← the leaderboard

Al Jazeera English · Iran · 2 Aug 2026

The headline editorialises, passive voice hides who attacked, and the legal stakes go unmentioned.

5.3
/ 10 · article score
scored on 3 of 11 measures · thin coverage

The double standard

The article names the US and Israel as the initiating aggressors of the war in one sentence, then immediately retreats to symmetric language ("the two countries resumed attacks against each other") when describing ongoing hostilities, applying a stricter standard of attribution to the war's origin than to its continuation.

How it builds, in War origin and ongoing hostilities sentence

  1. Named actors: US and Israel named as war's initiators

    The war began on February 28, when the US and Israel launched surprise strikes against Iran

    Active voice with named agents and specific date

  2. No actor named: symmetric framing erases initiator

    the two countries resumed attacks against each other in recent weeks

    Agentless symmetric construction, no actor distinguished

  3. Iran named for Hormuz action; US unnamed for attacks

    Iran has since tightened its control over the waterway as the two countries resumed attacks against each other in recent weeks

    Iran named as active agent for Hormuz; US unnamed in same sentence

The same decision, both sides

Attribution of agency in military action

The US and Israel are named as active agents who launched the war with a specific date attached.

The war began on February 28, when the US and Israel launched surprise strikes against Iran

Ongoing US strikes against Iran are dissolved into symmetric mutual-attack language with no actor distinguished.

the two countries resumed attacks against each other in recent weeks

Naming of actor for specific unilateral action

Iran is named as the active agent tightening control over the Strait of Hormuz.

Iran has since tightened its control over the waterway

The US side's resumed attacks are not attributed to the US by name in the same passage.

as the two countries resumed attacks against each other in recent weeks

What a reader is left with. A reader is left with the impression that Iran bears equal or greater ongoing responsibility for the conflict's continuation, even though the article's own account of the war's origin places the first strike squarely with the US and Israel.

Every highlight is a quote the model flagged. Tap one — or a metric below — to see what it measures and why it scored the way it did.

Aggressor framingHeadline analysis

Trump says new round of Iran talks will begin Monday

United States President Donald Trump has said that negotiations with Tehran are set to begin on Monday after he decided to hold off on new strikes on Iran in pursuit of a deal. Trump said on Sunday that a plan was in place for the US to launch “the biggest attack since World War II” against Iran but that he halted it to give diplomacy a chance. Recommended Stories list of 3 items list 1 of 3 No breakthrough on Strait of Hormuz as Trump halts attack on Iran list 2 of 3 Saudi Crown Prince MBS urges Trump to ‘prioritise dialogue’ in US-Iran war list 3 of 3 Iran says negotiations with Oman over Strait of Hormuz in final stages end of list “Obviously, they don’t want to be attacked. They knew the extent of the attack because they saw it forming,” Trump told reporters on board Air Force One on Sunday. “Now what we’re doing is talking to them in the form of a negotiation. It begins tomorrow afternoon.” He gave no details about the venue or participants in the talks. Trump pulled back from threats of an attack on Saturday after saying the “perimeter” of a deal was in place. In his latest comments, Trump said Iran and US partners Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar had urged him to hold off on the strikes. “When the allies asked to call it off, you’ve got to sort of say, ‘Well, let’s see.’ And the reason they ask is they think there’s a deal,” he said. “There’s a deal on [the Strait of] Hormuz, and then there will be a deal on the nuclear, or you might call it the denuclearisation of Iran.” He said Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman had also urged against the strikes, warning of possible unintended consequences. “I mean, will they be flooded with people pouring into their country and disaster? A lot of bad things can happen,” Trump said. Regional diplomacy intensifies Trump’s announcement came hours after Iranian Minister of Foreign Affairs Abbas Araghchi held a second phone call with Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud, joined by Pakistani Army Commander Asim Munir, to discuss recent diplomatic efforts. Advertisement The officials exchanged views on the current situation and on “initiatives aimed at maintaining and strengthening security and stability” in West Asia, Araghchi said in a Telegram post. They also stressed the need to use regional cooperation and political solutions, he added. Earlier on Sunday, Iran’s official news agency IRNA reported that negotiations between Tehran and Oman over the Strait of Hormuz were in their final stages, citing Araghchi. Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei said the negotiations focused on agreeing to a new route through the strait, adding that this had “no link to the Strait of Hormuz being opened or closed. That is a separate discussion”. The war began on February 28, when the US and Israel launched surprise strikes against Iran, although months of on-and-off diplomacy have led to periods of relative calm. A previous ceasefire deal, which included the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, a vital conduit for global energy supplies, fell through. Iran has since tightened its control over the waterway as the two countries resumed attacks against each other in recent weeks. Oil prices fall as escalation fears ease Oil prices dropped sharply in early trading after Trump abandoned plans for a new military operation against Iran, easing fears of further disruption to Gulf energy supplies. Brent futures were down $4.08, or 4.64 percent, at $83.85 a barrel on Sunday. West Texas Intermediate lost $4.01, or 4.74 percent, to trade at $80.66, according to the Reuters news agency. The decline reversed part of last month’s surge, when both benchmarks gained more than 20 percent as renewed US-Iran fighting and attacks on commercial vessels near Oman intensified concerns over shipping through the region.

Read the original article ↗