Some people expect the media to be omniscient. Would that it were so. Most of the time, newspapers and the electronic media have to report first what they're told (one hopes by credible sources), and then delve deeper. Such was the case with this month's military and diplomatic flareup over a confrontation between U.S. and Iranian naval forces in the Strait of Hormuz.

U.S. officials reported that on Jan. 6 Iranian boats threatened U.S. Navy vessels in the Strait, zooming around them and dropping objects into the water. At the same time, the officials said, a radio warning came to the U.S. ships to the effect that they were about to be blown up. The U.S. officials cited the incident as an indication of the "real threat" posed by Iran.

In the ensuing days, the account changed somewhat. It was revealed that the U.S. couldn't confirm whether the radio threat had come from the Iranian boats, other vessels in the area, or from some spot on land.

To top it off, press reports and accounts from seafaring folks cast suspicion on  pranksters who have been pestering ships with strange radio transmissions for more than two decades. They are collectively known as "Filipino monkey." Most likely, the accounts went, that's who "threatened" to bomb the U.S. ships.

Predictably, some charged the media were carrying water for the Pentagon, which, it was alleged, wanted to blow the Hormuz events out of proportion for political reasons.The left-leaning organization Democracy Now! ran a Web interview with historian Gareth Porter headlined "Sensationalist Media Did Pentagon's Bidding in Fake 'Provocation' with Iran."

Whether you believe the accounts coming out of the Pentagon were the result of confusion on the Navy's part, or manipulation, the case bears witness to how the press can be caught in the middle when there are no reporters on the scene.

I wanted to see how Stars and Stripes handled the Strait of Hormuz news. I found the coverage generally fair despite the follow-the-bouncing-ball feeling to ascertaining the truth. In the Mideast edition, the one most relevant to the events, there were headlines at the top of Page 1on four days between Jan. 8 and Jan. 14.

They started with the account provided by the Pentagon: "Iran taunts U.S. Navy."(That headline badly needed attribution). There followed the denial by Iran ("Iran: U.S. fabricated video of confrontation") ; the news that the radio threat may not have come from the Iranians ("Who threatened the U.S. Navy?"); and the insistence by the Navy that the episode was worrying regardless who was behind the radio message ("Navy: Tensions high after radio threat.") In succeeding days, the paper reported on inside pages wire service accounts of the "Filipino monkey" phenomenon.

The story isn't over, and Stripes should continue to give readers information about it that comes to light.

In the meantime, on to the next diplomatic crisis.