Inside Iran’s Information War: What Citizens Are Being Told About the Conflict
Iranians are receiving a tightly controlled version of events as the war involving Iran, the United States, and Israel unfolds, one shaped largely by state media narratives, censorship, and restricted access to independent information.
The first indications that Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, may have been killed surfaced on international broadcasts beyond the reach of most Iranians. On February 28, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu suggested during a public statement that there were “signs that the tyrant is no more,” implying that Khamenei had died in a joint U.S.–Israeli strike.
However, viewers inside Iran watching state television encountered silence. Government officials initially refused to confirm or deny the reports. On one of the state broadcaster’s channels, IRTV3, a news presenter urged the public to “trust” the government and its official sources. Reports of Khamenei’s death were dismissed as “baseless rumours,” with assurances that the truth would soon be revealed.
It was not until the following morning, hours after U.S. President Donald Trump announced the death on social media, that Iranian state media acknowledged the development.
Controlled Narratives in Wartime
Since the start of the conflict, which has reportedly killed more than 1,200 people in Iran and spread to Lebanon and several Gulf Arab states, Iran’s state-controlled media has blended confirmed facts with unverified claims to present a carefully curated narrative to domestic audiences.
While millions of Iranians attempt to follow developments through foreign Persian-language satellite channels, access to independent reporting remains difficult. Internet blackouts, strict censorship, and blocked websites often leave citizens cut off from outside sources during periods of unrest and conflict.
An analysis of the first week of war coverage by Iranian state media reveals a clear pattern: extensive reporting on civilian suffering, strong calls for retaliation against perceived “enemies,” and appeals for national unity and loyalty to the Islamic Republic.
At the same time, there has been limited coverage of military installations or government facilities reportedly struck by Israeli and U.S. forces.
Iran’s Powerful Media Apparatus
According to the press freedom watchdog Reporters Without Borders, Iran ranks among the most restrictive environments in the world for journalists.
Since the 1979 establishment of the Islamic Republic following the Iranian Revolution, the country’s media landscape has operated under strict government oversight. Most Western news outlets, including Persian-language services such as BBC Persian, are banned from reporting from inside the country.
State media dominates television and radio broadcasting but has also expanded aggressively into digital platforms. Government-affiliated outlets operate news websites and maintain active channels on platforms such as Instagram, Telegram, and X.
However, accessing these platforms from inside Iran typically requires the use of virtual private networks (VPNs) due to government restrictions.
During internet shutdowns, common during protests or conflict, state-controlled outlets become the primary source of information for many citizens.
“They have a narrative that they’re pushing,” said Mahsa Alimardani of the human rights organization Witness. “It is that they are quite victorious and that their military is very strong.”
Claims and Counterclaims
Several Iranian state media outlets have reported that Iranian forces inflicted heavy casualties on American troops, often publishing figures that far exceed official U.S. confirmations.
On March 3, the semi-official news agency Tasnim News Agency, which is closely associated with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, claimed that 650 U.S. military personnel had been killed within the first two days of fighting. The report cited an IRGC spokesperson and was quickly picked up by media outlets in countries including India, Turkey, and Nigeria.
At the time, the U.S. Department of Defense reported only six American casualties. Later, the United States Central Command confirmed that an additional seven service members had died, bringing the official toll to 13.
AI and Digital Propaganda
Advances in artificial intelligence are also shaping wartime messaging.
In one instance, the state-run English-language broadcaster Press TV shared a video on social media showing a high-rise building engulfed in flames. The post claimed the footage showed damage in Bahrain following an Iranian strike.
However, closer examination revealed visual anomalies, such as two vehicles appearing to merge into one, indicating the video had likely been generated using AI technology.
Read also Lethal ‘Black-Clad’ Elite Kill Squad Deployed to Protect Iran’s New Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei
Experts say the increasing use of such content suggests a growing reliance on digital manipulation in information warfare. “While the use of AI-generated content in propaganda is not new, the fact that major state media outlets are using it repeatedly is striking,” said Brett Schafer of the UK-based think tank Institute for Strategic Dialogue.
Truth, Propaganda, and Public Doubt
Despite accusations of disinformation, Iranian state media occasionally publishes material that proves accurate, complicating the information landscape.
For example, reports on March 3 that more than 160 children and school staff were killed in a strike on a school initially sparked skepticism among government critics, who suspected the images released by state media were AI-generated.
However, analysts later confirmed that aerial photographs of a mass funeral were authentic. Satellite imagery showed newly dug graves appearing the day after the ceremony in a cemetery approximately 3.7 kilometres from the school.
Human rights advocates say this mixture of real documentation and propaganda creates confusion among audiences both inside and outside Iran.
“We have to hold two truths at the same time,” Alimardani explained. “The Iranian regime may conceal evidence when it is responsible for abuses, but during war it also documents civilian casualties extensively.” While such documentation can support the state’s narrative, experts caution that it does not automatically make the evidence false.
For observers trying to understand the conflict, analysts say one principle remains essential when consuming state media reports from Iran: maintaining a healthy degree of skepticism
