If there ever was a strategy behind Donald Trump’s decision to blow up the Middle East, it is lying in tatters as the second week of the Iran war draws to a close.
Archived version: https://archive.is/20260314053257/https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-03-14/united-states-iran-war-donald-trump-middle-east-strategy/106436200
Disclaimer: The article linked is from a single source with a single perspective. Make sure to cross-check information against multiple sources to get a comprehensive view on the situation.
Understandable to take them at their word, and I wouldn’t begrudge you for keeping the title as-is given that page, but the page is complete BS – at least for their website.
If you again look at “Analysis & Opinion”, you’ll see there’s not a single article labeled “Opinion”, articles marked “Analysis” like “Are we outsourcing our souls to artificial intelligence?” are blatantly opinions, the sidebar on ABC’s website lacks any “Opinion” section, and even within this article, “X has the upper hand in this conflict” is an opinionated stance.
Saying “they differentiate between analysis and opinion” is untrue because they literally don’t have material marked as “Opinion”.
I haven’t checked all their content but at least going through the latest articles all of them are either by ABC editors or paid freelancers. From what I can see they don’t do guest op-eds where they shirk any responsibility for the content.
It’s possible they used to do them, but no longer does.
The motivation behind
[Opinion]prefix is to avoid accrediting content to publications that they don’t explicitly endorse. In this case it looks like they do.That said, I don’t disagree that the whole approach is confusing.
That makes a lot of sense, and I appreciate the rationale. Thanks!
As a regular ass reader, I agree. The best news is hardly distinct from avowed and evidence based journalism and research. In short, good faith and competence.