Have media learned any lessons from Iraq war coverage?
Does media coverage of the Iran War, like reporting about the Iraq war 20+ years ago, pour gasoline on the flames of conflict and promote pro-war narratives while marginalizing peaceful voices?

A review of the mistakes made by Western media in reporting the Iraq war can provide a useful guide that can be used to evaluate current Iran war coverage. (These are chronicled in my textbook, Peace Journalism Principles and Practices). The most prominent of these errors was that media was pro Iraq war, and ignored anti-war voices. One study cited in the text showed 2/3 of all sources in media coverage were pro Iraq war voices, including 71% of cable TV talk show guests.

Since it’s too early for quantitative, peer-reviewed content analysis research by reputable sources regarding Iran war media coverage, we’re left with anecdotal evidence and analysis to fill in the gaps. That said, there is ample evidence to suggest a bias in the media that is cheerleading the Iran war’s “successes” while marginalizing anti-war voices. 

AI-generated image

As the Iran war began, “as if on cue, Bret Stephens is once again cheerleading for intervention on the opinion pages of the New York Times, invoking the language of resolve and credibility that lubricated the invasion of Iraq. On CNN, chief national security analyst Jim Sciutto claimed that U.S. military veterans “are likely welcoming these strikes tonight,” a sweeping assertion offered with the same confidence that once accompanied talk of “shock and awe.” On Fox News, chief political analyst Brit Hume is claiming, like he did in 2003, that Americans support this war of choice. We have been here before: an American president launches strikes in the Middle East, elite opinion closes ranks, the ghosts of quagmires past hover unacknowledged in the studio lights.” (Salon 2/2/26) 

TV panels on the 2026 Iran war have often featured current and former U.S. officials and analysts framing the strikes as necessary, preemptive, or aimed at liberation. CNN has regularly featured analysis from retired general David Patraeus and admiral James Stavridis. Also, claims aired on CNN have stated that U.S. veterans "likely welcome these strikes" even though there are veterans who are disappointed at or outright oppose the war.  On Fox News, it was claimed that Americans support the "war of choice," mirroring rhetoric used during the 2003 Iraq invasion. (In fact, surveys show that the Iraq war is broadly unpopular.)   

At the same time, anti-war voices seem to have been largely marginalized, with the exception of the nearly gleeful reporting from some about MAGA enthusiasts who are upset about the war. (e.g. ABC; The Hill).

In Politico, Emma Ashford, a senior fellow at the Stimson Center, stated that it is a "definite failure" of restrained, anti-interventionist voices that they have been unable to pull media narratives away from a pro-war orientation. She goes on to state that even prominent media figures on the right, such as Tucker Carlson and Steve Bannon, have seen their influence diminished after their failed campaign to pressure the administration to eschew the bombing campaign against Iran.

On February 28, March 2, and March 7, there were protests in 50+ cities around the US.  Organizations like the ACLU, Public Citizen, and Greenpeace have stated their opposition to the war. Yet, analyses from AllSides (a media watchdog organization) and Mondoweiss (a left wing, pro-Palestinian outlet) suggest that mainstream media coverage heavily focused on the success of Operation Epic Fury, while marginalizing reports of protests and other domestic opposition, civilian casualties (like the school bombing), and the war’s humanitarian impacts. These  analyses suggest a pattern of almost exclusively spotlighting U.S. military “successes.” 

Certainly, the tone and amount of bias in the coverage is tinged by partisan political factors. Fox News and other media on the right have generally praised the war while criticizing its opponents in and out of the media. Left leaning outlets like MSNOW (formerly MSNBC) and the New York Times have been much more critical, frequently questioning the war's legitimacy and the lack of a clear long term exit strategy.  The impact of this reporting divide can be seen in public opinion polls that show most Republicans support the war, while most Democrats and independents oppose it.

Without detailed content analysis data, it’s impossible to reach any firm conclusions at this time. However, the anecdotal evidence certainly points to a repeat of the mistakes made by media more than 20 years ago. The public needed a sober, objective, informed presentation of the pros and cons of war back then. Instead, they got pro-war flag waving that helped to legitimize an illegitimate, bloody, decades-long debacle in Iraq. Will history repeat itself?

Next: In Part II of my discussion of Iran war coverage, we'll look at whether press are repeating other mistakes from Iraq war coverage. Does reporting feature hyped, false stories (propaganda) about the reason(s) for attacking Iran? Are journalists relying on on dubious, biased sources? Are they parroting government propaganda, especially about the school bombing?