I don't think the author's claim is accurate. In truth there is reporting on Iran in (to take just one example) the New York Times which has nothing to do with

I don't think the author's claim is accurate. In truth there is reporting on Iran in (to take just one example) the New York Times which has nothing to do with the nuclear deal and which frequently does cover the struggles of normal Iranians. There is probably less than the author wants, b/c he would like it to be more widely covered. This is understandable. But the situation in Iran is well covered. Indeed I follow it b/c I have an interest in the country and find that the Post and Times do a good job. Articles not about the nuclear deal appear about once a month or slightly more frequently. What is more likely is that these articles are not that widely read. If this coverage were as widely read as coverage of the NFL, for example, no doubt more US newspapers would have bureaus in Iran. Examples from the past few months... (This is excluding many articles having to do with the nuclear deal) - September 28, "‘I Can’t Imagine a Good Future’: Young Iranians Increasingly Want Out" (page A-4) - September 3, "An Iranian commander who said the West deployed lizards as nuke spies dies from Covid-19" (apparently did not appear in the print edition) - August 13, "Iran’s Health System ‘Beyond Disastrous’ From Covid Surge" (page A1) - August 5, "A New President Takes Office in Iran, Solidifying Hard-Line Control" (page A-8) - July 28, "‘I Am Thirsty!’ Water Shortages Compound Iran’s Problems" (page A-10) There is separately plenty of reporting about the nuclear deal. Plus Iran is mentioned frequently in articles about Lebanon, Iraq, Syria, Saudi arabia, etc, depending on the topic.