What to do?
Terrorism and the Media
Imagine you are a resident of Jerusalem, in the year 60 AD. You are taking a walk
throughout the marketplace doing your weekly shopping. You see a man pull out a dagger
and he yells 'death to all Romans' and attacks a roman guard, killing him in front of
hundreds of spectators. The assassin quietly slips into the crowd and is lost in a sea
of people never to be found. The word of the attack spreads and soon it is the talk of
the town. Many more attacks on Romans are made by the Sicarii and the Zealots.
Sympathizers of the Romans slowly disappear and their voices vanish from Jerusalem. The
fear of terrorism grows and Roman repression grows along with it, this in turn leads to
the people of Jerusalem to revolt in 70 AD (Miller V). If this attack had been made in
some dark alley with no spectators would the people react the way they did?
The marketplace of old Jerusalem, can be compared to the media of today. What better
place to get the public informed about your reasons and purpose for attacks than the
news. Albert gave a good definition of terrorist's objectives when he stated:
"Terrorists try to exercise influence over targeted officials on nations through
intimidation of the public and arousal of sympathy for the social and political causes
they espouse. Without widespread publicity, terrorist acts can achieve neither of these
effects" (Bandura, Albert qtd. In Nacos 1). Terrorists need the news media to get the
publicity, and the media is a willing accomplice. The news media is an accessory to
terrorism, and as such they should develop a set of standards that will limit the
terrorist ability to get their message out to a large audience during terrorist
situations; Also the media should also point out police mistakes without over emphasizing
them, giving equal coverage to both sides of the issue.
Terrorism is the use of violence against innocents to bring about political change
through fear. It is a combination of indoctrination and drama. The relationship between
terrorism and the media is symbiotic. As terrorists require widespread attention, the
media needs news (Miller v-vi). Terrorism in effect is a from of advertisement of the
terrorists goals and what they want accomplished. In 1980 the New York Times printed a
total of 916 articles on terrorist events. That means that terrorists were getting their
message out nearly three times a day to the American public(Miller 60). Terrorists have
usually used the media for four main reasons. The first reason is to have their message
heard and strike fear into their target group. The second is to win over the publics
support for their cause, by highlighting themes like, the righteousness of their cause,
and the assuredness of their victory. Third they use media to disrupt government and
security responses, by suggesting that they are overreacting, and their efforts are
counterproductive. Finally the fourth is to raise the moral of their current members,
raise recruitment, and encourage more attacks (Alexander 30-31). John O' Sullivan gave
this quote about media and terrorism, "If the media were not there to explain their
political and social significance [their goals and motives], terrorism would cease to
exist" (Nacos 48).
With all the interaction between the media and terrorism an option being considered by
many governments is censorship of media's coverage of terrorist events. During many
terrorist incidents the police do not want all the information that they have gathered to
be released, for fear of the publics safety, and the security of their future actions.
One motive of terrorists is to sway the publics belief in police forces dealing with the
terrorist incident. For that reason the printing of damaging articles and stories
requires some restraint (Alexander 36). An example of the media needing restraint
occurred on April 30, 1980, when a group of Arab secessionists captured the Iranian
embassy in London. As the SWAT teams began to move in their biggest advantage was the
element of surprise. But, that was almost destroyed by a cameraman from British ITV
(Independent Television) who got past the police barricade and broadcast a live assault
on the embassy. One can only speculate what would have happened if the terrorists had
been watching the television (Miller 28). Complete and total censorship is not the
answer. Schmid put it well in his book Violence as Communication when he said:
In many countries it is likely that the level of terrorism will increase rather than
decrease after the introduction of terrorism. The increase is due to the fact
that...[terrorist] groups will feel freer to engage in terrorist acts...since they can
count on not being exposed and criticized by the local media. The mass terrorism of
Hitler and Stalin was possible because the people were not fully aware of what was going
on. Government imposed censorship on news of... terrorism can, in our view, be a cure
that is worse than the disease. (150)
A total blackout of media's coverage of terrorist events is not necessary, if the media
will reform its procedure for covering terrorist activities. A leader in this movement
of self-censorship is CBS. CBS has set up a list of guidelines that all the reporters
must follow during terrorist situations (Alali 10). One option for the media to take is
that there should be a consensus of standards for covering terrorism stories. There are
several parts to this consensus and they are as follows: don't over exaggerate events
that are already sensational; the media should paraphrase terrorist demands so they do
not get all their political messages out; also they should not broadcast live coverage of
terrorist situations unless the head of the news department allows it. News reporters
should also have permission to talk with terrorists, and if there is permission these
interviews should not interfere with the ongoing negotiations. The reporters should also
be attentive to the warnings and orders of law enforcement officials on the scene (Paletz
108). When all the media can set a standard to live by a total blackout of coverage
will not be needed. But, if a total blackout of media's coverage of terrorist events
becomes policy, many believe that there will be abuses made by the police forces, that
will go unreported to the public and the proper authorities.
