Uncategorized
Iran Exposed the Myth of Independent Journalistic Access
Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei speaks during a meeting in Tehran, Iran, Jan. 17, 2026. Photo: Office of the Iranian Supreme Leader/WANA (West Asia News Agency)/Handout via REUTERS
In October 2025, an opinion piece published in Iran International cited a telling remark by British broadcaster Jon Snow about his reporting from Tehran. When asked how his network, Channel 4, managed to secure access to Iranian officials, he said simply, “They whistle, and we go.”
That seemingly innocuous line was jumped on by journalists and critics because it revealed something about the way Western media covers authoritarian states like Iran. It was a rare moment of honesty but also representative of a deeper issue in Western journalism and a reminder that when dealing with tyrants, access is not the same thing as truth.
Access as Control: How Authoritarian Power Shapes Reporting
Snow’s comment should make anyone who cares about reporting from conflict zones or closed societies sit up and take note. The problem is not just that some correspondents end up parroting the messaging of the regimes they cover. The bigger problem is that the structure of modern foreign reporting rewards access above all else. If you have a visa, if you have a fixer approved by the intelligence services, if the state can decide where you go and who you interview, then you are in. If you challenge the narrative you are shown, you risk losing that access. The idea is simple: stay onside with power and you stay in the country; challenge power and you are out. This is a kind of press freedom in name only.
This dynamic is not unique to Iran, though the Iranian case makes the point with shocking clarity. To report from Iran, Western journalists must operate under state supervision. Their fixers are often regime-approved minders who decide which families they can meet, which streets they can visit, and what stories they can tell. The price of defiance is expulsion. Most choose to stay, and so they comply. The result is journalism that reports through the regime’s lens. In this case, the coverage mirrors Tehran’s narrative while ignoring its contradictions or its crimes.
The Iran International article highlighted how this kind of reporting perpetuates the illusion that “moderates” or “reformists” within the clerical regime are always on the brink of pursuing a more friendly policy toward the West, if only Washington and its partners would be more conciliatory.
But they are the only ones able to meet with foreign press, for a reason.
It must be acknowledged how easy it is, due to simple language barriers, for a regime like Iran to tell the West one thing, through these hyper-managed interviews, and to tell their allies or their own people something entirely different. In Iran, a younger, connected, defiant secular generation is fighting for their lives against a religious dictatorship.
Stories about women walking unveiled in defiance of the compulsory hijab law are rarely told with the depth and persistence they deserve, even though they represent one of the most sustained grassroots challenges to the Islamic Republic.
When Gatekeepers Become Storytellers
This tension between access and truth is not a quirk of reporting on Iran. It applies across many of the most important conflict zones of our time.
Look at how journalists cover the Palestinian territories. To report from the West Bank or Gaza, you need permission from the Palestinian Authority, Hamas, or the relevant security forces. If you want to talk to armed groups such as Hamas or Islamic Jihad, you must do so through intermediaries, and translators, and with the blessing of those groups.
The consequence is that journalists become dependent on these authorities to open doors for them. That dependency shapes the story. The authorities are the gatekeepers and the journalists end up telling the story they want told rather than the story that needs to be heard.
The same dynamic is evident in southern Lebanon.
In 2006, Nic Robertson of CNN spoke about his experience covering the conflict in Lebanon and how Hezbollah “had control of the situation.” That level of control creates an environment where reporters must negotiate and constantly accommodate the group’s conditions for reporting, if they want to stay in the country and file their stories. That negotiation inevitably affects the substance of the reporting. Some stories that might make those groups uncomfortable never get told. The result is a version of events curated by those terrorists themselves.
When a regime-backed organization can quietly move money, people, and logistics through cartel routes, the southern border stops being a political debate and becomes a national security vulnerability.
