By Scott Fraser
Is Terrorism Contagious? Has the media been an inadvertent ally of terrorism? Although these two questions raise parallels it conveys a suggestion that perhaps terrorism is disease like and that the media have become in fact an unintentional innocent victim of the disease. Terrorism has many victims, intentional and unintentional and that implicates all manner of global politics, state governance, cultural and societal fabric. Moreover, the media is also involved in and reports on many subjects and many events associated with terrorism and as such the mass media, in its journalistic pursuits provides its perception of terror events through its various means and on many occasions; differently. This article will discuss the perceived association the media has with terrorism and the way in which terrorist influence the media and media audiences.
Terror and Media
Terrorist use the mass global media as a means to spread an expression of their cause and to create an issue across all geospatial boundaries that normally they would not have access too. Terrorist are media savvy and understand the real value of the media and how to manipulate and draw the medias attention for their own outcomes. Terror organisations can measure their success off the amount of media coverage it is awarded for the atrocities they carries out. In todays globalized media environment the results of terror attacks are shared not only CNN and the BBC but also on Al Jazeera and on the web in front of the populations shielding, or acquiescing to, the terrorist in their midst.
Do terrorist manipulate the media? Is terrorism contagious? It could be argued strongly that yes they do and yes it is. The mass media reports news worthy terrorism stories for ratings and news company shareholder value. The media, in the main, is a commercial entity that survives on news worthy ratings, which reaches out to listeners, readers and viewers, worldwide. It is in the way in which the media audience perceives the information and the way in which the media report terror incidents, the language and visualizations of an event that impacts on the psyche of the media audience which spans to and has the ability to influence a world wide audience.
The ability of the modern news agencies to use satellite and digital technologies to broadcast events as they happen “live” and graphically to a global audience has not been lost on violent extremists. Terrorist understand that instantaneous media exposure for their grievances simply requires a dramatic incident to attract the worlds press. The way in which the terrorism impacts on the media and the way in which the media should or should not report on terrorism stories are explained in the context of perception risk. That is in the way that the media as a medium interprets a terrorist event, investigates or decides whether it is news worthy and the impact it may have on the public that will receive the media message and inadvertently the terrorist message. The concept of accidents or potential events materialising as risk signals helps explain an audiences strong response to terrorism.
Paul Slovic in his paper Perception of Risk Posed by Extreme Events describes terrorism as ‘a new species of trouble’, the way the media deals with this risk as part of our Western society will impact on the general public that receives the media information. Because the risks associated with terrorism are seen as poorly understood and catastrophic, accidents anywhere in the world may be seen as omens of disaster everywhere, thus producing responses that carry immense psychological, socio-economic, and political impacts. This represents evidence that suggests that yes, terrorist and terror incidents do influence the media and media audience and that terrorist and terror organisations are in fact aware of the media, the way in which the media portrays a terror events and also, the way in which populations perceive and react to terror occurrences across the world.
Organised..?
It has been widely acknowledged that organisations such as Hezbollah, which is listed as terror organisation, and other well know terror organisation such as the Irish Republican Army (IRA) both have very sophisticated information operations and have actively engaged in public relation campaigns, grant interviews and hand out media statements to gain support for the media. The IRA also has a well-known political wing called Sinn Féin which has created a close relationship with the print and electronic media.
Hezbollah and the IRA’s Sinn Féin have both participated in a an intentional and well crafted campaign on the mass media and as a result the media are drawn into reporting on both sides of the terror organisations operations, the operational terror or ‘military wing campaigns’ and the political maneuverings of their political wings. Since the inception of the modern era of terrorism ‘terrorist attacks are often choreographed to attract the attention of the electronic mass media and the international press.
The media is obligated to report objectively on news worth events that occur around the world. However, what is news worthy to one journalist or news corporation is not to another, why is this? It could be said that media outlets need to place a certain amount of spin on the news to make it more attractable in order to reach an audience and to also have a more opinioned version without venturing to far from the facts. When a terror attack occurs there appears to be a certain amount of drama that is attached to sell a particular story.
The way in which modern terrorism has become a focal point of the media and publics concern and fear for safety is at the core of the above subjects. Terrorism subjects are considered important in today’s modern society and are therefore perceived as important that we remain vigilant to maintain our way of life without being manipulated by terrorism. Through the process of social amplification risk framework (SARF), the adverse impacts of terror events sometimes extend far beyond the direct damages of victims, property and may result in massive indirect impacts. Terrorist events or incidences can be thought of as dropping a stone in a pond, at the middle of the epicentre the ripples move, spreading the event impact as it moves outwards, the media helps this occur. The Theory of Social Amplification of Risk; states that certain kinds of hazards and accidents are especially likely to lead to widespread and strong concerns. This was the case with 9/11 and the fall out is very much evident today.
How do the ripples at the epicenter of a terror attack emanate outwardly? The media report stories that are made news worthy by editors and that are cleverly choreographed by terror cells using such things as media releases or interviews that will attract the attention of a wider audience; a tantalizing news scoop. Depending on however, how media editors perceive their own feelings and perceptions of the event and the amount of spin that is allowed to be added will then decide what is to be released to the world media audience. As a consequence, dramatic news such as terrorist incidents often reflects the personal, political, and cultural biases of editors and reporters and contains a great deal of “human interest” content.
Depending on which side you sit is dependant on the message that is being sent. For terrorist, to receive a nightly broad cast could be regarded by them as good news of a perceived successful attack. On the other hand, those that are on the receiving end of news of a terror attack can be horrified by such an event. This can be a doubled edge sword for terrorist groups. I could be suggested that a vital factor in gaining access to the media and mixing that with the lethality of an attack can sow the seeds of a terrorist groups own destruction. Terrorist groups can experience an irremediable backlash, even among supporters, as a result of doing injury to innocents.
Conclusion
To, the first half of the question; Is terrorism contagious? The symptoms are there to say that the mass media, within a global sense is, or are on occasions, drawn into the terrorism web intentionally by terrorists. And on other occasions it appears to be by choice that the media choose terror stories that will sell the best on the evening news. Given the choice and human nature it would appear that the media are to a degree fixated with the terrorism phenomenon and therefore feel it necessary to report it as it is perceived in the media world as news worthy. A more apt question perhaps; Is the media contagious?
To the second half of the question; Has the media been an inadvertent ally of terrorism? Perception and the way one person to the next, terrorist included, interprets the media message can have a very negative impact or indeed a positive result, depending on which side the media audience is from. The media, as a technical entity has assisted terrorist organisations in achieving notoriety for their atrocities through communication, but who hasn’t the media helped in the modern era? Conversely, this can account for both sides. Terrorist obviously, when it suits, relish in the idea of media coverage however, the media are taken advantage of by terrorist organisations and as such the media take are supposed to take reasonable precautions to ensure that the media coverage is balanced.
Perhaps the question that really needs to be asked; Has terrorism been an inadvertent ally of the media?
Scott Fraser holds Master of Security Management and is an independent security professional with over 25 years’ experience in the field. Scott has previously held positions with Australian Defence Force (Army), Consultant to Corporate and Government, and the Gas, Oil and Mining Sectors within the Asia Pacific and African regions.
