Lesson Report:
**Title & Synopsis**
**Framing the Houthis: Institutional Bias, Media Sources, and Ground Truth**
This session used the current conflict involving the Houthis in Yemen and the Red Sea as a case study for institutional bias and the challenge of establishing “ground truth� in international politics. Students compared non‑Western media, U.S. think-tank/State Department sources, and discussed how naming, imagery, and source selection shape perceptions of the same events. The class concluded with a formal introduction of the upcoming 1.5–2 page situational report assignment, linked to students’ chosen international issues.
—
### Attendance
Number of students mentioned absent: **4**
– Absent: **Hermine**, **Idina**, **Beknazar**, **Ayn Azik** (noted as “gonna be absent for a little whileâ€�).
– Present (explicitly checked): Albina, Azamatu, Makrona, Zoe, Sophie, Nino, Elena, Mukadas, Altanay, Zamira, Adam.
—
### Topics Covered (Chronological, with Activity/Topic Labels)
#### 1. Opening & Course Housekeeping
– **Multicultural Week reference & rapport-building**
– Brief informal remarks about “Multicultural Weekâ€� (food, games).
– Light tone to transition into class content.
– **Missing Walt reading & research deadlines**
– Instructor apologized that the assigned Walt reading did **not** appear on eCourse.
– Explained the omission was due to several research deadlines consuming time.
– Stated explicitly that there is still “plentyâ€� to do in class despite the missing reading.
– **Session goals explicitly laid out**
– Three main goals for the day:
1. **Continue examining institutional bias** via a focused case study: the **Houthis in the Red Sea**.
2. **Connect that case study** to each student’s **individual project/issue**, selected the previous Tuesday.
3. **Introduce the situational report assignment** (1.5–2 pages) that will be **due one week from today (next Thursday)**.
– **Attendance taken explicitly**
– Called roll by name (see attendance section above for details).
– Noted that several students had “disappearedâ€�/stopped attending (Hermine, Idina, Beknazar), and that **Ayn Azik** will be absent for a while.
—
#### 2. Activity 1: Non‑Western News Coverage of the Houthis (Establishing Ground Truth, Part 1)
– **Framing the key analytical goal: “ground truthâ€�**
– Instructor reiterated a recurring course task: **collecting as much unbiased information as possible** on a given issue.
– Defined the overarching medium-term goal: **How can we establish a “ground truthâ€�** on a contentious international issue?
– Emphasized that today’s first 10–15 minutes would be a **practical exercise** in this, focused on the **Houthis in the Red Sea**.
– **Clarifying who the Houthis are (baseline knowledge check)**
– Asked the class: “Who here knows who the Houthis are as an organization?â€�
– Student response (Adam): **Houthis are based in Yemen.**
– Brief recap:
– There was a **revolution/uprising** in Yemen.
– Houthis are the **group that took control** and are now the **de facto ruling/controlling force** in much of Yemen.
– Mentioned minor language note: discussion of what Houthis are called in Russian (“Houthiâ€� / “Houthikiâ€�), highlighting cross-linguistic variance.
– **Instructions for the non‑Western news activity**
– Students were asked to **work with a partner**.
– Task:
– Find **one news headline** (with accompanying image if possible) about the **Houthis** from **no later than one week ago** (i.e., within the last 7 days).
– The source must be **non‑Western**:
– Acceptable: **Al Jazeera**, other international but non‑Western outlets, **Russian** or other local news.
– **Explicitly forbidden**: stereotypically **Western news sources** (e.g., major U.S./UK outlets).
– Goal: capture **recent coverage** of the Houthis from **non-Western perspectives**.
– Technical step:
– Discussed using **Google’s time filter** (“sort by timeâ€�) to limit search to the past week.
– Either the instructor or a student (Asimov) demonstrated how to do this, effectively a micro‑tutorial in **time-bounded searching**.
– Comment: “And now you’re literateâ€� – underscores that this was positioned as basic digital literacy.
– **Deliverables during class**
– Students were asked to:
– **Take a screenshot** of:
– The **headline**, and
– The **main picture** (if present) at the top of the article.
– **Post the screenshot to the class Telegram group chat** to create a collective dataset of headlines/images.