The Iranian regime’s threat to the U.S. doesn’t just rely on missiles. It… pic.twitter.com/kHU8OwX76Q
— HonestReporting (@HonestReporting) January 16, 2026
The Cost of Choosing Access Over Truth
And that brings us to the central problem. Journalists who operate under these conditions face a stark choice: they can stay close to power and preserve access, or they can push harder for truth and risk being shut out. Many choose to stay. That choice is understandable on a personal level. Journalists want to be where the action is. They want to file video and cables from the front lines. They want their editors to see them as intrepid and essential. But when access is the primary measure of success, it distorts what journalism is supposed to do. Journalism is supposed to challenge power, not accommodate it. It is supposed to expose abuses and amplify voices that might otherwise go unheard. But when access is controlled by those in power, journalism can become an unintentional arm of propaganda.
This dynamic matters beyond public opinion, but also politically, as leaders in Western capitals still rely on the press to gauge what is happening inside these societies. When the media misreads a country, so do the governments that read the media. Western policy on Iran for decades has been shaped by reporting that overemphasized factionalism and the potential for internal reform, even as the reality on the ground showed a population oppressed by the clerical establishment. That disconnect between media portrayal and lived reality has consequences for diplomacy and strategy.
Some journalists have tried to break free from this dynamic. But journalists who take that approach often find it difficult to return. They may be denied visas or locked out of future assignments. That is part of the price of choosing truth over access.
This issue does not mean that journalists should never go to places like Iran, Gaza, the West Bank, or southern Lebanon. On the contrary, those places deserve reporting. But it does mean rethinking how that reporting is done and how it is viewed and understood. Journalists must be willing to acknowledge the limitations of access, to report on what they are not shown, and to seek out voices beyond those sanctioned by power. We need journalism that recognizes the structural pressures that shape reporting and ultimately pushes back against them.
If and when journalists do eventually get deeper access to places like Gaza, they will face the same issues. Access will be contingent. Permission will be dependent on staying within certain lines. Journalists will need to think clearly about the ethical and professional implications of those conditions. Should they accept them in order to be able to say that they were there? Or should they insist on the freedom to report what they see and hear without being steered by those who have an interest in shaping the narrative? That is a question every correspondent must answer for themselves.
Ultimately, the lesson of Jon Snow’s offhand comment about reporting in Iran should not be boiled down to a joke or a sound bite. It should be a warning. Journalism that prioritizes access over truth fails its audience. It confuses permission for credibility. It allows power to define the terms of reporting instead of letting reality speak for itself. If we want journalism that truly informs and challenges the powerful, then we need to demand more of the reporters in the field and more of the editors who send them there. We need journalism that listens to the streets and not just to those pulling the strings.
Founder of the modern Jewish Pride movement, Ben M. Freeman is the author of Jewish Pride: Rebuilding a People (2021), Reclaiming our Story: The Pursuit of Jewish Pride (2022), and The Jews: An Indigenous People (2025). Educating, inspiring and empowering, his work focuses on Jewish identity and historical and contemporary Jew-hatred. A Holocaust scholar for over 15 years, Ben came to prominence during the Corbyn Labour Jew-hate crisis in the UK and quickly became one of his generation’s leading Jewish thinkers and voices against Jew-hate.
This article was originally published by HonestReporting, a Jerusalem-based media watchdog with a focus on antisemitism and anti-Israel bias — where a version of this article first appeared.
Uncategorized
Australia PM Albanese ‘Profoundly Sorry’ for Failing to Prevent Bondi Beach Attack
Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese speaks at the Sydney Opera House during a National Day of Mourning for the victims of the Dec. 14, 2025, mass shooting at a Jewish Hanukkah celebration at Bondi Beach, in Sydney, Australia, Jan. 22, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Jeremy Piper
Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said on Thursday he was “profoundly sorry” for his failure to prevent the Bondi Beach mass shooting, as the country observed a day of mourning for the victims of the attack.
Police say a father and son opened fire at an event celebrating the Jewish festival of Hanukkah on Dec. 14, killing 15 people in Australia‘s worst mass shooting in decades.
They say the two men were inspired by Islamic State to carry out the attack, which the government has called an act of terrorism against Jewish people.
