3 measurements spanning 8 days, net +3. Dots are measurements; the straight line between them is drawn to join them, not to claim we know the path taken in between — snapshots are recorded only when a count changes, so gaps mean “no change observed”, never “interpolated”. The vertical axis spans 621–624 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)
Subscribers
Change
14 Aug 2026, 02:08
624
+3
6 Aug 2026, 17:33
621
no change
6 Aug 2026, 02:46
621
first reading
Engagement
16 posts held, back to 8 December 2025 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 1 pageof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR · 30 days
184.9%
avg views ÷ 624 subscribers
Avg views / post
1,150
4 posts measured
Reaction rate
1.26%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
4
of 16 held
ERR is average views per post over the last 30 days divided by subscribers, the definition TGStat uses, so this figure is comparable with the one you will see elsewhere. It falls structurally as a channel grows: a high ERR on a small channel and a low one on a large channel describe reach mathematics, not quality. We publish the figure and the sample it came from and pass no verdict on it.
ER is defined industry-wide as (forwards + reactions + comments) ÷ views— note the denominator is views, not subscribers. Telegram’s public web preview carries views and reactions but not forward or comment counts, so the reaction rate above is the reactions term only and is therefore a floor: the true ER for this channel is higher by an amount we have not measured and will not estimate.
What these figures were computed from
Window
Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 24 July 2026
Posts held
16 (8 December 2025 – 24 July 2026)
Views total
4,614
Reactions total
58
Forwards / comments
not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken
6 Aug 2026, 17:33 UTC
Views are a single reading per post, taken at the time above. A post published in the last day or two is still accumulating views, which pulls the 30-day average down slightly. That is a property of the standard definition rather than a fault in it, so we keep the definition rather than “correcting” the number into something nobody can reproduce.
Precision. Telegram publishes view counts on its public widget in short form — 8.12K, 3.7M — so any reading at or above 1,000 reaches us rounded to three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. Averages and rates derived from them are shown to the same precision rather than to the unit: a figure like 3,701,250 would assert digits nobody measured.
Reaction counts are published per emoji and rounded the same way, so a total below 1,000 is exact and a larger one is a sum that may carry a rounded component from each emoji above 1,000. Because it is a sum, it does not look rounded — read a large reaction total as three significant figures per contributing emoji rather than as the figure it prints.
Reaction mix
175 reactions across 16 posts, in 6 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 86.3% of them.
Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
Reaction
Count
Share
Share, drawn
❤
151
86.3%
💔
11
6.29%
👍
5
2.86%
👏
5
2.86%
👎
2
1.14%
😭
1
0.571%
No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.
Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one — 4.34K, 1.2M — so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.
Coverage. Reactions were read on 16 of the 16 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 175reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 16 most recent posts we hold, published 8 December 2025 to 24 July 2026, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.
⤵️در این شماره میخوانید:
🎥 سرمقاله:
➖سینمای جنگ؛ صدای مظلومان و راوی فاتحان
📝زینب غیاثی
➖خانهای که رفت، خانهای که ماند
📝علی ملاقلیپور
➖لطفاً فعلاً درباره این جنگ فیلم نسازید:
امتناع فرم در سینمای جنگ جدید ایران
📝داوود طالقانی
➖بحرانِ فرم و شخصیت در عصر سیطرهٔ تکنیک و تجارت
📝حمیدرضا رنجبرزاده
➖فراتر از شلیک گلولهها
سینما بهمثابهٔ درمانگر زخمهای جنگ
📝محمدپارسا اشرفی
➖تکامل در خط مقدم
چگونه میدانهای نبرد ب…
🎬 برداشت چهارم منتشر شد | جنگ در آینهٔ سینما
صاحب امتیاز: کانون مطالعات فیلم و سینما دانشگاه تهران
مدیر مسئول: زینب غیاثی
سردبیران: زینب غیاثی، محمدحسین لشگری
ویراستاران: ریحانه اوجاقی، محمدامین ولیپور
صفحهآرا: ابوالفضل شریفی
🆔@ut_cinemacenter
🎬Hamnet (2025)
#برداشت_چهارم [جنگ در آینهی سینما] | در ویژهنامهی برداشت میخوانید:
«وقتی دوربین، ویرانی یک اتاق خواب یا رها شدن یک اسباببازی در میان خاک و خل را نشان میدهد، در واقع فروپاشی ساحت امنیت روانی را به تصویر میکشد. این تصاویر، داغ آوارگی را به یک تجربه بصری مشترک تبدیل میکنند.
