice
Inequality in the Right to Access Information
The existence of two types of internet — one for the people and another for specific groups — represents a discriminatory structure. The right to freely access information is an equal right, but the white line turns this right into a privilege for a limited few, reinforcing the concept of a class-based internet.
Crisis of Public Trust in the Media
When some media activists or journalists use internet access that the public is deprived of, it naturally harms public trust. This situation raises questions about the independence, transparency, and impartiality of the media and can even place independent journalists who do not have access to such facilities in an unequal position.
Formation of Rent-Seeking, Influence, and a Hidden Market
Any limited and valuable privilege has the potential to create an unofficial market or networks of influence. The white line, by becoming an informational and organizational privilege, can pave the way for the formation of non-transparent networks, structural corruption, or security dependencies.
Why Do Some Journalists or Media Activists Use the White Line?
Some holders of these lines have stated that they need unfiltered internet for real-time and accurate news coverage. Others have claimed that the white line was activated without their request, and after becoming aware, they faced a complicated process to cancel it. On the other hand, many journalists and media experts emphasize that having such a privilege is inconsistent with the principles of professional independence and media ethics, and transparency in this area is necessary.
Long-term Consequences for Society and Media Structure
Weakening of Digital Justice
The existence of free internet for a specific few and restrictions for the majority undermines communication justice and turns access to information from a public right into a governmental privilege.
Reduction of Media Independence and Increase in Self-Censorship
A journalist who enjoys special privileges may act more cautiously on certain issues to maintain it, leading to self-censorship and a reduction in the media’s supervisory function.
Widening Gap Between Users and Media
As inequality increases, public distrust in the media grows. Audiences trust media when they feel everyone operates under equal conditions, not when some have access to internet that others are deprived of.
Solutions and Necessities
Transparency in Access Policies
It is essential for responsible institutions to clarify the list of special access holders, the criteria for granting it, and the related oversight mechanisms.
Transparency is the first step in rebuilding public trust.
Strengthening Professional Ethics in the Media
Media can voluntarily disclose whether they use such access or not. Drafting clear ethical principles regarding independence, avoidance of privilege-seeking, and maintaining distance from centers of power is also important.
Revisiting Filtering Policies
As long as public internet is restricted, the existence of special access will inevitably create rent-seeking.
The main solution is not to expand privileges but to restore free internet for all users.
The white line internet is an indication of a structural inequality in access to information.
This phenomenon has consequences beyond individual benefit and directly affects social justice, media independence, public trust, and the health of the information space.
A society where a specific group has access to free internet while the majority is deprived faces a media landscape that, instead of overseeing power, is influenced by it. The first step to rectify this situation is transparency, revisiting restrictive policies, and respecting the common right of all citizens to freely access information.