Flags were flown at half-mast across the country ahead of a memorial event at Sydney’s iconic Opera House, where Albanese apologized to the relatives of the victims in the audience.
“You came to celebrate a festival of light and freedom and you left with the violence of hatred. I am deeply and profoundly sorry that we could not protect your loved ones from this evil,” Albanese said to sustained applause in his speech at the event.
Last month, the prime minister said he was “sorry for what the Jewish community and our nation as a whole has experienced” – an apology that some relatives said was insufficient.
A minute’s silence, including on the country’s main television channels, was held across the nation just after 7 pm in Sydney (0800 GMT) as the memorial event began.
Event attendees lit candles and heard speeches from other lawmakers, as well as Jewish prayers and video tributes.
Buildings across the country, including cricket stadiums in Melbourne and Perth, were also illuminated, while play was paused during the Australian Open tennis tournament to observe the minute’s silence.
The Bondi attack shocked the nation and led to calls for tougher action on antisemitism and gun control, with critics of Albanese saying he had not done enough to crack down on a spate of attacks on the Jewish community in recent years.
The government disputes this, and has already passed legislation tightening background checks for gun licenses, as well as separate legislation that would lower the threshold for prosecuting hate speech offenses.
Uncategorized
US Pitches ‘New Gaza’ Development Plan
A drone view shows Palestinians walking past the rubble, following Israeli forces’ withdrawal from the area, amid a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas in Gaza, in Gaza City, Oct. 11, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Dawoud Abu Alkas
The United States on Thursday announced plans for a “New Gaza” rebuilt from scratch to include residential towers, data centers, and seaside resorts, part of President Donald Trump’s push to advance an Israel-Hamas ceasefire shaken by repeated violations.
Trump has parlayed the ceasefire into a broader “Board of Peace” initiative aimed at resolving conflicts globally.
After hosting a signing ceremony for the board in Davos, Switzerland, on Thursday, Trump invited his son-in-law Jared Kushner to present development plans for Gaza, its densely populated cities and towns now in ruins from two years of war.
“In the beginning, we were toying with [building] a free zone, and then [having] a Hamas zone,” Kushner told an audience in Davos of Trump’s early plans to rebuild Gaza, where nearly the entire 2 million population is internally displaced.
“And then we said, you know what? Let’s just plan for catastrophic success.”
‘MASTER PLAN‘
Kushner presented the audience with a slideshow depicting a “master plan” for what he termed a “New Gaza,” displayed on a color-coded map with areas reserved for residential development, data centers, and industrial parks.
The slides included an image of a Mediterranean coastline packed with glittering towers akin to those in Dubai or Singapore. They suggested redevelopment would begin in Rafah in the south, an area under complete Israeli military control.
But they did not address key issues such as property rights or compensation for Palestinians who lost their homes, businesses, and livelihoods during the war. Nor did they address where displaced Palestinians might live during the rebuilding.
Kushner did not say who would fund the redevelopment, which would first require clearing an estimated 68 million tons of rubble and war debris.
A conference will be held in Washington in the coming weeks “where we’ll announce a lot of the contributions that will be made … from the private sector,” Kushner said, without elaborating.
The slides shown by Kushner were nearly identical to slides leaked to the Wall Street Journal in December. The newspaper reported then that the US had offered to “anchor” 20% of the redevelopment project, without going into detail.
Trump has floated the idea of transforming Gaza, ruled for years by the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas, into the “Riviera of the Middle East,” an idea that has drawn criticism from Palestinians.
RAFAH CROSSING
Kushner’s presentation in Davos followed remarks by Ali Shaath, the Palestinian technocrat leader backed by Washington to administer the enclave under Trump’s 20-point plan for Gaza.
A key unfulfilled element of the ceasefire has been the reopening of Gaza’s key Rafah border crossing with Egypt for the entry and exit of Palestinians. Shaath, speaking by video link, announced the Rafah crossing would open next week.
“Opening Rafah signals that Gaza is no longer closed to the future and to the war,” Shaath said.
