This is The Poynter Report, your daily guide to the news about news. Subscribe to get it in your inbox every weekday.

The United States is engaged in an unpopular war, according to most American citizens. Very unpopular. Historically unpopular.

That’s what early polls are indicating.

The latest Quinnipiac University poll shows that 53% of voters oppose the U.S. military action against Iran, while 40% support it. In addition, 74% of voters oppose sending U.S. ground troops into Iran, while 20% support it.

Quinnipiac University polling analyst Tim Malloy said, “Voters are unenthusiastic about the air attack on Iran and there is overwhelming opposition to putting American troops on Iranian soil to fight a ground war.”

In addition, a majority of voters (55%) do not think Iran posed an imminent military threat to the U.S. before the current military action against it, while 39% think it did.

The results aren’t surprising. Americans have already been killed in this war, as well as hundreds of civilians in Iran. The Pentagon reported Tuesday that 140 American service members have been injured so far. Of those, 108 have returned to duty, but eight have been severely injured. There’s the worry that a prolonged war could mean the U.S. having to put boots on the ground in Iran. Oil prices are fluctuating wildly, meaning rising prices for gas and other goods.

And there’s this: The Quinnipiac poll shows that 77% of voters think it is either very likely (33%) or somewhat likely (44%) that there will be a terrorist attack on U.S. soil in response to the U.S. military action against Iran.

Not surprisingly, polls show a divide along party lines. Democrats are pretty much universally against the war, while Republicans generally support it — although they would like to see the U.S. less involved in conflicts around the world.

Immediately after the attacks, polls from CNN, Reuters/Ipsos and The Washington Post all showed that around 60% opposed the war — pretty much in line with the latest Quinnipiac poll.

Back on March 4, The New York Times’ Ruth Igielnik wrote, “It is not uncommon for support to swell in the beginning days of a military conflict, but the approval typically fades over time.”

The Times also revealed just how unpopular this war is as compared to other wars in U.S. history.

Their findings, based on past polls at the time, showed other wars and conflicts had a much higher approval and support from Americans — 97% supported the U.S. getting involved in World War II, 92% favored getting involved in Afghanistan in 2001, 82% supported involvement in 1991’s Persian Gulf War. Other wars and conflicts, generally, had immediate support, including 75% for the Korean War.

There are other similar examples. (There was no polling found regarding the U.S.’s involvement in Vietnam.)

The New York Times’ Lily Boyce and Ruth Igielnik wrote, “At the beginning of wars, presidents typically experience what researchers call the ‘rally around the flag effect,’ where support swells, even among those who otherwise disapprove of the president. As polarization has grown over the last 30 years and Americans have drifted further apart politically, that effect has diminished.”

That clearly is affecting the latest polling on Iran. As Matthew Baum, a professor at Harvard University who studies public opinion on foreign policy, told the Times, “People from the opposing party of the president have been the source of most of the rally, but Democrats are not going to rally behind Trump. For this president, to the extent that he has any rally from his base, he has a base who thinks they hired him to get him out of wars.”

Asking the right question

New York Times White House correspondent Shawn McCreesh is getting widespread praise from journalists and others for a question he asked of President Donald Trump about the war in Iran earlier this week. The specific topic was a strike near an Iranian elementary school for girls that Iran says killed at least 170 people, most of whom were children.

President Donald Trump, at one point, had said Iran has Tomahawk missiles and might have been responsible for the strike on the school.

McCreesh asked Trump on Monday, “You just suggested Iran somehow got its hands on a Tomahawk and bombed its own elementary school on the first day of the war, but you’re the only person in your government saying this. Even your defense secretary wouldn’t say that when he was asked, standing over your shoulder on your plane on Saturday. Why are you the only person saying this?”

Trump said, “Because I just don’t know enough about it.” He, again, talked about other countries having Tomahawks and that the school incident was under investigation. He added that he’s “willing to live” with whatever a U.S. investigation finds.

McCreesh, as I said, was applauded for his question. One commenter on social media asked, “Are there Pulitzer Prizes for reporters’ questions?”

The question quickly laid out the facts, didn’t attack or compliment the president, the tone wasn’t confrontational and it was straight to the point. And while some might not have liked Trump’s actual answer, the president seemed to respect the question enough to answer in a reasonable and nonconfrontational tone.

Although one can’t help but wonder if Trump would’ve had the same reaction if a female journalist had asked that question.

Meanwhile …

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt speaks with reporters at the White House on Tuesday. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said the Trump administration is being “harassed” by The New York Times regarding the strike on the girls’ school in Iran. Yes, she actually said the Times is harassing the administration by simply questioning who is responsible for the deaths of approximately 175 people, many of whom were school children.

When asked during a White House briefing on Tuesday, Leavitt said, “Look, again, as the president said yesterday, he will accept the conclusion of this investigation by the Department of War. I know there’s been a lot of speculation in the media about who may be responsible for this. We’re not going to get ahead of the Department of War, and the conclusion of that investigation. The president has a right to share his opinions with the American public, but he has said he’ll accept the conclusion of that investigation, and frankly, we’re not going to be harassed by The New York Times, who’s been putting out a lot of articles on this, making claims that have just not been verified by the Department of War to quickly wrap up this investigation, because The New York Times is calling on us to do so.”

In a visual investigation, The New York Times’ Malachy Browne and John Ismay wrote, “The video, uploaded on Sunday by Iran’s semiofficial Mehr News Agency and verified by The New York Times, shows a Tomahawk cruise missile striking a naval base beside the school in the town of Minab on Feb. 28. The U.S. military is the only force involved in the conflict that uses Tomahawk missiles.”

