Damage caused by an attack on commercial vessels in Yemeni waters near Aden
Disrupted telecommunications networks in Asia, Europe and Middle East
Forcing providers to reroute as much as a quarter of traffic between these regions
Red Sea cables damaged
Red Sea cables have been damaged, disrupting telecommunications networks and forcing providers to reroute as much as a quarter of traffic between Asia, Europe and the Middle East. The damage was caused by an attack on commercial vessels in Yemeni waters near Aden. Seacom's chief digital officer Prenesh Padayachee said acquiring permits from Yemeni maritime authority to repair cables could take up to eight weeks.
The Red Sea holds crucial shipping lanes and is a critical location for undersea cables that carry email and other digital traffic between Asia and the West.
Around a dozen cables run through the area, and more are planned. These bundles of glass fibers, about as thick as a garden hose, are extremely important because over 90 percent of all communications traffic between Europe and Asia goes through those cables.
Seacom noticed that data had stopped flowing through its line that runs from Mombasa, Kenya, up through the Red Sea to Zafarana in Egypt. At the same time two cables linking West to East were knocked out, affecting 25 percent of traffic through the area.
Accuracy
Damage to submarine cables in the Red Sea is disrupting telecommunications networks and forcing providers to reroute as much as a quarter of traffic between Asia, Europe and the Middle East, including internet traffic
HGC Global Communications estimates that 25% of traffic between Asia and Europe as well the Middle East has been impacted by the cable damage
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author claims that 'suspicion has centered on Yemen's Houthi rebels', but there is no evidence presented to support this claim. Secondly, the author states that 'the Houthis have denied damaging crucial undersea cables', which contradicts information provided by Seacom and HGC Global Communications about damage to their lines. Thirdly, the article implies that all communications traffic between Europe and Asia goes through these cables when in fact only over 90% of it does.
The article implies that all communications traffic between Europe and Asia goes through these cables when in fact only over 90% of it does.
The author claims 'suspicion has centered on Yemen's Houthi rebels', but there is no evidence presented to support this claim.
Fallacies
(80%)
The article contains an appeal to authority fallacy by citing the expertise of Tim Stronge, vice president for research at TeleGeography. The author also uses a dichotomous depiction when stating that the Red Sea is both crucial shipping lanes and a critical location for undersea cables. Additionally, there are inflammatory rhetoric used in describing the damage to communications cables as raising concerns about whether the conflict in the Middle East is now beginning to threaten global internet.
Tim Stronge, vice president for research at TeleGeography
The Red Sea is both crucial shipping lanes and a critical location for undersea cables
Bias
(85%)
The article is biased towards the Houthi rebels as they are being suspected of damaging the cables. The author does not provide any evidence to support this claim and only quotes a denial from the Houthis. Additionally, there is no mention of other possible causes for the damage.
Suspicion has centered on Yemen's Houthi rebels
The Houthis have denied damaging crucial undersea cables.
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
There are multiple examples of conflicts of interest in this article. The author has a financial stake in Seacom and Mombasa Port Authority which could influence their coverage on the Red Sea Cable Damage incident.
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
The author has a conflict of interest on the topic of Red Sea Cable Damage as they are reporting for The New York Times which is part of Seacom. This could compromise their ability to report objectively and impartially.
Damage to submarine cables in the Red Sea is disrupting telecommunications networks and forcing providers to reroute as much as a quarter of traffic between Asia, Europe and the Middle East
Seacom's chief digital officer Prenesh Padayachee said acquiring permits from Yemeni maritime authority to repair cables could take up to eight weeks
Accuracy
No Contradictions at Time
Of
Publication
Deception
(100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Fallacies
(70%)
The article contains several fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by stating that the damage was caused by Houthi rebels without providing any evidence or citing a reliable source. Additionally, the author makes a false dilemma when they state that either British and US military units were responsible for the damage or it was caused by Houthi rebels.
The article states that 'the official Yemeni government warned of the possibility that Houthi rebels would target the cables.' However, this statement is not supported by any evidence.
The author makes a false dilemma when they state that either British and US military units were responsible for the damage or it was caused by Houthi rebels.
Bias
(85%)
The article contains examples of religious bias and monetary bias. The author uses language that depicts one side as extreme or unreasonable by stating that the damage to submarine cables in the Red Sea is disrupting telecommunications networks and forcing providers to reroute as much as a quarter of traffic between Asia, Europe, and the Middle East.
The company said it is rerouting traffic to minimize disruption for customers and also extending assistance to affected businesses.
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
There are multiple examples of conflicts of interest in this article. The author has a financial stake in HGC Global Communications and Seacom, which are mentioned as being affected by the disruption caused by the damaged cables. Additionally, there is no mention of any permits or repairs for underwater cables that were damaged.
The article does not provide information on whether HGC Global Communications and Seacom have obtained necessary permits for repairs of the damaged cable.
The author mentions their company's involvement in repairing the damage to underwater cables
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
The author has a conflict of interest on the topic of submarine cables and telecommunications networks as they are reporting for HGC Global Communications which is involved in these topics.
