From its inception, BIBA’s pre-eminent motif has been the celebration of the success of British-Iranian businessmen and women. It is refreshing to see British-Iranians who have received homage by way of scientific, commerce-based and industrial achievements.

Why BIBA on TV Programs?

Communication is undoubtedly pivotal in gaining success in BIBA’s endeavour as aneducator, a business association and promoter of British-Iranians.

BIBA’s prime form of communication was that of business meetings. With time however, we have discovered other various means of delivering our messages for example: Publications, newspapers, and the Internet & emails. In general it is very difficult to determine which method has been the most effective for BIBA. Most recently we have considered the media of “Television”.

Why IRAN TV (ITV) of California?

Iran TV (ITV) has been in operation for the previous 23 years in California. Since three years ago ITV has been broadcasting internationally covering North America, Europe and the Middle East. According to some surveys, ITV is the most successfully run American-Iranian television.

When Mehdi Norowzian's film, Killing Joe (UK Production), was nominated for an Oscar in March 2000, we utilised the occasion to promote BIBA in California and the response was very positive. Ever since we have become particularly interested in developing BIBA's ties with the US business community. More than one million American-Iranians live in the USA, most of whom are engaged in a number of professions such as finance, IT, high technology, media, fashion, engineering, construction, etc. Our conclusion is that an enormous opportunity exists for British-Iranians to link with American-Iranians, where both have very successful business communities in their respective countries.

Further Details:

UK Viewers may watch via;
Satellite : Telestar 12 5Degrees West
Frequency : 12594
Symbol Rate : 31829
Polarisation : Horizontal
FEC : 3/4

Amir's enthusiasm for the media all started whilst at Nottingham University in October 1987, when he won the David Harlech Democracy Prize for screen writing a play he had written which was then sponsored by Channel 4(UK).

After a year working in journalism in Fleet Street, London and another year at Cambridge University to complete a Masters Degree in International
Relations he became a researcher for an independent television company. He is currently making an art series called 'Arena' about awards for BBC2, which is due to be completed at the end of March 2001.

Amir Amirani 33-year-old has been fascinated with the world of film-making ever since his older brothers started a career in film-making. And today they are both running "The Amirani Films Company" in London.

Amir's excitement by ideas from all sorts of different areas of life and enjoyment in meeting people led him to make the radio programme 'Autonomy' about Britain's first Internet billionaire Mike Lynch which was documented for Radio Four. Mike Lynchs achievements were so impressive that a second radio programme 'Who needs MBA?' was made out of the interview with him. The 30-minutes programme focused on business and the issues concerning weather a MBA's is helpful or necessary. Amir's radio programmes were short lived, he then went on to what he enjoys most television documentaries.

His most recent documentary film 'Bands Apart' was made for BBC2 in October 2000. It is a documentary following the journey of Courtney Pine to South Africa to discover how Apartheid used radio as propaganda, and to find the black musicians who survived it. The organisation procedure of the documentary took twelve weeks, he said- ''I researched it as much as I could for two weeks and spent two weeks in South Africa and filmed for a further two weeks and finally the editing took six weeks.''

Amir enjoys the intense involvement and complication aspect of television more than radio because he says; ''radio cannot deal with pictures, just sound, and is so much easier and quicker …television deals with images and is much more satisfying. You can go out and make a radio programme on your own, but you can't with television. Television costs a lot more. It's much harder and the scope is greater'

Amir's goal for the future is to keep on producing documentaries he is also interested in drama. But in the long run his ultimate goal is to make movies. They are all different aspects of film making so he will carry on in this field as long as he can and enjoys it.

Ms Ziba Mirhosseini made a controversial film about divorce in Iran that was shown on Channel 4 last summer. The film aroused mixed feelings about its purpose. Divorce in general is an ugly subject in any community, but has an added dimension in a country that is suffering from economic and social hardship. We spoke to Ms Mirhosseini about her motivation in making this film, and whether it was right to prosper from other people's misery.

(BIBN) What was your motivation in making this film?

(ZM) I have been working on Islamic family laws since the early 1980's. I researched family courts in Iran and in Morocco, and I have written a book called "Marriage on trial", a study of Islamic family law. In that book I looked at Islamic family law and its interpretation, and what it really means to be married and divorced under Islamic law. I took an anthropological, and in a way unorthodox approach by focusing on court cases in Iran and Morroco. The book was published in 1993. In March 1996, Kim Munjinato, an award-winning British film-maker, and I were introduced. For a long time she had wanted to make a film in Iran. I gave her a copy of my book and she showed interest in making a film together. That is how I got involved. We soon discovered that we had an intense dissatisfaction with the way that the media deals with the whole issue of Iranian women and Islam.