They later added, “The Times has identified the weapon seen in the new video as a Tomahawk cruise missile, a weapon that neither the Israeli military nor the Iranian military has. Dozens of Tomahawks have been launched by U.S. Navy warships into Iran since Feb. 28, when the U.S.-Israeli attack on Iran began.”

Meanwhile, check out this fact check from Louis Jacobson from Poynter’s PolitiFact: “Trump says Iran has Tomahawks, the weapon experts say destroyed an Iranian school. That’s unproven.”

Notable journalism regarding Iran

• The New York Times’ Christine Chung with “4 Continents in 62 Hours: How One American Got Out of Qatar.”
• The New York Times’ Aishvarya Kavi with “Trump’s Shifting Timeline for How Long the Iran War Will Last.”
• The Los Angeles Times’ Richard Winton with “Iran’s threats on U.S. soil: sleeper cells, lone wolves, cyberattacks and eerie numbers code.”
• The Atlantic’s Gal Beckerman with “Just Don’t Say the W-Word.”
• MS NOW’s Vaughn Hillyard, David Rohde and Ian Sherwood with “Nuclear experts undercut White House claims about Iran reactor at heart of case for war.”

USA Today’s new editor

USA Today has a new newsroom leader. It’s Jamie Stockwell, a former editor at The Washington Post and The New York Times.

Stockwell will not have the traditional title of editor-in-chief. Instead, she will be vice president of news. She will report to Monica Richardson, senior vice president of USA Today.

Stockwell becomes the third person named top editor at USA Today in the past three years. She follows Caren Bohan, who left last December after being in the job a little over a year. Before that, Terence Samuel was in the job for about a year when he left in July 2024.

Stockwell was The Washington Post’s deputy managing editor of news, but was recently caught up in the massive layoffs at the Post that saw hundreds of journalists lose their jobs. Before that, she was executive local editor at the Post.

Her career also includes being executive editor of Axios Local, deputy national editor at The New York Times and managing editor of the San Antonio Express-News. She started her career as an intern and then a full-time reporter at the Post covering criminal justice issues.

Richardson said in a statement, “Jamie’s career has been defined by ambitious journalism, digital innovation, and a deep commitment to the evolving needs and preferences of modern audiences. Her experience building high-performing teams at a local and national level, driving transformation, and producing high-impact storytelling with her candid leadership style will be instrumental as we accelerate USA Today’s evolution and solidify our role as America’s essential, facts-forward news source.”

The New York Times’ Katie Robertson wrote, “Ms. Stockwell plans to focus on how to meet audiences where they are in a time when reading habits and technology are evolving.”

Stockwell told Robertson, “A year from now, not only do I want readers to feel more connected to us and to feel USA Today is an essential part of how they understand what’s happening in the country, but I also want the newsroom to be leading the industry in how we innovate and experiment in service of readers.”

CNN’s botched tweet

Over the weekend, two Pennsylvania teens were arrested after being accused of tossing makeshift bombs at an anti-Islam demonstration and counterprotest outside the official residence of New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani. According to authorities, both cited being motivated by the terrorist group, ISIS.

CNN’s story — “What we know about the 2 terror suspects accused of tossing makeshift bombs near the NYC mayor’s home” — was fine. The CNN tweet of the story was not.

The since-deleted tweet from the official CNN X account read, “Two Pennsylvania teenagers crossed into New York City Saturday morning for what could’ve been a normal day enjoying the city during abnormally warm weather.  But in less than an hour, their lives would drastically change as the pair would be arrested for throwing homemade bombs during an anti-Muslim protest outside of Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s home. Here’s what we know so far.”

The bizarre tweet was roundly criticized — as it should have been. One internet headline: “Stinks When a Sudden Arrest Ruins an Otherwise Perfectly Good Day…”

CNN took down the original tweet and then tweeted, “A post regarding the two individuals arrested for throwing homemade bombs outside of New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s home failed to reflect the gravity of the incident thereby breaching the editorial standards we require for all our reporting. It has therefore been deleted.”

Media tidbits

• I need to clarify something I wrote in Tuesday’s newsletter about six former Washington Post sportswriters joining ESPN. I wrote that they were all caught up in the recent and massive Post layoffs that, essentially, gutted the sports department. But, actually, one of those journalists, Robert Klemko, left the Post on his own to join ESPN.
• Speaking of the ESPN hiring of Post writers, here’s Awful Announcing’s Sam Neumann with “Ex-Washington Post hires show signs of ESPN recommitment to journalism.”
• My Poynter colleague, Kelly McBride, with “This Wyoming newspaper ditched its police blotter.”
• For Nieman Lab, Neel Dhanesha with “The creator of Wordle is back with a new game about cryptic crosswords.”
• Former Democratic and independent Sen. Kyrsten Sinema has been hired by the Washington Reporter as a contributing columnist. The Reporter calls itself center-right and conservative-leaning, but most would consider it extremely right.

Hot type

• The Wall Street Journal’s Alex Leary with “Trump Is Obsessed With These $145 Shoes—and Won’t Let Anyone Leave Without a Pair.”

More resources for journalists

• Audit your crime coverage, implement a sustainable newsroom policy and learn to do more meaningful work with fewer resources. Only a week left to apply.
• New editors: Get guidance from industry veterans and build the skills you need to become indispensable to your newsroom. Apply now.
• Get the tools, mentorship and peer community to turn your non-fiction book idea into a publishable proposal. Apply for our workshop today.

Have feedback or a tip? Email Poynter senior media writer Tom Jones at tjones@poynter.org.

The Poynter Report is your daily dive into the world of media, packed with the latest news and insights. Get it delivered to your inbox Monday through Friday by signing up here. And don’t forget to tune into our biweekly podcast for even more.