From a review of possession to a request for cooperation; Questions before Ashtari Soba Now wrote in Gazashi: The debate between Wahid Ashtari and Hossein Gurbanzadeh in the Fars news agency, starting with the dispute over the functioning of the holding in the Persian Gulf and the dismissal of Mohsen Pekanjad, the former oil minister, to the publication of messages attributed to Ashtari and a live conversation with the holding public; The incident that made Ashtari's possible media cooperation with the collection stretching for criticism the center of the discussion. Announcements that changed the course of the debate In this debate, which was held on Monday, November 4, Gurbanzadeh, a member of the board of directors of the Persian Gulf Petrochemical Industries, published images of correspondence attributed to Ashtri. According to him, these messages testified to the consultation for the acceptance of the project and media advice from the holding. In the published messages, the name of Babak Zanjani and the trustee of his property were also mentioned in connection with the proposal for media cooperation. In response, Zanjani denied any acquaintance or connection with Ashtari and said that Ruhallah Kayani was responsible for his property during the period of detention from the Ministry of Petroleum. The question raised in the discussion was not only about a communication activist's contact with an economic complex; The question was, did the person who is currently criticizing the holding function consult with that group for media cooperation in the past, and what was the nature and outcome of this consultation? Live contact with the public relations manager After the announcements were published, Ashtari called Hamed Shams, the public relations manager of the Persian Gulf Holding. In this conversation, Shams announced that the correspondence was done on Telegram and claimed that he had a video of the conversation and the process of deleting the messages. He also said he kept a record of before and after the messages were deleted. Bringing the displayed side of the correspondence into the live conversation took the discussion beyond Gorbanzada's claim; However, strengthening the principle of correspondence does not alone prove all claims about the purpose, agreement or result of the cooperation. To judge these cases, the full content of the parties' messages and explanations is important. Professional cooperation or conflict of interest? Media cooperation with an economic enterprise does not in itself prove a violation. The central question is the transparency of the relationship and its connection with the person's public duties: is there cooperation? What was the subject and its conditions?

From a review of possession to a request for cooperation; Questions before Ashtari Soba Now wrote in Gazashi: The debate between Wahid Ashtari and Hossein Gurbanzadeh in the Fars news agency, starting with the dispute over the functioning of the holding in the Persian Gulf and the dismissal of Mohsen Pekanjad, the former oil minister, to the publication of messages attributed to Ashtari and a live conversation with the holding public; The incident that made Ashtari's possible media cooperation with the collection stretching for criticism the center of the discussion. Announcements that changed the course of the debate In this debate, which was held on Monday, November 4, Gurbanzadeh, a member of the board of directors of the Persian Gulf Petrochemical Industries, published images of correspondence attributed to Ashtri. According to him, these messages testified to the consultation for the acceptance of the project and media advice from the holding. In the published messages, the name of Babak Zanjani and the trustee of his property were also mentioned in connection with the proposal for media cooperation. In response, Zanjani denied any acquaintance or connection with Ashtari and said that Ruhallah Kayani was responsible for his property during the period of detention from the Ministry of Petroleum. The question raised in the discussion was not only about a communication activist's contact with an economic complex; The question was, did the person who is currently criticizing the holding function consult with that group for media cooperation in the past, and what was the nature and outcome of this consultation? Live contact with the public relations manager After the announcements were published, Ashtari called Hamed Shams, the public relations manager of the Persian Gulf Holding. In this conversation, Shams announced that the correspondence was done on Telegram and claimed that he had a video of the conversation and the process of deleting the messages. He also said he kept a record of before and after the messages were deleted. Bringing the displayed side of the correspondence into the live conversation took the discussion beyond Gorbanzada's claim; However, strengthening the principle of correspondence does not alone prove all claims about the purpose, agreement or result of the cooperation. To judge these cases, the full content of the parties' messages and explanations is important. Professional cooperation or conflict of interest? Media cooperation with an economic enterprise does not in itself prove a violation. The central question is the transparency of the relationship and its connection with the person's public duties: is there cooperation? What was the subject and its conditions?