• العربية
  • فارسی
Brand
  • Iran Insight
  • Politics
  • Economy
  • Analysis
  • Special Report
  • Opinion
  • Podcast
  • Iran Insight
  • Politics
  • Economy
  • Analysis
  • Special Report
  • Opinion
  • Podcast
  • Theme
  • Language
    • العربية
    • فارسی
  • Iran Insight
  • Politics
  • Economy
  • Analysis
  • Special Report
  • Opinion
  • Podcast
All rights reserved for Volant Media UK Limited
volant media logo

Disconnected and afraid: Iran’s internet blackouts leave lasting scars

Maryam Sinaiee
Maryam Sinaiee

Iran International

Feb 1, 2026, 13:09 GMT+0
An Iranian woman, Samaneh, tries to connect to the internet to check on her visa status for her migration process, after a nationwide internet shutdown since January 8, 2026, following Iran's protests, in Tehran, Iran, January 25, 2026.
An Iranian woman, Samaneh, tries to connect to the internet to check on her visa status for her migration process, after a nationwide internet shutdown since January 8, 2026, following Iran's protests, in Tehran, Iran, January 25, 2026.

When Iran cuts off internet access, millions are plunged into more than digital silence. Mental health experts say the blackouts intensify anxiety, isolation, and trauma in a society already under extreme strain.

The Iranian outlet Khabar Online has argued that the fear of being digitally cut off from unfolding events can resemble a form of mass FOMO, anxiety driven not by social media envy, but by enforced disconnection.

Beyond personal stress

The article says that the consequences extend far beyond individual stress. “Cutting the internet is not just a trauma at the individual level; it severely destroys interpersonal bonds and trust,” it said.

It also warned of what it called “anticipatory anxiety.” Even after access is partially restored, society remains on edge.

“Every slight drop in internet speed triggers waves of stress and panic over another shutdown,” the article added.

US-based psychotherapist Azadeh Afsahi said the effects mirror enforced isolation. “Clinically, shutting down the internet is equivalent to enforced isolation and the sudden loss of multiple coping mechanisms at once,” Afsahi told Iran International.

“Isolation is a well-established driver of anxiety and depression and significantly increases the risk of suicidal ideation and suicide attempts.”

She added that Iran’s psychological baseline is already fragile.

Decades of repression, violence, economic instability, and chronic uncertainty have severely compromised mental health, she said, and internet shutdowns “compound the existing trauma” and can “push already vulnerable individuals closer to psychological collapse.”

From isolation to overload

Afsahi said prolonged digital silence creates a dangerous psychological cycle: after days or weeks of isolation, people are suddenly exposed to graphic images and devastating news once access is partially restored.

The abrupt flood of information, she said, can overwhelm the nervous system, triggering panic attacks, dissociation, intrusive thoughts, trauma-related symptoms resembling PTSD, and an increased risk of suicide.

“This cycle – isolation followed by psychological overload – creates cumulative, long-term harm,” Afsahi said.

The effects are not confined to those inside Iran. Families, journalists, activists, and content creators abroad are also affected, as their mental wellbeing depends on connection and community.

Shutdown as a tool of control

Internet disruptions have become a familiar reality for Iranians in recent years. Sometimes nationwide, sometimes regional or temporary, shutdowns have emerged as a central tool used by authorities to control protests, slow the spread of information, and suppress evidence of repression.

During crises, restricted access heightens public anxiety while crippling digital businesses and essential online services.

The most recent shutdown followed the 12-day war with Israel in June, when internet access was disrupted for roughly six days. This time, however, several days of complete blackout were followed by only limited access to a heavily censored domestic intranet.

Nearly 25 days later, the restrictions persist, with only a trickle of tightly restricted access returning. Many people and businesses still lack access.

Coping at the margins

Some Iranians have traveled to border regions or neighboring countries to send business files, upload videos documenting the January 8-9 crackdown, or contact family members.

Meanwhile, informal volunteer networks abroad have attempted to provide access through anti-censorship tools such as Psiphon and its Conduit feature, offering slow and unstable connections to the outside world.