There are mistakes that the police forces make that need to be brought out and made known
to the public and the courts, so proper actions can be taken. Liberal democrats believe
that the police is responsible for the publics scrutiny through the news media. It is
believed by most of the media that they should not make accusations that the police can
not respond to for legal reasons. Police agencies feel that reporting, exaggerations,
and the threat of due dates should not drive the content of news stories. They wish for
equal coverage of the terrorism and police actions. The police also require support of
society and to get it they need the support of the media, this aids them in their
counterattacking of terrorism. The police admit that their actions are not the only ones
which will resolve the problem, but both the police and the media are committed to the
maintenance of democracy, and how they act reflects that commitment (Alexander 36). An
example of when the police agencies fowled up a hostage situation was in 1972, at the
Munich Olympics. There were more press at that incident then at any other terrorist
attack in history. When the hostages were moved to a local Airport the police made
several mistakes which led to the deaths of nine hostages and one policeman.(Miller
96).The press was there to cover those mistakes and bring them to the public's attention.
If there was no media around these events would never have been reported and would have
been long forgotten and those at fault would never have been reprimanded for their
mistakes. Despite all of their mistakes being made public the police do not wish for a
total blackout of media coverage during terrorist events. The police believe that the
media can be a very helpful tool in helping them combat terrorism. The media is a
powerful tool for vanquishing rumors, clearing up misinformation, and combat fear (Miller
7). While the media can sometimes hinder the police it is also a great asset their for
their disposal in combating terrorism.
In conclusion, when the media emphasizes terrorist events it helps to facilitate two of
the universal goals of terrorist. The first is that the terrorists gain publicity and
attention is drawn to their cause. The second is that when the media shows events and
over exaggerates it influences public attitudes about the root of their politically
motivated violence. Brian M. Jenkins summed up what terrorism is when he said "Terrorism
is aimed at the people watching, not the actual victims. Terrorism is theater" (Jenkins,
Brian M. qtd. In Nacos 75). Total censorship of terrorist events is not the cure, it
will lead to abuses by the police forces handling the cases. The only solution is that
the media needs to work out a set of morals that they follow when they are covering
terrorist actives. They need to be objective giving equal weight on the terrorist
activities and the police forces dealing with the terrorists. They should not place too
much emphasis on the police mistakes, while bring them out into the public. The media
needs to remain subjective and not let either the terrorists or the law enforcement take
control of what they report Theodore H. White sums it up with this statement " ...power
in America today is control of the media of communication" (White, Theodore H. qtd. In
Nacos 16).
Works Cited
Ala, Odasuo A., and Kenoye Kelvin Eke, ed. Media Coverage of Terrorism. Newbury Park:
Sage Publications, 1991.
Alexander, Yonah, and Richard Latter, ed. Terrorism & the Media. New York: Brassey's
(US), Inc., 1990.
Miller, Abraham H., ed. Terrorism the Media and the Law. New York: Transnational
Publishers, 1982.
Nacos, Brigitte L. Terrorism and the media. New York: Columbia University Press, 1994.
Paletz, David L., and Alex P. Schmid, Eds. Terrorism and the Media. Sage: Newbury Park,
1992. (P. 24)
Schmid, Alex P. and Janny de Graaf. Violence as Communication. Beverly Hills: Sage
Publications, 1982.
|