—
#### 3. Analysis of Non‑Western Headlines & Imagery
– **Guided analysis prompt**
– After students posted their screenshots, they were asked (with partners) to:
– Examine the set of **headlines and images** in the chat.
– Note:
– **Repeated ideas/frames** across these sources.
– **What is missing or excluded**: Are there notable **omissions**, or topics not being mentioned?
– **Reported patterns from students**
– **Visual framing of Houthis:**
– Students noted that images **consistently depicted the Houthis as armed fighters**:
– “Pictures show them as powerful fighters.â€�
– Emphasis on **military photography**: men with guns, combat gear, and militant posturing.
– Instructor recorded this as a repeated theme (“chant markâ€� on the board), reinforcing that visual symbolism is part of bias/framing.
– **Portrayal of control and authority:**
– Some students noted headlines that **frame the Houthis as in control**:
– They are presented as **de facto decision‑makers** and **leaders** within Yemen or in the Red Sea theatre.
– Discussion captured that non‑Western sources often **highlight their agency and control**.
– **References to international actors and humanitarian crisis:**
– Students observed frequent mention of **Iran** and the **U.S.** in relation to Houthis.
– Some headlines also referenced a **humanitarian crisis**, suggesting a broader contextualization of the conflict.
– **Transition to deeper framing analysis**
– Instructor used this preliminary pattern recognition to prepare for a more conceptual discussion of **how naming and labeling** structures our understanding of the same conflict.
—
#### 4. Naming & Framing: “Operation Prosperity Guardian� vs. “Battle of the Promised Conquest�
– **Introduction of competing labels**
– Instructor wrote two phrases on the board:
– **“Operation Prosperity Guardianâ€�**
– **“Battle of the Promised Conquestâ€�**
– Asked students:
– What do these phrases refer to?
– Who is using each phrase?
– What is the purpose behind each naming choice?
– **Clarifying the referents**
– **Operation Prosperity Guardian**
– Described as:
– A **series of operations** from **2023 until May 2025**.
– Conducted by the **United States and a Western coalition**.
– Against the **Houthis in Yemen** (and, importantly, related to the **Red Sea maritime domain**).
– Framed as the overarching Western label for **Western coalition vs. Houthis**.
– **Battle of the Promised Conquest**
– Identified as:
– The name used by the **Houthis themselves** for their overarching **strategy** since roughly **2024**.
– A strategy to:
– **Consolidate control within Yemen**, and
– **Establish their position internationally**, especially within the **Red Sea**.
– One student speculated a link to **Hamas** (due to similar militant vocabulary); instructor clarified:
– Vocabulary and rhetorical style may be similar, but this term specifically refers to **Houthi** strategic framing, not Hamas.
– **Conceptual takeaway: language as institutional bias**
– Instructor emphasized that both phrases **refer to the same underlying conflict** but:
– One is a **Western military/government label**.
– The other is a **Houthi/self-designated label**.
– Point stressed: **Naming conventions encode perspective and agenda**:
– “Prosperity Guardianâ€� suggests protection, order, and economic stability.
– “Promised Conquestâ€� suggests religious/ideological destiny, liberation, or victory.
– This conceptual pivot linked back to the earlier exercise:
– Just as images and headlines frame perceptions, **labels used by different institutions** (governments vs. non‑state actors) reflect **competing narratives**.
—
#### 5. Activity 2: U.S. Think Tanks & State Department Sources (Establishing Ground Truth, Part 2)
– **New source-type requirement**
– Students were assigned a second research task, this time focusing deliberately on **American institutional sources**:
– Find an article on the Houthis dated **no earlier than January 1** (within roughly the last month).
– Source type must be either:
– A **U.S. think tank** (preferably based in Washington, D.C.), or
– An article or statement **published directly by the U.S. State Department**.
– Instructor advised:
– If unfamiliar with term **“think tankâ€�**, students should **Google it** and consult lists of prominent U.S. think tanks.
– **Deliverables**
– Same as before:
– Locate an appropriate article.
– **Screenshot the headline and any top image**.
– **Post to the Telegram group chat** so the class has a comparative dataset.
– **Prompted comparative analysis**
– Students were asked to **repeat the earlier analytic steps**:
– Identify **repeated themes** across think‑tank/State Department headlines and images.