Kim was particularly intrigued by the contrast between documentaries made by foreign and British film-makers, and those that come out of Iran. These show Iran as a fanatic nation, whereas films by Kiarostami for example present a different picture of Iran. If you see these two images together you will not think that they are about the same people. She was interested in finding out for herself.

It took a long time, and a change of government in Iran, before we were given access to make the film. We wanted to make a film about ordinary people and everyday life. But at the same time we wanted to focus on stories and develop characters. We wanted to make a film without any pre-planned notion and not requiring a script. A documentary about what we observe, at the same time enabling the people in the film to tell their own story, and to use the medium of documentary cinema to create their own narrative. The idea was to concentrate on everyday life and get away from ideologies.

The work I had done was aimed mostly at people who are aware of cultural nuances. Making the film was an opportunity for me to reach the public; ordinary people. We wanted to make a film that an ordinary Westerner could relate to on personal and emotional levels. Clearly divorce and break-up of marital relationships is a subject that almost everybody can relate to. It is a universal issue. There is always pain involved, but also an element of comedy. So far, in the media, the focus has always been put on the differences in cultures, and if the focus is shifted onto common humanity, then perhaps you can bring another dimension to the image of Iranian women in Islam. This is an important issue for me.

(BIBN) Some people have referred to your film as a horror movie because it dwells on a very sad and distasteful issue. Do you think that it was right of you to make the film?

(ZM) Firstly, who is to say that films always have to made about subjects which are sweet or nice? The rule of documentary is to be critical. Its role is to observe the problematic areas of society. So it is not a horror movie, it is about reality. Those who call it a horror movie do so through their own fear of divorce. But divorce is really only one phase of marriage. Secondly, the response from Iranians in Iran and Iranians outside Iran has been completely different, and I think it goes back to the relationship Iranians in exile have with their own culture, and with the culture of the host country in which they live. Most of the Iranians outside Iran treat their culture with contempt. They have an image of themselves as Westernised and prosperous, and they do not want to see another image of their country. Whereas the people who live in Iran view this as their real life, and I have immense respect for them. These are women with dignity and integrity who are fighting for their rights. One has only to read reviews in this country of the film to see how this has been recognised by Western audiences. They really related to and came to respect these women. Actually, they have not been too critical of the system of justice. Until 30 or 40 years ago, the system of divorce in this country was the same. The issues of support for single mothers and divorced women are really very modern issues, and in Iran marriage and divorce has a whole different dimension. We must not forget, also, that we are a developing country, and these issues take a different dimension. The film is a fun one, a tragic one maybe, but not a horror.

(BIBN) Previously you referred to it as a cult movie. You could also call Psycho or Natural Born Killers a cult movie. So do you believe that what you have done is just to highlight the violence in Iranian society, and is it morally right to make money out of it?

(ZM) I think that Psycho is a great movie and it is a real classic. It is ridiculous to compare Psycho with my film as it is not full of violence. As for making money out of it, we did not make money. The film was commissioned by Channel 4 and we were paid wages for making it. We have given free access to whoever wants to show the film, and we have not got the television rights as it was not commissioned by us. The film is not meant to portray the misery of others, but rather the courage of a people. Every story has two sides. One should not see the misery alone. These are women who are going through a difficult time in their lives. All of them chose to be in this film, and they were even shown the film upon completion. We were very honest with everyone who was involved. Many people changed their minds about refusing to be in the film and joined in the project later, as was the case with Mariam, our final character. She basically wanted her voice to be heard. I remember when we met her we wanted her to be in the film very badly because of the strength and dynamism of her character, and also because her case was a custody case, and not many get to the courts because of the rigidity of the law. As I am very knowledgeable about legal matters I ended up as a consultant to most of the women. Out of court times we sometimes used to chat about what was going on, and I remember saying to Mariam that if we did not speak up then nobody was going to give women their rights. Rights are something to be fought for. Obviously Maryam thought about this, because the following day she agreed to be in the film. So all of the women that are in the film saw us as allies, and they confided in us. One of the major problems that we faced before making this film was that I knew that there are always two levels to every dispute. One is the legal aspects, and the other is the real cause of marital breakdown, but since that is not recognised by the law as a valid reason, women tend not to talk about it. But when women talk to the camera they confide in it and use it to tell their story. One of the women in our film, Massey, who talked about her husband's sexual problems, was amongst the people who did not want the film to be shown in Iran, and we would never show it in Iran without their full consent. After seeing the film she contacted me saying that she would like it to be shown in Iran after all, because she thinks that it is important that people should speak out.

(BIBN) And will you ask the ex-husband's permission?

