Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Hysteria Against Terrorism
Hysteria Against Terrorism
Malpractice of Journalism in
Covering Terrorist Attacks
Catherine, Tingyu CHEN 26257408
Introduction
Journalism is meeting new expectations and challenges since the
beginning of 21st century, when terrorist attacks keep casting massive
shadows and trauma to the world (Elliott, 2004). Zelizer and Allan
(2003, p.2) suggest that when the outside world darkens, journalism
takes on its true colors. Journalism has a responsibility to help the
general public get out of past shadows.
However, some media have been overreacting to terrorist attacks.
Instead of presenting a gathering of chronological moments and
information, they are covering terrorist attacks in an inflammatory
way, which either cheerleads the hype, or deliberately exaggerates the
danger to create a sensation. The overreaction even brings negative
influences to gentle Muslims who are not threatening to social
harmony.
The hysteria of media regarding terrorist attacks does no good to
trauma recovery. When people are irritated or overwhelmed by the
reporting, the experience and comprehension become irreconcilable
Public
perception
and
the
coverage
of
terrorism
The process of public perception is influenced by the information they
receive. The process involves a construction of cognition shaped by
mass
media
sources.
In
the
context
of
political
and
mass
get
more
attention
and
social
eminence.
Less
favored
interpretations are often the ones that can have less influence on the
public or less attractive to the public: media put less weigh on them so
media can make the most of their limited resources and make the most
profit. The imbalance of reporting or predilections is able to bring out
emotions, and the emotions activated by reporting can lead to
resultant trauma.
In the coverage of Lindt siege, which took place in Sydney, Australia in
2014, when more than ten customers were held hostage in a cafe by a
gunman who was believed to have Islamic religions because hostages
were seen holding an Islamic flag against the window of cafe, many
media infer that the incident may have underground linkage with ISIS
(Blacktown Sun, 2014), although there were no concrete evidence
suggesting that the gunman was a member of ISIS (Simon, 2014). The
coverage highlighted assumptions towards ISIS, while ignoring the less
favored lone-wolf explanation.
In this case, media acted as mouthpiece of ISIS although it wasnt their
original purpose at all. The inflammatory coverage acted as a free
advertising of ISIS. There werent strong evidence suggesting the corelationship between the gunman and ISIS, yet the media coverage
helped ISIS take credit of the whole event. This free advertisement was
adding to peoples fear towards ISIS, and fear was what the preestablished assumptions were catering to. Excessive public anxiety
was generated during the process which could lead to excessive
trauma. The trauma can worsen the wound and hurt the public again.
When media attributes lone wolf attacks to terrorist organisations,
they are amplifying the influence of the terrorist organization. The
attribution caters to publics fear against terrorists, whose attacks aim
in Yemen (Perez and Johnson, 2009). Although The New York Times
pointed out that Hasan had no religious preference, it still interviewed
staffs at The Muslim Public Affairs Council on their comments on the
riot (McFadden, 2009). The link was finally made between al-Awlaki and
al-Qaeda (Esposito, Cole and Ross, 2009).
The label Muslim was applied early in coverage, regardless of the
degree of proof. For those who were Muslim, this identity was
repeated in every story, solidifying the connection between terrorism
and Islam (Powell, 2011). Media reinforces the bond between
terrorism and Islam, and is emphasizing the stereotype which may
have been generated from the previous biased coverages and has
been deeply embedded in the bottom of hearts of the general publics
since then. The prejudice and fear against normal Muslims in life is
enlarged by media, although normal Muslims are not threatening to the
nation at all. Besides, under long terms of biased reporting, Muslims
may be unconsciously influenced by the imbalanced coverages so that
they may start to regard themselves as anti-society and begin to be
harmful (Mamdani, 2002). The interaction between media coverage
and Muslim feedback may end in alienation between Muslim group and
non-Muslim group, leading to irreconcilable conflicts.
One possible reason to explain the tendency to link Muslim to Islam is
journalists lack of knowledge in Islam. Saidi (2007) argued that some
journalists may suffer from lack of knowledge about the faith and
people who believes in Islam. Besides, journalists themselves may be
influenced by the stereotype against Muslims as well. Powell (2011,
p.92) argued that western journalists, who were born under Orientalist
culture, may regard Muslims as the other. The suggestion is that
Muslims and westerners (no matter they are Christians or not) stand on
opposite grounds. In the last few decades, Arabs or brown, once
the signifier of an exoticism, now represents an negative Other
paradox
of
cheerleading
and
Conclusion
Terrorism is a threat to human beings (Powell, 2011). Media, journalism
and terrorism coexist, where terrorism causes trauma and journalism
reveals the trauma terrorism has cast. Media and journalism bear the
responsibility to inform the public, alleviating the fear and warn the
possible attacks if possible.
However, when covering terrorist attacks, there are malpractices of
media which aggravate contradictions and cause hostility among the
crowds. In this essay three kinds of malpractices are discussed, which
are improper assumptions after attacks, inappropriate linkage between
terrorism and Islam, and inadequate language during the coverage.
The three ways, either delineate different social sectors, or sharpen
social panics. These are all pathological patterns of media reactions
towards terrorism and should be avoided.
As Hartcher (2014) states, They (terrorists) turn to terrorism to win
attention, to cause fear, and to use that fear to produce an
overreaction. That overreaction is the measure of their success.
Terrorism is a tool of the weak against the strong. It is designed to turn
the enemy's strength against itself. Media should never assist
terrorists to cause secondary attacks. Ungrounded assumptions and
inflammatory words should be totally dispelled from the coverage of
terrorism.
Bibliography
1. Allan, S. (2010). News culture. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill/Open
University Press.
2. Cbsnews.com, (2009). Soldier Opens Fire at Ft. Hood; 13 Dead.
[online]
Available
at:
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/soldier-
Available
at:
http://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/huge-
at:
http://content.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,175385,00.ht
ml [Accessed 19 May 2015].
5. Elliott, D. (2004). Terrorism, Global Journalism, and the Myth of
the Nation State. Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 19(1), pp.29-45.
6.
at:
at:
http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/fort-hood-shooter-
contact-al-qaeda-terrorists-officials/story?id=9030873 [Accessed
30 May 2015].
9. Glassner, G. (1999) The culture of fear, New York: Basic books.
10.
12.
Rampage.
The
New
York
Times.
[online]
Available
at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/06/us/06forthood.html?
pagewanted=all&_r=0 [Accessed 30 May 2015].
15.
Coverage
in
U.S.
and
U.K.
Newspapers.
The
[Accessed
30 May 2015].
17.
19.
[online]
Available
at:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/65
21758/Fort-Hood-shooting-Texas-army-killer-linked-to-September11-terrorists.html [Accessed 30 May 2015].
22.