As criticism of Iranian state television grows over perceived bias against reform-oriented candidate Massoud Pezeshkian, snippets of the debate have gone viral on social media.

Meanwhile, concerns are rising within Iranian society about the ability of both candidates to tackle the country's problems. Another heated discussion centers on the reaction of those who boycotted the election or abstained, who make up more than 60 percent of eligible voters. The key question is whether some of them will support Pezeshkian in the runoff on Friday.

This concern was evident in the remarks of Prince Reza Pahlavi, who called for a national boycott and Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, who acknowledged the low participation rate in what some observers dubbed a humiliating admission.

Pro-reform politicians and social media users have suggested that ultraconservative candidate Saeed Jalili's brother, who heads the state television, may have used his influence to shape the debate's questions and answers.

Mohsen Hashemi, the chairman of the central council of the pro-reform Executives of Construction Party, charged in an interview with Khabar Online that the questions asked by the state TV presenter were designed to tarnish Pezeshkian's image and create doubts about his integrity.

Hashemi added that Jalili's influence on state television is deep-rooted, thanks to his brother's position as the head of the country's sole broadcaster.

Meanwhile, he dismissed accusations that members of the Rouhani administration are running Pezeshkian's campaign and that his possible government would be a continuation of former President Hassan Rouhani's presidency.

Hashemi claimed that the questions were given to Jalili beforehand to better prepare him for the debate. Nonetheless, he opined that the two rounds of debates between the runoff candidates are likely to boost election participation by 10 percent.

Like many others, Hashemi noted that both candidates were more polite in the first debate, while the second debate was marked by agitation and anger from both sides.

Khabar Online wrote in another report that Jalili used the same tactics as former President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, i.e., trying to make his opponent angry and at the same time smile at him.

The report added that the state TV and its presenters clearly favored Jalili and nearly all of the staff members present on the set supported the ultraconservative candidate. The website characterized, particularly the second debate, as quarrels rather than a conversation.

The website noted that Jalili was utterly nervous and even hysteric during the debate and raised his vice at several points and frequently interrupted Pezeshkian. At times, both candidates clenched their fists, noted the website.

A point made by other observers was that none of the candidates showed any interest in the key issue of the environment in the two debates.

Some observers continued to express concern for the perils of the possible election of hardliner Jalili as Iran's next president. One of them was Abdolreza Faraji Rad, Iran's former ambassador to Norway and Hungary, who said Jalili's possible win will be too costly for Iran's foreign policy.

On the same note, Hamid Hosseini an expert on energy has also warned that a country of 80 million population cannot be run on barter trade involving sheep and mango. He was referring to a recent transaction between Iran and Pakistan.

The concern is also evident among the public. Journalist Roozbeh Bolhari quoted pro-government reformist activist Saeed Laylaz as saying that Iran's reformists were hoping that another 10 million would vote to finish the election in the first round, but they did not. As a result, Laylaz pointed out,