– Notice **what is missing or de‑emphasized**.
– Then, **compare** these Western policy-oriented narratives with the **non‑Western media** analyzed earlier.
– **Reported patterns from students**
– **Focus on international relations and foreign powers:**
– Students noted that these sources heavily emphasize:
– Which **states and coalitions** are involved.
– The broader **international relations context** of the conflict.
– This aligns with the institutional mission of think tanks and the State Department:
– Provide **analysis** of “what’s happening in the world.â€�
– Offer **policy prescriptions** or rationales for action.
– **Focus on humanitarian issues and aid:**
– Several articles highlighted **humanitarian crises** and **issues with aid**:
– Disruption of aid delivery.
– Humanitarian impact of Houthi actions or of broader conflict dynamics.
– **Portrayal of the Houthis:**
– When asked how Houthis are portrayed overall (positive/negative/neutral):
– Students generally agreed that Houthis are framed **negatively**:
– As **rebels at best**, **terrorists at worst**.
– As actors **causing humanitarian crises**.
– As **bombing innocent merchant ships** in the Red Sea.
– This stands in contrast to non‑Western sources that portrayed them more as **powerful local actors/decision‑makers**, even if still militant.
– **Discussion of propaganda and caution around intentions**
– One student remarked that the U.S. framing reminded them of coverage of the **Taliban**, implying a sense of **propagandistic representation** (strongly negative, security‑centric).
– Instructor responded by:
– Acknowledging the intuition but **cautioning against jumping straight to “propagandaâ€�** as a label.
– Encouraging students to identify:
– **Specific textual/visual features** that create that impression.
– Concrete **patterns and evidence** rather than immediately ascribing motives or intentions.
– This reinforced the methodological orientation: **analyze content and structure first**, then discuss bias and agenda.
—
#### 6. Synthesis: Triangulation and the Missing Local Perspective
– **Concept of “last mileâ€� in information gathering**
– Instructor summarized key insights from the two comparative exercises:
– **Non‑Western news**: more varied depictions, military imagery, recognition of Houthi control, references to regional powers and humanitarian impacts.
– **U.S. think tanks/State Dept**: strong emphasis on international security, coalition responses, and negative characterization of the Houthis.
– Then introduced the idea that even this dual comparison is **still incomplete**:
– The “last mileâ€� of building ground truth is often the **hardest**: accessing **local perspectives**.
– **Local sources and language barriers**
– Emphasized that:
– **Local actors’ perspectives** (e.g., Yemeni sources, Arabic‑language outlets, local civil society accounts) are often **underrepresented** in easily accessible mainstream/global media.
– These sources are frequently **buried in local languages**, not well indexed by major Western platforms, and thus **harder to find**.
– Stressed the need to:
– Use **digital tools** (search strategies, translation tools) to **bridge language gaps**.
– Make a conscious effort to **seek out and incorporate local voices** when trying to understand an international issue.
– **Connection to broader course theme: institutional bias**
– The exercise illustrated:
– How **different institutions** (local media, non‑Western outlets, U.S. think tanks, state agencies) each present **biased yet informative slices** of reality.
– Establishing “ground truthâ€� is not about finding one perfect source, but about **triangulating multiple biased perspectives**, particularly including those **closest to the conflict**.
—
#### 7. Assignment Briefing: Situational Report (Linking to Students’ Own Issues)
– **Assignment parameters**
– **Due date**: **One week from today** (next Thursday).
– **Length**: **1.5 pages, maximum 2 pages**.
– **Format**:
– Will follow the **outline format** students worked on during **last Thursday’s session**.
– Instructor will **post detailed formatting guidelines on eCourse tonight** (along with, presumably, the missing Walt reading).
– **Content and topic requirements**
– Topic: The assignment must focus on the **contemporary international issue** each student selected on **Tuesday**.
– Must be an issue the student:
– Finds **interesting or important**, and
– Can research with multi-source triangulation.
– **Key constraint**: the issue must **involve multiple states**.
– Explicitly **excluded**:
– Purely **internal civil wars** with no significant external state involvement.
– **Intra‑faction conflicts** confined wholly within one country.
