‘A Bushy Beard and Easy Smile’: Western Media’s Grotesque Framing of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s Death

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was only the second Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran. He assumed power in 1989 following the death of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, and ruled for decades as the ultimate authority over a regime defined by repression, regional destabilization, and violent ideological extremism.

His tenure was marked by:

• The systematic crushing of political dissent
• The imprisonment, torture, and execution of dissidents
• The violent suppression of nationwide protest movements
• The arming and financing of proxy militias across the Middle East
• The institutionalization of chants of “Death to America” and repeated threats to destroy Israel

Under his leadership, Iran’s security forces opened fire on protesters during successive waves of unrest in 2009, 2019, and during the nationwide demonstrations that followed the death of Mahsa Amini in 2022. In January of this year, fresh nationwide protests were again met with force.

Independent analysts estimate that at least 30,000 people were killed in the crackdown, a figure the regime has never credibly refuted. Across these cycles of repression, human rights organizations have documented thousands more deaths and tens of thousands detained.

Yet when Iranian state media confirmed Khamenei’s death nearly 24 hours after US and Israeli airstrikes struck his compound in Tehran, segments of Western media coverage adopted a tone that bordered on reverential.

The most notable example appeared in The Washington Post, which described Khamenei as known for his “bushy white beard and easy smile,” noting that he cut a “more avuncular figure in public” than his predecessor. The obituary highlighted his fondness for Persian poetry and classic Western novels, including Victor Hugo’s Les Misérables.

The New York Times summarized him as a “hardline cleric” who had made “Iran a regional power” while maintaining hostility toward the United States and Israel.

Sky News labeled him the “arch foe” of President Donald Trump, framing the moment as a personal rivalry.

The Wall Street Journal observed that he “nurtured the country’s global ambitions but struggled at home with a withering economy.” Reuters referred to his “fiery ambitions” toward Israel and the United States. The BBC aired images of mourners drawn from regime-controlled broadcasts with little scrutiny of their staging.

Across outlets, the pattern was consistent.

The man who presided over decades of repression was reframed through aesthetic detail and political positioning. His beard. His smile. His literary tastes. His “ambitions.”

His victims were secondary.

This is not about demanding polemics from obituary writers. It is about proportion.

When authoritarian rulers die, the moral weight of their record should not be softened by lifestyle detail or neutralized by euphemism. Calling a regime ideologue a “hardliner” obscures the reality that he headed a theocratic state apparatus that jailed journalists, executed political prisoners, funded Hezbollah and Hamas, and ordered violent crackdowns against his own people.

Headlines shape historical memory. The first paragraph matters more than the 12th. In death, reputations are distilled and authoritarian rulers should not be granted the luxury of dilution.

So while newspapers fawned over what they chose to highlight, from his wry smile to his love of literature and carefully cultivated image, the rest of us should remember him for what he was: a brutal dictator who deserved the fiery end he met.

The author is a contributor to HonestReporting, a Jerusalem-based media watchdog with a focus on antisemitism and anti-Israel bias — where a version of this article first appeared.