بازنمایی این رنج به مخاطب آسیبدیده اجازه میدهد تا سوگ خود را معتبر بداند و بفهمد در این درد تنها نیست؛ درست مانند پایانی…
🎬از کرخه تا راین(۱۳۷۱)
#برداشت_چهارم [جنگ در آینهی سینما] | در ویژهنامهی برداشت میخوانید:
«تعریف ما از جنگ، در تصویری که از سینمای جنگ خواهیم داشت اثر میگذارد. فرق میکند که ما مانند لیلا (با بازی هما روستا) در فیلم «از کرخه تا راین» (۱۳۷۱) جنگ را زشت ببینیم یا مانند امانوئل کانت، متفکّر لیبرالیست دههٔ ۱۸ میلادی، زیبایی را در جنگ ببینیم: «میتوانیم هر قدر بخواهیم در باب این که در مقایسهٔ میان مرد سیاست و مرد …
#برداشت_چهارم [جنگ در آینهی سینما] | در ویژهنامهی برداشت میخوانید:
بحران فرم و شخصیت
در عصر سیطرهٔ تکنیک و تجارت
به قلم حمیدرضا رنجبرزاده | پژوهشگر و منتقد فیلم
انتشار به زودی...
🆔 @ut_cinemacenter
#برداشت_چهارم [جنگ در آینهی سینما] | در ویژهنامهی برداشت میخوانید:
لطفا فعلا دربارهٔ این جنگ فیلم نسازید:
امتناع فرم در سینمای جنگ جدید ایران
به قلم داوود طالقانی | پژوهشگر و منتقد فیلم
انتشار به زودی...
🆔 @ut_cinemacenter
#برداشت_چهارم [جنگ در آینهی سینما] | در ویژهنامهی برداشت میخوانید:
خانهای که رفت، خانهای ماند
به قلم علی ملاقلیپور | کارگردان و پژوهشگر تاریخ
انتشار به زودی...
🆔 @ut_cinemacenter
#برداشت_چهارم [جنگ در آینهی سینما] | در ویژهنامهی برداشت میخوانید:
سرمقاله:
سینمای جنگ؛ صدای مظلومان و راوی فاتحان
به قلم زینب غیاثی | دانشجوی کارشناسی رشتهی علوم ارتباطات اجتماعی
انتشار به زودی...
🆔 @ut_cinemacenter
نشریهی «برداشت» در نظر دارد ویژهنامهای با عنوان جنگ در آینهٔ سینما منتشر نماید.
از علاقهمندان به حوزه سینما، نقد فیلم و مطالعات فرهنگی دعوت میشود تا با ارسال یادداشت، مقاله، نقد و جستارهای تحلیلی، در تهیه این ویژهنامه همکاری کنند.
محورهای پیشنهادی ویژهنامه:
۱. بازنمایی جنگ و خشونت در سینما
۲. انسان، هویت و زندگی روزمره در سینمای جنگ
۳. سینمای دفاع مقدس: روایتها و بازخوانیها
۴. حافظه، فقدان و تروما در سینم…
انجمن علمی علوم ارتباطات اجتماعی دانشگاه تهران با همکاری کانون فیلم و سینمای دانشگاه تهران برگزار میکند:
🎞 کارگاه آموزش نقد فیلم
با تدریس:
👨🏻🏫 محمد جواد فراهانی؛ منتقد و استاد دانشگاه
🗓زمان برگزاری: سهشنبه، نهم دی، ساعت ۱۷ / دانشکده علوم اجتماعی دانشگاه تهران ، خیابان جلال آل احمد ، بعد از دانشگاه تربیت مدرس
🎟️هزینهی ثبتنام: ۶۰ هزار تومان
🔻حضور برای عموم آزاد است.
🔗لینک ثبتنام
←برای کسب اطلاعات بیشتر به ش…
Showing the 12 most recent of 16 posts we hold for @ut_cinemacenter. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.
Citation-graph rank
Citation-graph rank — 928,470 of 1,336,469entries in the measured graph. A weighted position computed from the forward and mention edges below — republished posts weigh more than named mentions — and recomputed periodically, over the whole graph. Published only as this ordinal position, never as a score: a position is a fact, and a score printed beside one channel’s name would read as a verdict this register does not make. The two counts beneath stay separate for the same reason mentions are never summed with forwards anywhere else on this page — a named-by count costs nothing to manufacture. The top 100 by this measure, or how it is computed.
Forward network
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
Built only from forwarded posts we have actually read, on both sides. Coverage is early and deliberately incomplete: a missing link means we have not read the post that would prove it, never that the relationship does not exist. Counts are distinct forwarded posts observed, so they only ever go up as we read more.
Mentions
Named by 1 registered channel — every channel on the register whose own posts have named this one, by its current username or any other username it currently holds, merged from two separately captured readings of the same fact so a namer caught by only one of them is not missed and a namer both caught is not counted twice. A username this channel has since dropped is not matched — that handle may belong to someone else now, and crediting today’s namer to yesterday’s owner would misattribute it.
Named by
Channels on the register whose posts name this channel's handle.
A mention is a weaker signal than a forward and is counted separately for that reason — naming a channel is not republishing it, and a handle in a post body is easy to place deliberately. The post counts beside each row below are distinct posts in which the handle appeared, from posts we have read on both sides — the “Named by N registered channels” figure above is a different count, of distinct NAMING CHANNELS rather than posts, and is not the sum of the rows under it.
Cite this entry
A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 14 August 2026 — this
entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“کانون مطالعات فیلم و سینما” (@ut_cinemacenter), 624 subscribers as measured 14 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/ut_cinemacenter.
Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.