Israel, which controls the Gaza side of the crossing, has rejected reopening it until Hamas fulfills its ceasefire obligation of returning the remains of the last hostage held in the territory.
After Shaath’s announcement, an Israeli political source said a special effort was being made to return Ran Gvili’s remains and that Israel would discuss reopening the crossing starting next week.
The next phase of Trump’s Gaza plan would see Hamas disarm and international peacekeepers deploy in the crowded, coastal enclave as Israeli troops withdraw further. The first phase left Israel in control of well over half of Gaza, with Hamas holding a sliver of territory along the coast.
Israel has continued to carry out air and artillery strikes in Gaza, often accusing Hamas terrorists of preparing attacks on its troops or encroaching into areas it controls.
Israel launched its air and ground war in Gaza after a Hamas-led cross-border attack on Oct. 7, 2023, that killed 1,200 people. Palestinian terrorists also kidnapped 251 hostages during the massacre.
Uncategorized
Israel Selects Noam Bettan to Compete in 2026 Eurovision Song Contest
Noam Bettan, Israel’s representative for the Eurovision Song Contest 2026, poses in this undated handout photo. Photo: Courtesy of Kan, Timor Elmalach/Handout via REUTERS
Noam Bettan will represent Israel in the 70th Eurovision Song Contest in Vienna, Austria, in May, after winning the Israeli singing competition “Hakochav Haba” (“The Next Star”) this week.
This year will mark the first time since 2022 that Israel will be sending a male contestant to the Eurovision contest. For the last few years, Israel has been represented in the Eurovision competition by women: Yuval Raphael in 2025, Eden Golan in 2024, and Noa Kirel in 2023.
Bettan will participate in the first semifinal of the 2026 Eurovision Song Contest in Vienna on May 12. There will be a second semifinal on May 14 and based on the results of the audience and jury vote, the top 10 countries from both semifinals will advance to compete in the grand final on May 16.
Bettan, 27, was raised in Ra’anana, Israel, to French parents who immigrated to Israel with their two older sons. Bettan, who was also born in Israel, is fluent in French. He released his debut album in 2023, “Above the Water,” and a number of his songs have become hit singles in Israel including “Madame,” which he used as his audition song for “Next Star” this year. He has performed across Israel with his band. In 2018, he competed on the Israeli singing talent show “Aviv or Eyal,” where he finished in third place.
The finale of this year’s “Rising Star” aired on Israeli television on Tuesday night and the four finalists included Bettan, Gal De Paz, Shira Zloof, and Alona Erez. In the final they performed covers of songs, with Bettan performing a Hebrew track, before the top three advanced to the superfinal, where Bettan performed a rendition of the French song “Dernière danse.” The song that Bettan will sing in the 2026 Eurovision will be selected internally by a committee convened by Israel’s public broadcaster Kan, which organizes Israel’s participation in the Eurovision. The song is expected to be announced in March.
Bettan previously auditioned for “Next Star” as a teenager, but failed to make it on to the show. After being crowned the winner on Tuesday night, he thanked the Israeli public for selecting him to represent his country in the Eurovision.
“I will give it my all, I’ll do everything I can to represent our country. It’s such a huge f–king privilege,” he said.
Israel has participated in the Eurovision 46 times and won the contest four times, most recently in 2018 with Netta Barzilai and her song “Toy,” which gave Israel the opportunity to host the contest in Tel Aviv in 2019.
In December, members of the European Broadcasting Union, which organizes the Eurovision, voted that Israel will be allowed to compete in the contest this year despite demands from several countries to ban the Jewish state because of its military actions in the Gaza Strip during the Israel-Hamas war. Following the EBU’s announcement, Spain, Ireland, Iceland, the Netherlands, and Slovenia announced their decision to pull out of this year’s Eurovision in protest. Other countries are facing increasing pressure to withdraw from the song contest because of Israel’s involvement, and two past Eurovision winners have returned their trophies to the EBU in protest of Israel’s participation this year.