The Guardian has acknowledged an error in its recent coverage of United Nations sanctions against Iran, underscoring how imprecision in reporting can skew the debate on one of the world’s most sensitive security issues.

In its September 20 article, “UN security council fails to prevent ‘snapback’ nuclear sanctions on Iran,” The Guardian originally stated that the UN security council had nine members. The paper later clarified that the council has 15 members, and that a resolution requires the affirmative votes of at least nine for passage.

Politico has issued a correction to its coverage of Emmanuel Macron’s weekend interview on CBS’s Face the Nation. An earlier version of the article gave the French president’s first name and title incorrectly. The slip itself is minor. But as with so much reporting around Israel and Palestine, even small errors carry weight because they highlight the way language, framing and credibility are all scrutinised.

The original piece described Macron’s defence of France’s recognition of Palestinian statehood, setting it in the context of the war in Gaza and heavy criticism from Washington. While Politico corrected his name and title, what went unexamined was the framing of Macron’s remarks. By presenting recognition as the “only” route to peace, the article risked glossing over Hamas’s role and the hard security realities Israel continues to face.

A lengthy CNN feature on the recognition of Palestinian statehood by the United Kingdom, Canada and Australia presents a highly partial narrative that risks misleading readers on several critical points.

The article, headlined “Western recognition won’t change the reality on the ground: A Palestinian state has never seemed further away” (17 September 2025), highlights international momentum for recognition but fails to address the longstanding record of Palestinian Authority (PA) corruption and incitement, including its “pay-for-slay” policy of financially rewarding convicted terrorists and their families. This omission is striking given that the piece presents recognition as a straightforward act of justice and legitimacy, while ignoring behaviors that directly undermine peace prospects.

The Guardian has amended an opinion piece that originally implied the United Nations itself had formally accused Israel of genocide in Gaza. In reality, the finding cited came from an independent UN commission of inquiry — not from the UN as a whole.

The correction, added on 18 September 2025, stated: “A previous version of the headline incorrectly implied that the UN’s independent international commission of inquiry spoke on behalf of the UN.”

The Guardian has amended an article on policing of Gaza-related demonstrations after incorrectly referring to the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) as “the UK’s” human rights watchdog. In fact, the EHRC covers only England, Scotland and Wales, not Northern Ireland.

The correction was quietly added on 19 August 2025, with the headline and main text both altered.

The New York Times has been forced to correct an article that wrongly attributed an antisemitic statement to conservative activist Charlie Kirk.

The article, Where Charlie Kirk Stood on Key Political Issues, claimed Kirk himself had made the remark during an episode of his podcast. In fact, he was quoting from a social media post — one amplified by Elon Musk — before going on to criticise it.

The New York Times has amended its reporting on Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s trip to Israel after misstating the length of the conflict in Gaza.

An article published on 13 September said that the war had been raging for nearly three years. In fact, the fighting began nearly two years ago. The correction was appended to a piece describing Rubio’s consultations with Israeli officials over their planned military offensive in Gaza City and President Trump’s frustrations with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s approach to the conflict.

The Guardian has issued another correction concerning its reporting on the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and proceedings over Israel and Gaza.

In a 5 September article by Beirut correspondent William Christou, the paper stated that the ICJ had ruled in January 2024 that the claim of genocide was “plausible”. This language has been widely misreported in international coverage but is not an accurate reflection of the court’s decision.

ABC has issued a correction after multiple outlets — Radio News, News Channel and News Digital — mischaracterized the voting figures behind a resolution from the International Association of Genocide Scholars (IAGS) declaring Israeli actions in Gaza as genocide.

Initial reports on September 2 said a majority of the association’s 500 members had voted in favor of the resolution. In reality, participation was far lower. Only 28 percent of members took part in the ballot, of whom 86 percent voted in favor.

NPR has issued a correction to its coverage of the mass Gen Z protests in Nepal, acknowledging that arson attacks on government buildings and the homes of senior politicians took place on Tuesday, not Monday as initially reported.

The original article suggested that the most severe violence erupted on the very first day of demonstrations, when young Nepalis began protesting corruption and a government ban on social media platforms. That framing implied an immediate descent into destruction.

In fact, the first day’s unrest, while deadly, did not involve the torching of parliament, the Supreme Court, or the residences of political leaders.

The New York Times has corrected an error in its recent news analysis on how the Trump administration has undermined Congress. The article originally stated that the Foreign Malign Influence Center (FMIC), established by Congress to counter election interference, played a major role warning about Russian propaganda during the 2020 presidential campaign. In fact, the FMIC only issued such warnings in 2024.