When Real People Are Turned into Bots

Statement by the Patriotic Doctors of Iran on the Iran coverage of German-language public broadcasters

The Patriotic Doctors of Iran strongly protest against the misleading portrayal of the Iranian protest movement and of supporters of Prince Reza Pahlavi in a video published by ZDFheute on 9 July 2026.

The problem with this video is not merely that it heavily abridges the facts. Through the selection, sequence and linguistic weighting of information, it creates an impression that partly contradicts the findings of the accompanying detailed ZDF article.

The written article explicitly states that the pro-Pahlavi movement online consists largely of real people. In addition, there are automated channels and a grey area of real accounts that coordinate their activities. At the same time, the article notes that the evidence of actual bot activity is considerably clearer for pro-regime comments. There, among other things, more than 190 identical comments within one minute, calls for harsh punishment of demonstrators and coordinated calls for violence against Jews were documented. (ZDFheute)

In the video, however, this crucial distinction is not adequately conveyed. The statement that the movement consists largely of real people is omitted entirely. Instead, “bot networks” are presented first, followed immediately by the claim that the comments found were “primarily” messages in favour of Prince Reza Pahlavi. The clearer pro-regime networks and Islamist calls for violence are then mentioned only as an additional finding.

This practically reverses the weighting of the written article.

An investigation that distinguishes between predominantly real people, partly coordinated users and individual automated structures becomes, in a short video, the suggestive message that visible support for Prince Reza Pahlavi is generated mainly by bots.

Coordinated political action, however, is not automatically artificial or fraudulent. People who raise the same demands after a massacre, use the same hashtags or jointly contact newsrooms are not bots for that reason. Political movements have always organised themselves, used common slogans and multiplied their messages. Journalistically responsible reporting must clearly distinguish between real activists, coordinated campaigns, automated accounts and fake identities.

The people really are on the streets

While supporters of Prince Reza Pahlavi are placed under blanket suspicion of being bots by such reports, the visible reality on the streets is often played down or only inadequately contextualised.

Since January 2026, Iranians in numerous cities across Europe, North America and other parts of the world have repeatedly demonstrated against the Islamic Republic. On 14 February alone, according to official figures from the Munich police, around 250,000 people gathered on the Theresienwiese. Participants had travelled from all over Europe. Countless pictures of Prince Reza Pahlavi could be seen at the rally, and his name was chanted repeatedly by the crowd. (Bavarian Police)

Further demonstrations with visible support for Prince Reza Pahlavi took place in Berlin, Düsseldorf, Paris, Stockholm, Amsterdam, Toronto and Los Angeles, among other places. (tagesschau.de)

One may hold different opinions about Iran’s future form of government. One may scrutinise Prince Reza Pahlavi critically. But one must not pretend that this social and political movement exists mainly in comment sections or is artificially produced by bots.

Hundreds of thousands of people on the streets are not bots.

The massacre must not become background noise

This distortion weighs particularly heavily in view of the crimes that preceded the digital campaigns.

Amnesty International describes January 2026 as the deadliest period of repression in Iran in decades and reports that thousands of people were killed, especially on 8 and 9 January. Human Rights Watch documented nationwide mass killings, shots to the heads and upper bodies of demonstrators and at least 400 visible bodies at a single location examined. (Amnesty International)

The ZDF article itself speaks of an estimated several tens of thousands killed. Because of the complete internet shutdown, the suppression of information and the intimidation of families, the final death toll still cannot be independently established. (ZDFheute)

Against this background, a fundamental question arises:

Why is energy spent on placing real supporters of the Iranian freedom movement under suspicion of being bots, while the scale of one of the worst massacres in recent Iranian history and the months-long visible mobilisation of the Iranian population and diaspora receive nowhere near the same media attention?

It would be wrong to claim that ARD, ZDF or other public broadcasters did not report on the demonstrations or the mass killings at all. They did report on them. Our criticism is directed at the weighting, the recurring framing and the asymmetric standards of evidence.

Support for Prince Reza Pahlavi is regularly played down with terms such as “Shah’s son”, “controversial”, “exile figure”, “unclear backing” or “fragmented opposition”. Even when demonstrators inside Iran chant his name, alternative explanations are sought as to why this supposedly need not mean actual support. (ZDFheute)

At the same time, statements that play down this support are often adopted without the same strict standard of evidence.

Not an isolated case

The current ZDF video is therefore not an isolated case. It fits into a recurring pattern:

Support for Prince Reza Pahlavi is doubted, psychologised or portrayed as a product of exile. His supporters are associated with bot networks and artificial amplification. Large demonstrations are mentioned, but their political significance is often played down. The regime’s crimes are reported, but do not always receive the visibility and consequences that correspond to their scale.

We do not claim to have knowledge of internal arrangements or secret instructions in newsrooms. Only individual journalists themselves can explain their political motivations.

The public effect of the recurring editorial decisions, however, is clear: the credibility and visibility of a significant current of the Iranian opposition are systematically weakened, while the actual crimes of the Islamic Republic and the real mobilisation against the regime fade into the background.

Our demands

The Patriotic Doctors of Iran call for:

• a public correction or supplement to the ZDF video that explicitly states that, according to ZDF’s own article, the pro-Pahlavi movement examined consists largely of real people;
• full disclosure of the methodology, in particular of the criteria used to distinguish real users, coordinated activists, automated accounts and fake accounts;
• a clear distinction between legitimate political mobilisation by real people and technically operated bot networks;
• balanced and proportionate reporting on the massacres of January 2026, the worldwide protests and the actual political significance of Prince Reza Pahlavi;
• the inclusion of diverse Iranian voices and experts, instead of having support for Prince Reza Pahlavi interpreted mainly by his political opponents.

Public broadcasters have the right and the duty to scrutinise every political figure critically. However, they do not have the right to reinterpret real people as instruments of digital manipulation through selective cuts and suggestive associations.

Anyone who sees hundreds of thousands of demonstrators and still talks mainly about bots is no longer just analysing reality – they are shifting it.

Patriotic Doctors of Iran