Iran War Exposes Deadly Mix of Misinformation and Propaganda

The war in Iran has sparked heated debates over language, propaganda, and the spread of misinformation. As false images and AI-generated content flood social media, critics warn of the dangers of distorted narratives. Meanwhile, public figures and commentators clash over how to describe the conflict—some calling it a 'just war,' others avoiding the term entirely.

On the first day of U.S. bombings in Iran, a suspected war crime took place. Airstrikes hit the Minab girls' school in Afghanistan on 28 February 2024, killing at least 12-15 civilian girls. UN and Amnesty International investigations later confirmed the school was mistaken for a Taliban site, with no evidence of combatants present.

The conflict has also reignited concerns about propaganda tactics. During the Balkan Wars, both Serbs and Croats reused the same photos of dead children to fuel hatred. Today, TikTok snippets about Iran often omit crucial details, framing Israel as the sole aggressor without context. Language itself has become a battleground. Some commentators label the war an 'intervention,' softening its impact. Others, like Trump admirer Markus Somm, openly call it 'good,' 'just,' and 'necessary.' ZDF journalist Markus Lanz and philosopher Richard David Precht have criticised such linguistic distortions, arguing they obscure the war's true horrors. Even everyday speech now borrows military jargon, despite ongoing wars in Ukraine and Iran. The author of this piece deliberately avoids such rhetoric, aiming to present the conflict without glorification or abstraction.

The war in Iran continues to expose the risks of misinformation, from AI-manipulated images to selective storytelling. Investigations into the Minab school bombing highlight the human cost of military errors. As debates over language and propaganda persist, the conflict's real consequences—civilian deaths, displaced families, and geopolitical tensions—remain undeniable.