A U.S.-based media watchdog says mainstream outlets leaned hard on the phrase “war crime” in early coverage of the U.S./Israel-Iran conflict, and that usage overwhelmingly targeted American and Israeli actions while Iran’s strikes went largely unlabeled. The analysis counted how often major outlets used the term, examined which incidents triggered the label, and highlighted apparent blind spots in reporting on cluster munitions and attacks on third countries.
The Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting and Analysis released a review that counted 32 instances of the phrase “war crime” across several big-name outlets in the first three weeks of the conflict. The study singled out the BBC, CNN, NBC News, The New York Times and The Washington Post as the sources tracked, and it calls the pattern striking and one-sided.
“CAMERA found 32 total applications of the phrase ‘war crime’ during the first three weeks of the war (Feb. 28-Mar. 21). Of those, 28 (88 percent) were directed solely toward the actions of the United States and/or Israel,” Litman wrote on CAMERA’s website. “Zero were directed solely toward the actions of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Four (12 percent) were unattributed or directed at both sides.”
Much of the “war crime” language, the analysis reports, stemmed from an early airstrike that allegedly destroyed a school in Minab, Iran, a deeply sensitive incident that spurred intense coverage and outrage. The Pentagon has said it is investigating that strike, which remains at the center of media debate and public scrutiny, and the watchdog points out how allegations can set the tone for weeks of coverage.
“Several of the other allegations refer to the sinking of an Iranian warship in the Indian Ocean in what can assuredly be classified as a lawful attack,” Litman wrote, arguing that some mainstream reporting failed to make legal distinctions. The review contrasts incidents that drew the “war crime” label with actions by Iran that received little or no such labeling, raising questions about consistency.
CAMERA highlights the use of cluster munitions by Iranian forces, noting that many of those weapons struck populated areas in Israel and beyond. “While cluster munitions are not universally banned, using them to target populated areas almost certainly constitutes a war crime,” the analysis found, suggesting a clear standard was selectively applied.
The watchdog also cataloged Iranian strikes that hit energy infrastructure and other key targets in countries not formally involved in the fight, including Kuwait and Bahrain, and said those attacks rarely prompted the same legal language from Western outlets. That disparity, the group contends, helped shape a narrative that downplayed or normalized Iranian actions while foregrounding alleged Western wrongdoing.
“This journalistic malpractice inverts reality,” Litman wrote, bluntly condemning what he sees as a pattern of biased language. The report frames the disagreement as more than editorial tone; it argues that inconsistent labeling affects public perception of who is held accountable for violations of the laws of war.
Adam Mossoff, a law professor at George Mason, amplified that critique on social media, writing that “data analytics confirm huge bias in favor of pro-Islamic regime of Iran by BBC, CNN, NBC and NY Times.” He laid out the numbers the watchdog produced and pointed to a string of Iranian actions that, in his view, meet the definition of war crimes yet went unflagged by major outlets.
“These media orgs used ‘war crime’ 32 times in news reports in the first 3 weeks of the U.S./Israel-Iran war. Zero references solely to crimes by Islamic regime, and 88% media uses referred solely to U.S. or Israel.
“Islamic regime uses cluster bombs against Israeli civilians, shoots missiles and suicide drones at civilian targets in numerous Arab countries not involved in war, fires missiles at holy sites in Old Jerusalem, [but] zero identification of these war crimes as standalone crimes by major Western media organizations. This is shameful.”
The report notes that inquiries to the named outlets seeking response did not produce comment by the study’s deadline. CAMERA traces its own origins to 1982 in Washington, where it formed in response to perceived bias in coverage of earlier Mideast conflicts, and the group frames this latest review as consistent with its long-standing mission of watchdog scrutiny.
Darnell Thompkins is a Canadian-born American and conservative opinion writer who brings a unique perspective to political and cultural discussions. Passionate about traditional values and individual freedoms, Darnell’s commentary reflects his commitment to fostering meaningful dialogue. When he’s not writing, he enjoys watching hockey and celebrating the sport that connects his Canadian roots with his American journey.