The government says the shutdown is necessary to protect national security and citizens’ lives. Concerns over potential cyberattacks may also play a role.

Technology researcher Mohammad Rahbari warned in Khabar Online that prolonged communication blackouts can undermine society’s psychological stability.

“The continuation of communication shutdowns, even if intended to protect citizens’ physical safety, can seriously damage psychological security – which is a core component of overall security,” he said.

Most Viewed

100 days after carnage: Iran economy reels from war, inflation, unemployment
1
INSIGHT

100 days after carnage: Iran economy reels from war, inflation, unemployment

2
INSIGHT

Ghalibaf defends Iran-US talks amid hardline backlash

3
INSIGHT

A nation in limbo: 100 days after the massacre, has the world moved on?

4
ANALYSIS

From instability to influence: Pakistan’s pivotal role in US-Iran diplomacy

5
ANALYSIS

100 days on: why Iran’s January protests spread across social classes

Banner
Banner

Spotlight

  • War-hit homeowners feel abandoned as Iran’s reconstruction aid fades

    War-hit homeowners feel abandoned as Iran’s reconstruction aid fades

  • 100 days on: the anatomy of Iran’s January crackdown
    INSIGHT

    100 days on: the anatomy of Iran’s January crackdown

  • Ghalibaf defends Iran-US talks amid hardline backlash
    INSIGHT

    Ghalibaf defends Iran-US talks amid hardline backlash

  • 100 days on: why Iran’s January protests spread across social classes
    ANALYSIS

    100 days on: why Iran’s January protests spread across social classes

  • From instability to influence: Pakistan’s pivotal role in US-Iran diplomacy
    ANALYSIS

    From instability to influence: Pakistan’s pivotal role in US-Iran diplomacy

  • A nation in limbo: 100 days after the massacre, has the world moved on?
    INSIGHT

    A nation in limbo: 100 days after the massacre, has the world moved on?

  • No clicks, no revenue: Iran's blackout wipes out online businesses

    No clicks, no revenue: Iran's blackout wipes out online businesses

  • Volunteers abroad deploy tech to pierce Iran's internet iron curtain

    Volunteers abroad deploy tech to pierce Iran's internet iron curtain

  • After 20-day outage, Iran internet flickers back but restrictions persist

    After 20-day outage, Iran internet flickers back but restrictions persist

•
•
•

More Stories

Forces given ‘blank check’ to kill protesters in Iran, senior official says

Jan 31, 2026, 16:30 GMT+0

Security forces were given free rein to use lethal force during the January 8–9 crackdown to spread fear and deter further protests in Iran, a senior government official said in a closed-door meeting, according to a source familiar with the talks.

The closed-door meeting was held to brief senior government officials and local governors on the brutal crackdown on protesters, the source told Iran International.

The senior official said security forces were given “full authority and a blank check to attack, with the aim of creating maximum fear to deter the resurgence of protests," the source said.

The order, he added, made no distinction between civilians and others.

The senior official speaking at the meeting was presenting assessments by security bodies that sharply contradict the government’s official figures on the killings.

While the official death toll stands at nearly 3,000, classified documents and eyewitness reports reviewed by Iran International’s editorial board show that more than 36,500 people were killed during the targeted suppression of Iran’s national uprising on the orders of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.

Following Khamenei’s speech on January 9, briefing sessions and internal discussions among senior Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) commanders used phrases such as “victory through terror” and “fight them until there is no more sedition," according to sources familiar with the discussions.

The same language later appeared on Telegram channels linked to pro-government groups.

Use of foreign forces

During the closed-door meeting, the senior government official confirmed earlier reports about the use of foreign forces in suppressing the protests, saying the Revolutionary Guards, its Basij militia, as well as Quds Force-linked units trained in Chechnya, Iraq, Pakistan, and Sudan were involved.

Iran International reported earlier this month that Iranian-backed Iraqi militias had begun recruiting and deploying fighters to assist Iranian forces in cracking down on protests.

