Our critique of
Russia Today (RT)
Analysis #429 Β· July 25, 2026 Β· 3 min read
Politics
Text size
RT Saw a 'Wave of Attacks.' The People Under It Counted Interceptions.
RT: 'Iran unleashes wave of attacks'Euronews: 'Iran military says it targeted'Jordan: 'no casualties or material damage'US 'has not confirmed' facilities were hitOwner: Russian Government
πŸ‘Decoded
Friday morning, Iran's army put out a statement saying it had sent drones at US bases in Bahrain, Jordan and Kuwait, in retaliation for thirteen straight nights of American strikes. That's the event. Now watch two newsrooms handle the exact same press release with the exact same facts available β€” because this one is a masterclass in how a verb can do a military's job for it. * Euronews headlined it: "Iran military says it targeted US bases in Bahrain, Jordan and Kuwait." Says. Targeted. Every claim in the piece wears its source on its sleeve β€” "the Iranian army said in a statement," the Revolutionary Guards "separately claimed." Attribution isn't decoration; it's the reader's receipt for where a fact came from. * RT headlined the same statement: "Iran unleashes wave of attacks on US bases." No says. No claimed. Iran doesn't allege a wave β€” it unleashes one, like Poseidon. The subhead tells you sirens blared as drones "reportedly struck the headquarters of the US Fifth Fleet," with one little "reportedly" doing hazard-pay work in the middle of a sentence that's already committed to "struck." * So what did the wave actually do? Ask the people standing under it. Jordan's military said it intercepted seven missiles and six drones, and that the whole operation "resulted in no casualties or material damage." Bahrain said it intercepted and destroyed "a number of Iranian aerial aggressions." The US, per Euronews, "has not confirmed that any of its facilities or personnel were targeted" β€” not damaged, targeted. There was an explosion reported in Bahrain, and it wasn't immediately clear it was even connected. That's the wave. * See the ladder? The Iranian statement says targeted. RT's subhead upgrades it to struck. RT's headline upgrades that to unleashes a wave. Three rungs up from the source material, and every rung was climbed in the headline office, not the battlefield. Meanwhile the only parties with shrapnel to count reported intercepted drones and zero damage. * RT is owned by the Russian government, and Moscow has an obvious rooting interest in America's war going badly. But you don't need the ownership chart to catch this one. You just need to notice which desk made you pay for the claim with a "says" β€” and which desk handed you the wave for free.
β€œThe statement said 'targeted.' The headline said 'unleashes.' The rungs in between were climbed in an office.”
Comments (6)
Comments are screened before posting. Use Report to flag a comment β€” reports are reviewed by our editorial team within 24 hours β€” or Block to hide an author.
deadline_dan
'wave' is such a lazy war noun. waves don't have return addresses
43d ago
SkepticalSue
One thing I'd add: RT often just translates Iranian state TV's own wording. Sometimes the critique belongs one desk further up the chain.
43d ago
dry_socket
my da still thinks RT is just 'another angle'. sending him this one
44d ago
jornolurker
'says it targeted' is doing so much heavy lifting. verb of the year candidate
44d ago
BiasBingo
RT 'unleashes wave' β€” drink. euronews 'says it targeted' β€” drink. i am no longer sober
44d ago
ZeynepReads
counting interceptions vs counting launches is the entire war in a single editing choice
44d ago