– **Flexibility to change topics**:
– Students **may change** their initially chosen issue if:
– They no longer find it interesting, or
– There is **insufficient information** available to do solid analysis.
– **Example: protests in Iran**
– A student raised **protests in Iran** as a potential topic.
– Instructor’s guidance:
– It can work, but the student must **explicitly articulate its international dimension**:
– “It is an international issue. The question is why.â€�
– This aligns with the requirement that the issue involve **multiple states and cross-border implications**.
– **Source expectations for the situational report**
– Students were warned **not to rely solely on**:
– Mainstream **English‑language news**.
– **Government sources** (e.g., State Department, official press releases).
– Instead, they are **challenged** to:
– **Triangulate sources**:
– Combine mainstream global outlets, government/think-tank analyses, and
– **Local sources**, especially in **local languages** where possible.
– Use **digital translation and search tools** to locate localâ€�language materials that represent the perspectives of actors on the ground.
– **Instructional link to the day’s activities**
– The Houthi exercises served as a **template** for what students should do in their situational reports:
– Contrast **non‑Western vs. Western** representations.
– Pay attention to **naming, imagery, and characterization**.
– Seek out and analyze **local perspectives** to complete the “last mileâ€� toward a more robust ground truth.
—
### Actionable Items
#### High Urgency (Before/By Next Class)
– **Post missing materials to eCourse**
– Upload the **Walt reading** that was previously not posted.
– Upload the **formal situational report assignment prompt**, including:
– Exact **due date/time**.
– Detailed **outline/formatting requirements** (as referenced from last Thursday’s outline exercise).
– Clear **criteria for acceptable topics** and examples.
– **Clarify assignment expectations**
– In the assignment description, reiterate:
– Requirement for **multiple states** being involved in the issue.
– Expectation to include at least **one or more local-language/local-perspective sources**, where feasible.
– Length limit (**1.5–2 pages**) and outline-style structure.
#### Medium Urgency (Next 1–2 Weeks)
– **Follow up on absent/disappeared students**
– Consider checking in (via email or institutional channels) with:
– **Hermine**, **Idina**, **Beknazar** (noted as having “disappearedâ€� from class).
– Document that **Ayn Azik** is on a known extended absence.
– **Plan explicit modeling of local‑source research**
– In an upcoming class, demonstrate:
– How to search for **local media** on a chosen conflict (e.g., Yemeni or Arabic‑language coverage of the Houthis).
– How to use **translation tools** effectively.
– How to **evaluate credibility** of less-familiar outlets.
– **Provide a concise framework/handout on “ground truthâ€�**
– Consider drafting a short handout or slide set summarizing:
– Steps to **triangulate sources**.
– Common **institutional biases** (state, think tank, local press).
– Criteria for identifying **gaps and omissions** in coverage.
#### Lower Urgency / Ongoing
– **Future class debrief on students’ own issues**
– Allocate time in a later session for students to:
– Share how they **integrated non‑Western, Western, and local sources** for their own topics.
– Reflect on differences in **portrayal and framing** similar to today’s Houthi example.
– **Reinforce careful use of the term “propagandaâ€�**
– In subsequent discussions, continue to:
– Encourage students to **identify concrete textual/visual evidence** before labeling something as propaganda.
– Distinguish between **bias**, **framing**, and deliberate **propaganda** as analytic categories.
– **Consider revisiting naming conventions in other case studies**
– Use additional examples (e.g., operations in other conflicts with competing names) to reinforce:
– How **language choice** is part of institutional bias.
– How naming shapes **public and policy perceptions** of conflicts.
Homework Instructions:
ASSIGNMENT #1: Situational Report on a Contemporary International Issue
You will write a concise 1.5–2 page situational report on the international issue you selected in class (or a new one if you choose to change it). This report asks you to practice establishing a “ground truth� by triangulating among multiple, differently biased sources—exactly as we did with the Houthis case—so that you can recognize institutional bias and recover underrepresented local perspectives.