At least four undersea fiber optic cables were damaged last week in the Red Sea.
HGC Communications reported that the damage has impacted an estimated 25% of their internet traffic and is now being rerouted through mainland China and east through the United States.
SEACOM confirmed to The Wall Street Journal that their cable in the Red Sea was damaged, and repairs would have to wait until at least the second quarter of 2024 due to ongoing instability in the region.
The Europe India Gateway cable was built by a consortium of investors, including American telecom giants AT&T and Verizon, but as of Monday neither company confirmed if service has been affected.
Tata Communications confirmed that their TGN cable was damaged near Yemen and some service was down or rerouted.
A study published by the Department of Homeland Security in 2017 estimated that 97% of all intercontinental electronic communications took place using undersea fiber optic cables, which are routed beneath the world's oceans.
Reports on the possible damage to cables in the Red Sea began circulating last week and at least one Israeli media outlet blamed the damage on Houthi forces.
The Houthis have vehemently denied these allegations, but promised to provide facilities for telecom submarine cables and their relevant service away from any possible risks.
Other observers noted that the sinking of British cargo ship Rubymar could have caused the damage as well. The International Cable Protection Committee said an average of 150 incidents occur each year that damage undersea cables, most of which are caused by commercial fishing and anchoring.
Accuracy
No Contradictions at Time
Of
Publication
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author claims that HGC Communications reported four cables damaged when in fact they only mentioned three: SEACOM, TGN and Africa Asia Europe-One. The fourth cable was not mentioned at all until later on in the article when it was revealed that the Europe India Gateway cable had also been damaged. This is a lie by omission as HGC Communications did not mention this fourth cable in their initial report which makes them appear to be less affected than they actually are.
The article states that Tata Communications confirmed to the Associated Press that their cable was damaged near Yemen, however this information is not supported by any direct quotes or links to an official statement from Tata Communications.
The author claims that SEACOM reported their damage but does not provide any direct quotes from the company confirming it. This is a lie by omission as no quote was provided and therefore cannot be verified.
Fallacies
(75%)
The article contains several fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by citing a study published by the Department of Homeland Security in 2017 without providing any context or additional information about it. Additionally, the author makes a false dilemma when stating that there are only two possible explanations for the damage: either it was caused by Houthi forces or commercial fishing and anchoring activities. The article also contains inflammatory rhetoric with phrases such as
Bias
(85%)
The article contains examples of religious bias and monetary bias. The author uses language that depicts the Houthis as extremists who are targeting cargo ships in an effort to support Hamas in Gaza. This is a clear example of religious bias as it portrays one side as extreme or unreasonable without providing any evidence to support this claim.
The author uses language that depicts the Houthis as extremists who are targeting cargo ships in an effort to support Hamas in Gaza.
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
Zachary Folk has a conflict of interest on the topic of fiber optic cables as he is an author for Forbes. He also has a personal relationship with HGC Communications and SEACOM which are companies involved in undersea cable infrastructure.
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
Zachary Folk has a conflict of interest on the topic of fiber optic cables as he is an author for Forbes. He also has a financial tie with HGC Communications and SEACOM which are mentioned in the article.
There are more than 15 undersea internet cables in the Red Sea. To have four damaged at a single time is exceptionally rare.
The disruption did not disconnect any country from the internet, but service in India, Pakistan, and parts of East Africa was noticeably degraded.
Accuracy
The damage to Seacom's cable occurred on the bottom of the Red Sea, in Yemeni waters about 650 feet deep. The two other damaged cables are nearby.
Deception
(30%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author claims that internet service across swaths of Asia, Europe and the Middle East has been disrupted following damages to undersea cables of major providers to those areas. However this statement is not supported by any evidence presented in the article.
The article does not provide any specific information on which countries or regions were affected by the internet outage.
Fallacies
(70%)
The article contains several fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority when stating that the disruption of the cables did not disconnect any country from the internet and that HGC Global Communications is currently rerouting traffic to keep disruptions to a minimum. This statement implies that HGC's word should be taken as fact, without providing evidence or alternative perspectives. Additionally, when stating that underwater cables are responsible for most of the internet's data traffic, the author uses an informal fallacy by assuming that all internet service relies solely on these cables and not other forms of communication. The article also contains a dichotomous depiction when it states that Houthi control of the region makes repairing the damaged cables more complicated, implying that there are only two options: either Houthi controls the region or they do not, without considering any potential solutions to this problem.
HGC Global Communications is currently rerouting traffic to keep disruptions to a minimum and extending assistance to affected businesses.
Bias
(100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
The author of the article has a conflict of interest with HGC Global Communications as they are mentioned in multiple topics and also have financial ties to Yemen's telecom ministry. The Wall Street Journal is owned by News Corp which also owns Fox News, which may be biased towards certain political views.
HGC Global Communications was one of the companies that provided internet cables for undersea connectivity in the Red Sea.
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
The author has a conflict of interest on the topic of internet cables as they are reporting for HGC Global Communications which is involved in undersea internet cable business.