That report said hundreds of Shiite militiamen from groups including Kataib Hezbollah, Harakat al-Nujaba, Kataib Sayyid al-Shuhada and the Badr Organization had been sent into Iran through multiple border crossings.

The fighters were transferred under the guise of pilgrimage trips and gathered at a base in Ahvaz before being dispatched to various regions, Iran International reported.

Tehran braces for war while testing the limits of diplomacy

Jan 31, 2026, 07:08 GMT+0
•
Behrouz Turani

Tehran appears to have taken the US military buildup near Iran seriously, but shows no sign of softening its rhetoric or accepting Washington’s terms while it explores limited diplomatic channels.

Speaking in Istanbul on Friday, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said Iran would consider US proposals for negotiations only if the military threat was removed first. Araghchi was in the Turkish city to explore a possible mediation initiative, though he made clear that Tehran would not negotiate under pressure.

Hours later, US President Donald Trump said he had directly communicated a deadline to Iran for reaching an agreement with Washington. “Only they know about the deadline for sure,” Trump told reporters, without elaborating on the terms or consequences.

The exchange reflects a familiar standoff: Washington is attempting to force rapid movement at a moment when Iran is politically and economically weakened, while Tehran is signaling defiance even as it quietly probes diplomatic off-ramps.

Ahmad Bakhshayesh Ardestani, a member of parliament’s Foreign Policy Committee, said on Thursday that internal debates were under way in Tehran over how far Trump might go.

“Trump’s confrontation with Iran during his first term was a failure,” he told news website Didban Iran, setting out his assessment that the US president’s long-term aim was to end the Islamic Republic.

“He knows there is no third term, and this is his only chance.”

Ardestani also argued that regional powers including the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, and Turkey oppose the collapse of the Islamic Republic, which he said they view as destabilizing and economically disruptive.

Former Iranian diplomat Kourosh Ahmadi offered a more cautious assessment.

Speaking to Entekhab on January 29, he said Trump’s deployment of military forces was intended primarily to intensify diplomatic and economic pressure on Tehran rather than signal a settled decision to strike.

“Trump does not want to be remembered as a president who failed to deliver on his promises,” Ahmadi said, adding that the show of force was designed to deepen Iran’s economic crisis and force concessions.

Araghchi has denied that talks are planned with US envoy and Trump aide Steve Witkoff, even as he travels regionally to discuss mediation proposals.

Ahmadi said US military action remained possible but warned that Trump would face difficulties justifying an attack both internationally and to his domestic political base.

He also dismissed speculation that Washington might attempt to block Iran’s oil exports, arguing that such a move would almost certainly trigger military confrontation in the Persian Gulf and affect China and Arab nations in the region.

Ironically, Iran’s hardline daily Kayhan—close to the office of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei—has suggested that Tehran itself should consider closing the strategic waterway.

Rahman Gharemanpour, an international relations expert, told Donya-ye Eghtesad that preparations for a major operation would require significantly more time and should not be read as evidence of an imminent attack.

In the same newspaper, Mashhad University academic Rouhollah Eslami said regional states are increasingly guided by cost-benefit calculations rather than ideological alignment—a shift that helps explain their reluctance to support military action against Iran.

For now, Iran’s position remains deliberately unresolved. Araghchi insists Tehran is prepared both for negotiations and for war—and given the balance of fear and defiance now shaping decision-making in Tehran, he may not be spinning for once.

Afghan migrants among those killed in Iran protests

Jan 30, 2026, 20:42 GMT+0

Several Afghan migrants were killed during Iran’s recent nationwide protests, with some taking part alongside Iranian demonstrators and others shot despite having no direct involvement, a source confirmed to Afghanistan International.

The protests began in Tehran and several other cities in late December, initially driven by public anger over the sharp fall in Iran’s national currency, soaring inflation and worsening economic conditions.

A series of messages circulated in Afghan migrant WhatsApp and Telegram groups during the early days of the protests, urging migrants not to participate, a source told Afghanistan International.

The messages warned that sharing photos or videos could have serious consequences, reflecting widespread fear of arrest, deportation or forced expulsion.

