Headline: "Iranian and Israeli Envoys Were Both at Nuclear Talks

...but then this New York Times article goes on to say that several other Middle Eastern countries were there, like Saudi Arabia.

So what do YOU think when you read a headline like that? It's so incredibly deceptive from everything the article has to do with! It just makes it sound like Israel and Iran were engaged in discussions about their nuclear programs, not that they both happened to send envoys to a forum along with several other Middle Eastern nations that were having a meeting.

Interestingly enough, Haaretz's article about the meeting also only included Iran and Israel as attendees of this conference in the headline, but the inclusion of Israel makes sense because its an Israel newspaper, and I just think the wording's a little better, no? The Haaretz version also has a little more to say about their specific meetings, including the fact that Iran was denying being there at all (just weird).

Anyways, it's little tidbits like these that make me furious about the media. Its funny too, I was just going to keep working on my large article about media bias, and then this headline popped up in one of my news feed. I had already read the Haaretz article and I was still thrown off by it. It's subtle, but subtlety is how the media gets away with being biased (not always, but some times). Why the media needed to single out any country in the Middle East for that is beyond me- how about just "Middle Eastern nations Send Envoys to Nuclear Talks in Cairo" or something like that? I can understand why Haaretz would want to stress that Israel was present as an Israeli newspaper, but the New York Times had no reason to single out Israel and associate them with Iran and their nuclear program unless the meeting was just the two of them specifically or involved solely the two of them, which it didn't.

I'm done. Lehit.