Are newsrooms burying Iranian efforts to influence midterms? - opinion

Who could ignore the constant drumbeat of newscasters, politicians, and voters lamenting the cost of gas at the pump?

A month before the war began in February 2026, a gallon of regular gasoline cost about $2.80, according to the US Energy Information Administration. By October, the price had climbed above $4.30, though it briefly dipped to about $3.70 in July.

With the midterm elections drawing near, voters have made fuel costs a top concern, blaming US President Donald Trump for the war’s effect on prices. Commentators, including Ali Velshi and Christiane Amanpour, have branded the conflict Trump’s “war of choice” while discussing its costs.

But the newsrooms that have scrutinized the war’s costs have largely overlooked a consequential account of Iran’s intentions that Reuters published on October 14, citing two senior Iranian officials: Tehran has been targeting ships to keep oil prices high to influence the US midterms.

In September, Trump accused Iran of trying to influence the election.

“They can’t hold out any longer. They’re desperate to try and affect the election so that we can get a nice, weak group of people in there and leave them alone and let them have their nuclear weapons,” he told reporters.

POLITICO, CNN, and The Washington Post reported his remarks. However, these same outlets did not include the Iranian officials’ remarks, leaving readers to assume that the comments were simply political fodder.

Later in September, Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps spokesperson Gen. Hossein Mohebbi read from what he called a “letter to the American people” at a press conference in Tehran.

In subsequent remarks to the Associated Press, Mohebbi urged Americans to reconsider their leadership and protest Trump’s policies to denounce what he called their government’s warmongering policies.

Around October 14, Iranian attacks sank two ships near the Strait of Hormuz. CNN, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, and Fox News covered the sinkings and the broader surge in attacks. The Times reported that attackers had struck more ships in the preceding week than in the entire month of September.

That same day, Reuters reported a piece of the story vital to Americans weighing the war and gas prices.

The two senior Iranian officials told Reuters that Iran was “deploying new tactics to target ships” sailing through the Strait as it sought to keep oil prices high and influence the midterm vote.

One official said Iran had changed the type and pace of its attacks to frustrate US and allied efforts to lower global oil prices.

According to Reuters, Iran’s senior leadership approved the strategy and coordinated it across the country’s ruling system. Tehran aimed to expand its operations beyond the strait into the Gulf of Oman and farther.

The second official said Tehran intended to prevent Trump from lowering oil prices before the elections.

CNN reported an analyst’s assessment of the strategy but left out the officials’ account. Matt Smith, an analyst at maritime-tracking firm Kpler, said, “It appears Iran is attempting to keep oil prices high ahead of the midterm elections, and the best way to do this has been to increase attacks – both from themselves and via the Houthis.”

A CNN broadcast likewise told viewers that analysts saw the attacks as part of Tehran’s effort to keep oil prices high through the elections.

However, an analyst’s speculative assessment does not hold the same weight as Iranian officials confirming that the regime is using the strategy, which CNN did not include.

Major newsrooms regularly publish Reuters reporting, including accounts that draw on unnamed officials.

Yet the coverage from CNN, The Washington Post, MS NOW, and The New York Times did not put these officials’ statements before their audiences while covering the attacks, gas prices, or foreign election influence.

Fox News buried the Reuters report solely within its live blog. Editors chose which parts of the story their audiences would see.

Sabotaging Americans from afar

Other developments made the question of Iranian influence more pressing.

On October 14, X/Twitter’s Global Government Affairs account said the platform had identified and suspended more than 13,000 accounts across three suspected foreign influence operations linked to Iran, Russia, and China.

According to X, the networks used inauthentic accounts to post and amplify content about US politics and targeted candidates and public figures across the political spectrum.

The New York Times mentioned the announcement on October 16, but its article focused on Russia without examining Iran’s role.

Still, unlike digital disinformation campaigns, Tehran’s strategy is not just an effort to change minds online; it is actively economically sabotaging ordinary Americans.

Earlier in October, The Washington Post reported that a National Intelligence Council assessment identified Iranian activity, though “not on the scale of Russia or China.”

The article also noted that US intelligence considered direct interference with voting machines or vote counts unlikely. But Iran does not need to touch a ballot to try to influence an election. Iran’s reported strategy uses force to raise costs for ordinary people to sway their votes.

News outlets have devoted significant attention to Trump’s responsibility for the war and to the financial pain Americans feel at the pump. Reuters’ account belongs in that coverage.

If senior Iranian officials told the wire service that Tehran was targeting shipping to sustain high oil prices and influence the midterms, Americans deserve to know.

Newsrooms that routinely rely on Reuters, including its interviews with unnamed officials, should not leave that account out of a story they already consider important.

An admission like this carries immense weight – a foreign adversary openly attempting to manipulate fuel markets to sway voters strikes at the very heart of American democracy.

The omission raises serious questions about the editorial priorities of newsrooms and whether political agendas shaped their coverage.

It also implicitly risks aiding a foreign adversary’s attempt to influence an American election by denying voters information they deserve to know.

The writer is a US media researcher at the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting and Analysis (CAMERA) in Israel. She was previously a Breaking News desk manager at The Jerusalem Post.