(ZM) If we show it in Iran we will hide his identity, but by bringing a case to court you have made it public. The ethical issue was something that was always on my mind, but at the end of the day you must make a decision. My priority is fighting for truth and for women's rights. I am a feminist. Why should I be ashamed of criticising my society? If I were a Western feminist my right to criticise my society would have been recognised. But as an Iranian I am criticised for making a horror movie because it is an unpleasant topic. It is the realities of life. So many Iranian women stay in unhappy marriages because of differing attitudes.

(BIBN) But the question is that is it right to make money out misery and violence?

(ZM) If one wants to expose faults, then one is sometimes forced to expose these issues. I was in Germany for a human rights conference and a film festival in which our film was shown. The film that won the award was about a child in Cambodia who lost her legs through walking over a mine. If it is to increase awareness then it is right. You cannot say that making a film about divorce is wrong because it is an unpleasant subject. It all depends on how and why the film is made. Making money is not my incentive.


Mother & Child

An asylum-seeker arrives at Dover: ''Why are you here?'' asks the customs officer. ''My house was bombed,'' comes the reply. ''No, why are you really here?'' persists the bloke in uniform. The asylum-seeker shrugs: ''Because I've always wanted to work in a chip shop in Basingstoke!''

It may not seem like a very promising subject for a comedy routine, but Omid Djalili's attempt to muster humour from the experiences of British-based refugees has won him a nomination in tomorrow night's One World Media Awards. ''It's great, isn't it?'' he beams. ''Not that I'd ever heard of them before.''

It seems especially apt that Djalili might walk off with a prize: he was born in Britain to Iranian refugees, who fled the Islamic revolution for fear of religious persecution - they practised Bahaism, a religion founded on the principle of world unification.

''I've always been someone who - for want of a better cliché - believes that the earth is one country,'' Djalili explains. ''And I did some stand-up about that, pointing out that Brits can go wherever they want in the world, but just because someone's from Kosovo or Iran, their decision to move is dirty.''

In fact, the time he spent with other exiled Iranians convinced him from an early age that leaving your country of origin is never taken lightly: ''There was endless talk of returning to the promised land, of wishing one was back home. I really believe that people only leave because they absolutely have to.''

Working it into his stand-up routine came about in response to the bandying about of the term ''bogus'' by politicians and the media; a call from Channel 4 asking if he was interested in making a documentary on the subject proved too good an opportunity to miss. The resulting production from Lion, Bloody Foreigners, was broadcast earlier this year to positive reviews, and has since garnered the One World nomination.

In Bloody Foreigners, Djalili travelled to Hull to meet asylum-seekers before handing over his worldly goods and attempting to live as a refugee himself. The film's insight comes from his genuine interest in those he talks to, and his unpatronising, unsentimental approach. If there are flaws they come from the ridiculous sight of Djalili ''living'' on a refugee's stipend of £5 per day for a measly two days.

He winces when the subject is broached: ''Well, to be honest I felt completely the same way,'' he admits. ''I thought: 'Here we go, TV tossers telling me what to do.' I kept a diary of the whole thing and I think if I ever publish it, a lot of people would be quite unhappy. They said: 'Be honest, say whatever you think.' So I did: we shot 26 hours and probably there were 10 of me saying, 'This is not a funny subject. You can't play with people's lives just to make a joke.' My whole problem was with the notion: 'It's about asylum-seekers, now let's make it fun.'

''At the end of the day I wanted to do a programme that was entertaining, educational, slightly elevating and showed the asylum issue as a global concern. To a certain extent, I think it did that, although it finished up as a bit of a pop documentary.''

Djalili's mixed feelings highlight an increasing dilemma for broadcasters determined to play the ratings game at every opportunity: they want to look as though they have a social conscience, and they need to fulfil their multicultural and non-British programme remits.

A research project published last year by the Media Awards' sister organisation, One World Broadcasting Trust, found that between 1998 and 1999, 60% of all the coverage of the developing world screened on British television derived from travel and wildlife programming. And in the decade from 1989 to 1999, BBC1's output of programming from the developing world fell by 28%, BBC2's by 37%, ITV's a whopping 74%, and Channel 4's by 56%. Since its inception, Channel 5 has produced next to no original overseas content, relying instead on repackaged wildlife programmes.

Tomorrow night's award ceremony aims to encourage a turn in the tide by honouring those media professionals who have highlighted issues of global justice. Last year, Jon Snow (who calls the awards ''the conscience of the British broadcast media'') picked up the One World Special Award for his lifelong commitment to international affairs; this year, he's hosting the ceremony.

Despite the challenging and difficult nature of this project, Djalili concedes that many of the resulting gags still make it into his club routine. Channel 4 was impressed enough to offer him six more films: ''They keep on saying things like 'It would be good if you could go to Cuba and interview Fidel Castro', and I'm like: 'And say what?' They don't have a clue,'' he laughs. ''They want me to be a cross between Louis Theroux and an ethnic Mark Thomas.''