Instructions:
1. **Confirm or (if needed) change your topic**
1.1. Recall the task from Tuesday: you chose “one contemporary issue in the world, international issue in the world, that you feel is especially interesting or important to you. The only qualifier is that it has to involve multiple states, so no single civil war, no inter‑faction conflict in one particular country.�
1.2. Decide whether to keep your original topic or change it. The instructor explicitly said:
> “You can change, yeah. If you don’t feel like the topic that you chose is interesting enough, or you don’t have enough information, you can select another one.â€�
1.3. Make sure your chosen issue:
– Is contemporary (currently ongoing or very recent).
– Clearly involves **more than one state** (e.g., regional conflicts, international interventions, sanctions regimes, maritime disputes, refugee flows with cross-border implications, etc.).
– Has enough public information and media coverage that you can find diverse sources.
1.4. If your topic is similar to the example discussed in class (e.g., protests in Iran), make sure you can justify its **international dimension**:
– Ask yourself: *“It is an international issue. The question is why.â€�*
– Think about foreign governments, international organizations, or transnational effects that make it more than a purely domestic story.
2. **Clarify your core question and scope**
2.1. Narrow your issue to a manageable focus for 1.5–2 pages. For example:
– Instead of “The war in Yemen,â€� focus on “Recent Red Sea shipping disruptions linked to the Houthis.â€�
– Instead of “Protests in Iran,â€� focus on “How foreign governments have responded to the protests in Iran.â€�
2.2. Formulate a guiding question your situational report will help answer, such as:
– “What is the current situation in X, and how are different actors framing it?â€�
– “How do Western and non‑Western sources differ in their portrayal of Y?â€�
2.3. Keep this question in mind as you select and compare sources.
3. **Collect a diverse set of sources (triangulation)**
Your goal is to reproduce the investigative logic of today’s class: comparing **non‑Western**, **Western/US think-tank or government**, and **local** perspectives to see how the same issue is framed differently.
3.1. **Non‑Western media sources**
– As in the first in‑class activity with the Houthis, find at least one or two pieces from **non‑Western** outlets (e.g., Al Jazeera, regional or local news agencies, Russian media, or other international but non‑US/Western European outlets).
– Recall the original instructions from class:
> “Find one news headline from no later than one week ago… regarding something with the Houthis… from a source that we would consider to be a non‑Western source… avoid what we would consider to be stereotypically Western news sources.�
– For homework, you do not need to limit yourself to one week, but try to use **recent** coverage of your chosen issue.
3.2. **US / Western think tanks and government sources**
– Mirror the second in‑class activity:
> “Find an article… from no later than… the beginning of the year… regarding the Houthis. But the source that you have to use is either a think tank based in the United States, preferably in Washington, D.C., or a U.S. State Department source itself.�
– For your topic, identify at least one:
– US‑based think tank report, commentary, or briefing (e.g., from major Washington, D.C. institutes), **or**
– Official US government material (e.g., U.S. State Department statements, fact sheets, or press releases).
– These sources will help you see how powerful institutions with clear policy interests frame the issue.
3.3. **Local / underrepresented perspectives (crucial requirement)**
– The instructor emphasized that this “last mileâ€� is often the hardest:
> “The last missing perspective… is finding the local perspective. Finding the perspective from actors that might not be properly represented by the mainstream sources that are easiest for us to find… Often times these sources are buried in local languages.�
– Make a serious effort to locate at least one source that:
– Comes from within the affected country or region (local news outlet, local NGO, local activist group, local government statement, etc.), **and/or**
– Is published in the relevant **local language**, even if you rely on translation tools to understand it.
– This step is not optional. Your report should demonstrate that you attempted to go beyond “mainstream English language news sites or government sources.â€�
3.4. **Avoid relying only on mainstream English and government narratives**
– The instructor’s explicit warning for this assignment:
> “Make sure that when you are trying to triangulate your sources, that you do not just use mainstream English language news sites or government sources. I would challenge you to go the extra step to trying to find local sources as well, especially those published in the local language.�
– When choosing sources, check yourself: if all your materials are from big English‑language outlets or Western governments, you have not met the assignment’s expectations.
4. **Analyze how different sources frame the issue**
4.1. Draw directly on the class exercise with the Houthis and the contrasting labels like “Operation Prosperity Guardian� vs. “Battle of the Promised Conquest�:
– Notice how naming conventions, headlines, and images encode different perspectives and values.
