Saed News: Riding the media wave and fabricating news to portray a favorable image of certain agendas regarding the negotiation process is an old tactic that American negotiators have used in previous rounds of talks to control public opinion and dominate media authority.
Saed News – According to the political desk of Saed News, quoting Farhikhtegan newspaper, the second round of Iran-U.S. negotiations in Rome began with fabricated news by an Al Arabiya reporter. Fabricated reports about direct negotiations between the U.S. and Iran or meetings in a joint room had already started a few days before April 12, and it seems that the primary current agenda of foreign media is manipulating domestic public opinion.
Yesterday, just minutes after indirect talks between the two countries had begun through Omani mediation, Al Arabiya’s reporter claimed that “the U.S. and Iranian delegations are in the same room at the Omani Embassy in Rome.” This report was quickly denied by Iranian media, and Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei stated that the negotiations were being held in “two separate rooms” at the “residence of the Omani ambassador in Rome.”
Riding the media wave and fabricating news to portray a favorable image of targeted agendas within the negotiations is an old tactic used by American negotiators in previous talks to control public opinion and dominate media authority. However, this time it seems the Iranian negotiating team has not ignored the foreign media’s narrative-building. Limiting foreign media presence during the first round of talks helped reduce the impact of fake news.
A key point is that the U.S. justifies the presence of numerous media outlets under the guise of information transparency, but in reality, this abundance allows for media manipulation and public opinion shaping. This was evident during the second round of negotiations, where more media were allowed on-site, and as a result, the volume and strangeness of fake news increased. One such report, allegedly by Al Jazeera, claimed that “Abbas Araqchi suspended the talks for 15 minutes due to the U.S. side raising non-nuclear issues, stating that talks would only resume if the focus returned to nuclear topics.” This was the second fake news item initially published by Al Jazeera, which was then picked up by other outlets. In reality, the Iranian team briefly left the room to perform prayers.
Interestingly, some domestic media outlets also fell into the trap and published the fake news without verifying it.
Fake news attributed to “informed sources” about the Iran-U.S. negotiations is generally spread with a few clear objectives. First, some media prioritize speed over accuracy to maintain news authority and sometimes publish inaccurate reports. Additionally, some of these inaccurate or false reports are deliberately released to create the impression of gains for the American side. For instance, Trump's claim about direct talks with Iran, amplified by other media, was a strategic move by the U.S. to suggest they had initiated direct, unmediated negotiations—something that was proven false once the talks started. Still, efforts continue in foreign media to push the narrative of direct Iran-U.S. negotiations, as Trump seems eager to claim that his negotiation outcomes have surpassed those of Obama’s team.
Some fake news stories are designed to derail the negotiations, while others are the result of Zionist meddling aimed at manipulating public opinion or creating internal political polarization in Iran. Zionist-affiliated Persian-language media—well-known for their anti-Iran media campaigns—are no exception. While they may sometimes publish accurate updates, their main focus is on shaping the initial narrative and framing to steer public perception. For example, the fake report by Iran International about a supposed three-phase agreement between Iran and the U.S.—claiming Iran would export enriched uranium and the U.S. would commit to certain obligations—seemed positive on the surface but would likely provoke strong domestic backlash.
The frequency and scale of these fabricated news reports undermine the justification that they are simply media errors or the result of faulty sources. These false reports significantly damage the credibility of the outlets involved. What follows is an examination of some of these fake stories and the reporters behind them.
Barak Ravid, a Zionist reporter and Middle East foreign policy analyst for Axios who is present at the Iran-U.S. negotiations in Rome, has been covering the negotiations and the Trump team’s reaction. Although some of his reports are not entirely false, they are clearly in line with the media policy of the Zionist regime and its interests. Therefore, it’s not surprising that news related to Iran and the negotiations is selectively released.
For example, Ravid’s report on internal division within the U.S. National Security Council over Iran—which reveals a continued preference among some Trump officials for military action—is beneficial for Israel, as it suggests that military options are still being considered. Ravid claimed that the U.S. has agreed to allow Iran to enrich uranium up to 3% for peaceful purposes—an assertion that neither side has confirmed or denied at the time of reporting.
Before the second round of talks, Ravid reported on a meeting between Witkoff and Mossad Chief David Barnea, implying that Israel was being kept in the loop. After the Iranian Foreign Minister mentioned a brief chat with Steve Witkoff during the first round in Oman, Ravid falsely claimed that a direct 45-minute meeting had occurred between Araqchi and Witkoff—clearly a fabricated report aimed at influencing Iran’s internal political environment.
It’s notable that many of Ravid’s reports have found significant traction within Iranian media. While it may seem his reporting on Iran is unbiased, in sensitive cases, he often publishes fake news under the guise of media authority, creating an impact long before the claims are denied.
"Last month, Iran’s President, along with the heads of the judiciary and parliament, met with the Supreme Leader... They told Mr. Khamenei that if Iran refused talks or if negotiations failed, military attacks on Iran’s two main nuclear sites—Natanz and Fordow—would be inevitable. At the end of the hours-long meeting, Mr. Khamenei gave in and allowed the negotiations to begin, first indirectly and then, if progress was made, directly with U.S. negotiators."
This was part of a report by Farnaz Fassihi, an Iranian-American journalist with The New York Times, quoting two "informed Iranian sources." Close associates of the Supreme Leader’s office denied this claim, calling it completely false.
Fassihi has a history of publishing fake news about Iran. While various media were speculating about the assassination of Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran, she claimed—based on seven sources, including two Iranian officials—that the killing was due to a bomb planted in his room two months earlier. This was denied, with Iranian officials saying Haniyeh’s residence had not been predetermined, making a bombing impossible.
Fassihi also reported the false news about the Supreme Leader’s health right before the 2022 unrest. The repeated use of unnamed “informed Iranian sources” suggests her reports may serve a specific agenda rather than being simple journalism. Many of her reports seem designed to influence Iranian public opinion and suggest the involvement of intelligence services in these fabrications. Fassihi continues to comment on and analyze the negotiations. While some of her statements may not conflict with the actual news, it wouldn’t be surprising if, in the coming days, more fake reports quoting “informed sources” surface to influence the direction of the talks.
Reuters, too, hasn’t lagged in publishing claims about direct Iran-U.S. negotiations. It also claimed that prisoner exchanges were one of the main topics discussed—a claim denied by Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman. Reuters has previously published inaccurate or false reports, such as claims during the media frenzy about Iranian arms sales to Russia.
During last year’s terror attack at Moscow’s Crocus City Hall, Reuters claimed Tehran had given Russia prior intelligence on the threat—something the Kremlin spokesman denied, stating that no such information had been received from Iran. Reuters also alleged that Iran was facilitating the secret transfer of advanced Russian missiles to Yemen—another claim that was later rejected.