Omid Djalili's Bloody Foreigners (Channel 4, Sunday)is the kind of documentary that those who viciously carp on about asylum seekers should be dragged away from their Oswald Moseley shrines and forced to watch. Travelling from Hull to Dover, Djalili's exploration of life for asylum seekers was uncompromising, emotional and powerful stuff. Aside from the slightly dubious Let's Pretend To Be An Asylum Seeker Ploy which still revealed stark and unpleasant truths about their plight this was a mature, thoughtful programme.

By detailing complains that Turkish refugees are "all perverts", then showing pictures of a delightful Hull resident flashing her breast, Bloody Foreigners exposed Britain's institutionalised, ingrained racism and hypocrisy, for which we are all responsible. (it is not as if Britain was built on the bones of people in the developing world, or that we sold weapons to dictators, or happy buying goods made in the third world now, is it?) It was sickening and shameful and should be compulsory viewing.

Babak Saraskani's fifteen years of experience in television and video includes consultancy and independent productions for various corporate bodies including Buckinghamshire County Council, UCB Home Loans Ltd., IDC, TACK training, SMC Pneumatics, British Telecom and H.R.H The Prince of Wales/St. James' Palace. He has also produced many programmes for Nationwide Building Society through Nationwide Television, of which he is the manager.

His broadcasting experience includes over 400 hours of edited programming for European Satellite and Cable Television. Amongst others, Babak has worked with people such as Michael Burke, Geoff Banks, Sue Cook, and H.R.H Prince Charles (through the Prince's Trust). He spoke to Shadi Khoroushi about his career.

(BIBN) How did you get into this business?

(BS) At first, of course, I had to juggle my studies with work, but after graduating I was ready to devote myself to my job. This profession is very difficult to get into in the UK as it is such a closed group. My main aim was to break into this circle. To help establish yourself in this business, it is useful to become an independent producer. I have now worked with a large number of people, and have had many clients, such as BT, MOD, and a number of engineering companies.

(BIBN) How have you survived in this profession? (BS) What makes the difference is the team of people that you work with. I always have the same team. I choose the production team to match the project, assess the job, and put a team together to satisfy the requirements of the job. You can be as creative as you want, but if you do not have the right team then you will have trouble producing quality work. Furthermore, to succeed and compete with rivals you have to be able to prove yourself and keep that standard, even if it means losing money.

(BIBN) How did the opportunity of working with Nationwide arise?

(BS) Around 12 years ago during my post-graduate course, I was given the opportunity to set up a video production unit with Nationwide. As a consultant, I continued for 8 or 9 years with various productions. Then around 3 years ago I was given the chance of becoming Nationwide Television Manager. Knowing the facilities well, I knew also that the potential for expansion was enormous. This, coupled with my passion for the job, led me to take it on.

(BIBN) What are you working on now at Nationwide?

(BS) Initially, the brief was to set up from scratch a production unit to produce programmes internally. However, this developed into much more, and is now moving toward the concept of information television, broadcast studio- feeding TV into terrestrial/satellite channels, radio studio, etc. There is the possibility of business television, which will create a lot of opportunity. On top of this, there is the option of Interactive Distance Learning, which gives the opportunity for 700-800 people to be linked to one centre. The cost is high, but there has been interest from large corporations.


Babak Saraskani In The Film Studio

BIBN) Which is more important in your profession, your business side or your artistic side?

(BS) To survive you need to earn the respect of both the Broadcasting community and the Corporate industry. It is not good enough to have a good idea. You have to present it to the MD in a way that they will understand. Sales is the language to speak. The artistic side is equally as important though, as there is a reputation to maintain. When people get used to a certain standard then they will not accept anything else. Also, you get judged on previous work, so you can not let your standards slip.

(BIBN) How do you measure success rate?

(BS) You can use three criteria to measure the success of a product; meeting the objective, quality of programme, and the relationship with the production team. An advertisement campaign on television, for example, can be seen as successful if it meets the objectives of sales and marketing. However, this is only one of the criteria that one can measure success with. In an industry like this, as a Producer/Director it is important to be credited by the critics at the same time. Moreover, the team that you put together, and the continuing relationship of that team from project to project, can be used to measure success.

(BIBN) How do you market your services?

(BS) Well. a good example is the Nationwide football sponsorship, but really the standard of work is marketing in itself. The reputation of a company is one of its most important marketing tools.

(BIBN) What are you plans for the future?

(BS) The logical next step is to expand to a level of production that would ensure that we can handle 6-8 jobs at one time. However, my emotional pull is still towards Iran. Having worked in the UK for the last 20 years, I want to take my expertise back to Iran. I have seen a lot of promise there, but I feel that the industry needs expertise to take it forward.