Coverage of the conflict between Iran and the US is becoming increasingly distorted – this is how we avoid the smoke and mirrors

It is time for the media to step back and ask not only whether a particular story might be accurate, but whether comments from dubious sources are important enough to merit an article

Pity the reporters covering the burgeoning crisis between the United States and Iran.

Cover Washington’s hypocrisies, policy contradictions and outright misstatements and you’re hammered online by Iranian exiles and Beltway armchair warriors as an “agent of the mullahs” or part of the “echo chamber” of those who don’t relish seeing more needless suffering in the Middle East.

Detail evidence of Iran’s operations abroad or misdeeds and you’re publicly smeared as a “warmonger” or “neocon” by the western “resistance” academics and activists.

Editors glued to the news agencies, 24-hour television channels and Twitter are wowed by sensationalistic headlines and alerts about sabotaged oil tankers, downed drones, and nuclear stockpiles. They demand flashy stories on the latest pronouncement by an Iranian general or White House officials, and quick!

Get the words “war”, “nuclear”, “bomb” and “Iran” into a headline and watch the web traffic spike.

But the disastrous war in Iraq, and the western media’s role in helping the White House shape the narrative ahead of that conflict, should cast a heavy shadow over coverage of the confrontation between the administration of Donald Trump and Tehran.

News outlets should be rightly concerned about whether cliques of hardliners in Washington, Tehran and other capitals are trying to gin up a war, and instrumentalising the media to do it.

Wise news organisations pursue stories not only about the latest breach of uranium limits in the nuclear deal, but about the nefarious characters, shady think tank “scholars” and opinion shapers – sometimes paid by governments – who are trying to push the United States into a conflict with Iran.

But many news outlets don’t. One particular news agency seems particularly adept at popping out quick, sexy Iran-headlines above three-paragraph articles that are absolutely devoid of context, but guaranteed to draw clicks and generate buzz.

Like in the run-up to the Iraq conflict, too many news organisations are taking anonymous Iran-related leaks and treating them as truth. Recently, one prolific Iran “writer” turned out to be a psychological warfare operation run by an unhinged exile cult holed up in a compound in the western Balkans.

Perhaps a deep breath is in order. It is time for the media to step back and ask not only whether a particular Iran story might be accurate, but whether comments from some former official or prayer leader are important enough to merit an article, whether leaks about perfectly legal actions by Iran merit front-page coverage, whether generating clicks justifies complicity in yet another gratuitous war.

Yours,

Borzou Daragahi

International Correspondent