– Consider which side uses which label, and what each label suggests about legitimacy, morality, and power.
4.2. For your chosen issue, systematically compare your sources:
– **Headlines and names**: Are there different names for the same operation, protest movement, or agreement?
– **Imagery**: What kinds of photos or visuals are used (e.g., “powerful fighters,â€� victims, politicians, crowds)? What mood do they create?
– **Portrayal of key actors**: Are they described as “rebels,â€� “terrorists,â€� “freedom fighters,â€� “government forces,â€� “resistance,â€� “civilians,â€� etc.?
– **Focus and omissions**:
– What issues are repeatedly emphasized (e.g., “terrorism,â€� “humanitarian crisis,â€� “maritime security,â€� “foreign interferenceâ€�)?
– What is barely mentioned or missing (e.g., local political grievances, history, casualties on certain sides, economic dimensions)?
4.3. Pay attention to **institutional bias**:
– Consider how the mission and audience of each source (state department, think tank, local outlet, regional broadcaster) shapes what they highlight or downplay.
– Ask: *If I only read this one type of source, what would my picture of the situation look like? What would I likely miss?*
5. **Plan your situational report using the outline format**
5.1. Your report must be **1.5 pages, no more than two pages**, as stated in class:
> “1.5 pages, no more than two pages, relatively short.�
5.2. Use the **outline format** you practiced last Thursday:
– The instructor:
> “The formatting will follow the outline format that you already worked on last Thursday. I’m going to post that all on eCourse tonight.â€�
– Follow the headings/structure provided in that outline template. Do not write a free‑form essay; keep the organized, point‑by‑point outline structure.
5.3. Before writing, sketch your main sections (adapted to the provided template), for example:
– Brief identification of the issue and why it matters.
– Key actors and their basic positions.
– Summary of what different types of sources say (non‑Western media, US/Western think tanks/government, local sources).
– Notable differences in language, focus, and framing.
– Identification of missing or underrepresented perspectives.
– Remaining questions or uncertainties about the “ground truth.â€�
6. **Write the situational report (1.5–2 pages)**
6.1. In your outline, clearly and concisely explain:
– **What** is happening (the current situation).
– **Who** the main actors are and what they are doing.
– **How** different sources frame these actors and events (positive/negative/neutral, technical vs. moral language, etc.).
6.2. Explicitly connect your analysis to the idea of “establishing a ground truth� from class:
– Show how using multiple, differently biased sources gives you a more complete picture than any single narrative alone.
– Highlight where the accounts converge and where they diverge.
6.3. Demonstrate that you actually used each type of source:
– Refer to at least one **non‑Western** media source.
– Refer to at least one **US/Western think tank or government** source.
– Refer to at least one **local or local‑language** source (or clear attempt at it).
6.4. Maintain an analytical, not purely descriptive, tone:
– Avoid simply retelling events. Focus on comparing **perspectives** and **biases**.
– You may use short, direct quotations from headlines or official labels (similar to how we discussed “Operation Prosperity Guardianâ€� vs. “Battle of the Promised Conquestâ€�) to illustrate framing.
7. **Format and length checks**
7.1. Ensure your report:
– Uses the **outline format** specified in class and posted by your instructor.
– Is **at least 1.5 pages** and **no more than 2 full pages** of main text.
7.2. Use clear, readable formatting (standard font, spacing, margins) consistent with course norms.
7.3. Provide basic source information (titles and outlets at minimum) so it is clear what you consulted, even if a formal bibliography is not specified in the template.
8. **Submit by the deadline**
8.1. The situational report is **due one week from the class in which it was assigned, i.e., next Thursday**, as stated:
> “In one week from today, you’re going to have your situation report for the issue that you have selected, that will be due… 1.5 pages, no more than two pages.â€�
> “Next Thursday, one week from today.�
8.2. Submit your completed report following the usual procedure for this course.
8.3. If you were absent on Tuesday when topics were chosen, you still must choose an appropriate international issue now (meeting the multi‑state requirement) and complete the assignment on time.
Use this assignment to practice exactly what we did with the Houthis case: move beyond a single narrative, recognize institutional bias, and work toward a more robust “ground truth� by actively seeking out and comparing missing perspectives.