1844 GMT: On the Air. The opposition broadcaster Rasa TV says it will end transmissions on 15 November unless it gets enough donations to cover costs.
1840 GMT: Economy Watch. Ayande News jabs at the official statistics on employment. While the Government centre claims 500,000, Ayande says the true figure is 2 to 4 million.
The head of the Central Bank, Mahmoud Bastani, has said inflation is at 18% but claimed it has fallen from an August rate of 20%.
1310 GMT: Censorship Watch. Khabar Online reports that parts of MP Heshmatollah Falahatpisheh's address to the Supreme Leader about the problems and demands of Iranian people were removed by State broadcaster IRIB.
1300 GMT: Parliament v. President. Speaker of Parliament Ali Larijani has damped down talk, following a speech by the Supreme Leader, of a move to a Prime Minister chosen by Parliament, rather than an elected President. Larijani said the Presidential system has been successful in countries with strong parties and he saw no indication of a change of system in Ayatollah Khamenei's statement.
1250 GMT: Threat of the Day. MP Mohammad Khoshchehreh, a former Ahmadinejad advisor who has become a critic, has declared that the President's team has taken away files of high officials from the Ministry of Intelligence and plans more disclosures.
0940 GMT: Political Prisoner Watch. Rah-e-Sabz reports that Davood Soleimani, a senior member of the Islamic Iran Participation Front, has been released after more than two years in detention.
A statement on behalf of 280 Iranian cultural and social activists has expressed support for actress Marzieh Vafamehr, sentenced to one year in prison and 90 lashes after her lead role in My Tehran for Sale.
0520 GMT: And while some US media are running scared this morning, CNN appears to be taken for a ride in the latest interview with President Ahmadinejad. The US network's flash message on Twitter: "Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said he had 'no problem with the people of the United States. We love them'."
There is no advance on that standard Ahmadinejad soundbite in the blog of Fareed Zakaria, who conducted the interview. He leads with the President's bookend comments --- "It was the will of the people that should work. ... justice, freedom and respect" and "NATO's mission in Libya exacerbated the conflict" --- which is exactly the line taken by the Iranian Foreign Ministry on Friday morning.
Zakaria might have a distinctive point in Ahmaidnejad's comments on the situation in Damascus, "We are going to make greater efforts to both encourage the government of Syria and the other side and all parties to reach an understanding. We believe there should be no interference from outside," except the President has put out this line on dialogue and reform for weeks.
And, until we see the full interview, that's about all to be taken away from this setpiece.
0500 GMT: It is telling that most of the Iran-centred headlines in the US press this morning are not about any development inside the country, but about its neighbour Iraq.
President Obama's announcement on Friday of a withdrawal of US forces has already sent reporters and commentators into Scare Mode. Here, for example, are the opening paragraphs of The Wall Street Journal's coverage:
The prospect of a U.S. pullout from Iraq at the end of this year is stoking fears among Washington's Middle East allies that Iran will profit from a diminished American military presence in the region.
Baghdad's political leadership, including Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, already has close diplomatic ties with Tehran, and has backed Iran on important regional issues, such as the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries' oil-production quotas and support for embattled Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.
A number of U.S. allies said Washington's pullout from Iraq could be seen by Tehran as a green light to intensify its meddling. A common joke from the early days of the U.S. presence in Iraq was that the U.S. spent billions of dollars to invade Iraq only to hand it over to the Iranians on a golden plate.
One worst-case scenario: Iraq could replace the role Syria has played for Iran: a pivotal Arab ally facilitating Iran's transfer of funds and arms to proxy groups such as Lebanese Shiite group Hezbollah and Palestinian militant group Hamas.
"[The pullout] is seen as giving Iraq back to Iran and a sign that the U.S. is less committed to the region," said a senior Arab official shortly after President Barack Obama announced the Dec. 31 pullout plan. "That's how it will be read in the region."
The Iranian issue has fueled some conservative criticism of Mr. Obama's decision. "Certainly, tonight Supreme Leader Khamenei will dance a jig of celebration," said Michael Rubin, a former Pentagon official now at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank.
It is also possible the final U.S. withdrawal from Iraq could focus Iran's gaze elsewhere. The country's leadership had prided itself on its ability to destabilize Iraq through Shiite allies such as cleric Moqtada al-Sadr. Analysts say Iran could now turn its attention to Afghanistan, at its eastern border, where over 100,000 U.S. troops remain.
There is a total of zero evidence for these assertions, apart from a bit of gloating by Iranian Minister of Intelligence Heydar Moslehi, "Now we see [the US] leaving US in shame." The article does not detail Iran's actions and policy in Iraq, nor does it explain how Baghdad is replacing Damascus as Iran's pliable partner. And the passage on Iran rubbing its hands over destabilising Afghanistan is a flight of lurid journalist imagination.
One searches in vain for recognition by the Journal's reporters that, for years, there have been back-channel talks between Tehran and the US over the way forward in Afghanistan and, yes, Iraq. Instead, the article wheels out commentators who have long put out polemic rather than facts (Michael Rubin) and dissident Iranian expatriates (Mohsen Sazegara).
Why does The Journal carry out this performance? Jay Solomon and Farnaz Fassihi, the scriptwritersk, would have to answer, but one pointed note is that --- in both this media and political business --- hot fear sells better than cold assessment.