An Afghan migrant living in Mashhad told Afghanistan International that many Afghans in Iran deliberately avoid political activity because of their precarious legal status, particularly protesting the government.

He added that some migrants joined the demonstrations nonetheless due to severe economic hardship.

Sources also said that amid an increase in security checkpoints, some Afghan migrants began using images of senior Islamic Republic figures as phone wallpapers, fearing inspections of their mobile phones by security forces.

Afghanistan International confirmed the identities of several Afghan nationals killed during the protests, including 16-year-old Amirhossein Moradi, who was shot in Mashhad and later died in hospital.

The human rights organization Hengaw also confirmed the deaths of three other Afghan nationals in the city. Sources say families were warned against speaking to the media before being allowed to bury their relatives.

Additional cases have been reported in Tehran, Karaj and Isfahan, including Afghan migrants and children killed by direct or indiscriminate fire, some while not participating in protests. Internet restrictions and pressure on families have made it difficult to establish accurate figures.

Afghan migrants have previously been killed during protests in Iran. During the 2022 nationwide unrest, Amnesty International reported that at least two Afghan teenagers were killed by Iranian security forces, with their families later threatened into silence.

Iran’s consul general in Herat has denied Afghan involvement in the recent protests, claiming some actors are attempting to damage relations between Iran and Afghanistan.

More than 36,500 Iranians were killed by security forces during the January 8-9 crackdown on nationwide protests, making it the deadliest two-day protest massacre in history, according to documents reviewed by Iran International's Editorial Board.

Huda Beauty faces boycott campaign over founder’s Iran protest video

Jan 30, 2026, 19:21 GMT+0

Global beauty brand Huda Beauty has become the focus of a viral backlash after its founder, Huda Kattan, shared a social media post that many Iranians said echoed Tehran’s narrative about the deadly crackdown on nationwide protests.

The controversy began earlier this week when Kattan, who has more than five million Instagram followers, reposted a video related to the unrest in Iran.

The footage showed supporters of the Islamic Republic burning images of exiled Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi and U.S. President Donald Trump—content critics said closely resembled state propaganda.

Many Iranians, both inside the country and in the diaspora, reacted with anger. Videos soon began circulating online showing users smashing, burning, or discarding Huda Beauty products in protest.

Some clips took a more satirical or graphic approach, depicting Kattan covering killed protesters with makeup, applying cosmetics to Iran’s supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, or appearing dressed as a cleric.

Others showed palettes and lipsticks dumped into garbage bins, gestures meant to signal rejection of the brand and what critics saw as Kattan’s misstep.

Kattan deleted the original Instagram story within hours, but the backlash continued and soon extended to prominent figures in the beauty community.

Nicknames such as “Mullah Beauty” and “Ayatollah Huda” quickly spread online, underscoring the belief among critics that the post amplified regime talking points rather than the voices of protesters.

Naz Golrokh, a US-based Iranian influencer with more than nine million Instagram followers, was among the first high-profile figures to call for a boycott. “If you can’t stand with innocent people, at the very least, don’t spread lies against them,” she wrote, urging her followers to stop purchasing Huda Beauty products.

Her post—showing a pile of destroyed cosmetics—received more than one million likes, becoming a rallying image for the campaign.

Iranian-American celebrity hairstylist Henry Zador also joined the boycott, posting videos of himself discarding Huda Beauty products and urging others not to underestimate their collective commercial influence.

“If Iran’s revolution succeeds and all major cosmetics companies enter the market, Huda Beauty will have no place in that large market,” Zador told Iran International.

Calls for accountability soon reached major retailers, with some users urging chains such as Sephora to reconsider carrying the brand unless Kattan addressed the criticism publicly.

Even Kattan’s sister and longtime collaborator, Mona Kattan, unfollowed her on social media amid the backlash. Mona, who has 3.8 million followers, has been more openly supportive of Iranian protesters, highlighting divisions within the beauty community over how to respond to the unrest.

Jehan Hashem, an Iraqi influencer with 15.5 million followers, also posted stories of unfollowing Kattan and expressing solidarity with Iranians.

Kattan later posted a series of messages denying support for the Islamic Republic and saying she did not feel qualified to take a public position on what she described as a complex internal political situation.

She also cited past US military interventions, including in Iraq, as shaping her reluctance to endorse foreign involvement.

For many critics, that framing deepened the backlash. They argued that labeling the uprising an “internal issue” minimized the scale of state violence and echoed language long used by Iranian officials to deflect international scrutiny. Others said that if she felt insufficiently informed, she should not have posted at all.

The episode follows earlier controversies involving Kattan over social media commentary on geopolitical issues, a history that has made critics quicker to scrutinize her public statements.

Huda Beauty is widely considered one of the largest cosmetics brands in the Middle East.

While no official data exists on its market share in Iran, the scale of engagement with the boycott—including visible participation by Instagram users inside the country—suggests it could have a tangible impact on the brand’s standing there.

How Tehran tried to control the story after January’s bloodshed

Jan 30, 2026, 15:45 GMT+0
•
Behrouz Turani

Tehran’s violent mid-January crackdown was accompanied by a quieter but sweeping campaign to silence the press and control information about the killings.

Following the bloodshed of January 8 and 9, Iranian authorities imposed the harshest media restrictions in decades, shutting down newspapers and severely limiting internet access in an effort to conceal the scale of repression.

After about a week, officials appeared to conclude that a total blackout was counterproductive: the absence of newspapers made it harder to project an image of normal life. Editors were summoned back to newsrooms, even though most journalists still lacked internet access.

With little they could do, many reporters went home, a journalist at the moderate daily Shargh later recalled in an Instagram post. Hours later, they were called back. “You must publish a newspaper tomorrow morning,” authorities told editors, “even if it is only one page.”

The papers that followed were thin and tightly controlled. Many carried only a handful of short items drawn from state-approved agencies, alongside recycled material from months or even years earlier.

At the same time, the government shifted its internet controls from broad blacklisting to a strict whitelisting system, allowing access only to approved users and outlets.

For nearly two weeks, outlets affiliated with the Revolutionary Guards — primarily Tasnim and Fars — dominated the limited online output, carrying statements from commanders and hardline officials and promoting the narrative that the unrest was “foreign-backed terrorism.”

When Fars opened its comment sections earlier this week, readers flooded the site with angry and often derogatory remarks aimed at the government. Moderators removed posts and blocked users, but commenters returned under new identities.

Critical comments often remained visible for minutes before deletion. Within days, Fars shut down comments entirely.

Khabar Online, one of the first websites permitted to resume limited updates as part of efforts to “normalize” the situation, encountered a similar problem. Reader comments quickly overwhelmed official narratives, prompting tighter controls.

By January 27, several newspapers and websites had cautiously resumed publication, avoiding any reference to the true death toll.

One exception was Etemad, whose managing editor, Elias Hazrati—also head of President Masoud Pezeshkian’s advisory public-relations board—published casualty figures approved by authorities, widely seen as a fraction of the real numbers.

Internet access has since been partially restored, but remains unpredictable. Some businesses are granted just 30 minutes of access per day at designated government offices after signing pledges not to cross official “red lines.” Their online activity is monitored.

Messaging platforms such as WhatsApp and Telegram function intermittently through VPNs. Even when messages are sent, replies often fail to arrive. Platforms commonly used for political communication, especially X, remain largely inaccessible.

Authorities say YouTube access has been restored at universities, and some pre-protest interviews have reappeared online.

The YouTube-based news program Hasht-e Shab (8 PM) resumed after a three-week suspension. In its first broadcast, it reported that the brother of one staff member had been shot dead during the protests.

With senior officials avoiding public appearances, the program interviewed its own managing editor, Ali Mazinani, who said internet access had become “critical” even for media outlets, particularly as Iran faces heightened external threats.

He said journalists are now barred from government offices they once covered and criticized the lack of transparency surrounding the crackdown and casualty figures.

The restrictions appear to have achieved their aim, narrowing what can be reported and publicly discussed about the crackdown—for now.