Terrorist attacks: Beyond reporting
Lionel Wijesiri-Tuesday, May 28, 2019Terrorist attacks are nothing new for the news reporters in Sri Lanka. They had ample opportunities to cover those gory events for three decades since mid-80s. Most of them learnt from their experience that covering each event was a difficult and emotive subject with significant social and political overtones. Care was required in the use of language that carries value judgement. They began to adapt strict guidelines.
However, the recent Easter attacks and subsequent events had shown that there is still a form of indifference in the way some media cover terrorist acts. The images or video clips that were rushed into publication or telecast incessantly dramatized the covered event. In some instances, they solicited couple of witnesses and invite few “experts” to “interpret” the event often in the middle of mayhem. By doing all these things, maybe unknowingly, they were essentially playing into the hands of terrorists.
But the most important obligation - to be right rather than first -was not always respected. Despite clear guidelines on the use of pictures and videos on terrorist attacks, our media continue to appear divided on what is right to publish and what is not right. Red lines were often crossed.
Democratic catch
We talk highly of media independence. Free speech and free media are the basic values of every democracy. No sane person will challenge it. However, at the same time, we must not forget that there is a delicate relationship between terrorists and the media. Media provide terrorists the publicity they need to inform the public about their successful operations and goals in future. The democracy should not be allowed to use as an arsenal for those who wish to reach their ends by violent means.
Yet, the terrorist movements have recognized this “democratic catch” and attempt to make full use of it. They exploit the available liberal instruments to find “golden paths” (from their point of view) to further their ends without holding themselves to the existing rules of law and order.
Some commentators say that terrorism is propaganda by deed, and the success of a terrorist campaign depends decisively on the amount of publicity it receives. The terrorist’s act by itself is nothing but publicity is. And the media gives it free of charge.
Attention
Today, among all the respected media, it is generally accepted that ethical reflections should accompany terrorism reporting. Firstly, the reporters should keep a sense of proportion. For example, terrorism deaths are the single most heavily covered type of deaths in the first pages of the leading newspapers and other media. This fuel the perception that we are living in some sort of a terrorist dominated country which is out of proportion from the reality that it is.
Secondly, it is noted that Islamic terrorism is given much more attention compared to other forms of terrorism.
Thirdly, the discussion has shifted from event-led and breaking news reporting to investigative and analytical forms of journalism. For example, even after one month of Easter disaster, some news media are allocating over half of their space (or time) for the terrorist related stories.
These three points need to be analysed in length.
Guidelines
Our recent shocking attack is also a reminder that we are lacking the consistency in ethical reporting. It is impossible to be specific or categorical about what news media should do. It is always context-specific. Broadcasters, for example, have a broader duty to avoid showing distressing or inflammatory imagery that reaches a wide and random audience. More than ever there is a responsibility for journalists (and citizens and the platforms) not to accept, let alone amplify terrorists’ strategy – getting free publicity.
Today, the role of the news media has become even more important as a source of credible, responsibly presented information, debate and social cohesion. Journalists also have a vital role in directly countering rumour, hatred and divisive messaging online. It’s fair and useful that journalists expose the failures of the social networks on these occasions but they should also pay even more attention to proving their own ethical, political and editorial worth.
The media newsrooms should improve their procedures and think harder about their public duty in their coverage. Some click-bait chasing, inflammatory, partisan news organisations will disregard the ethics but the mainstream should be aware that their credibility as well as their social responsibility rests on them being more reflexive.
Michael Jetter
Violence, so the saying goes, begets violence. Now evidence is emerging that suggests even the reporting of violence can trigger counter attacks. Research has found that sensationalist media coverage of acts of terrorism results in more such acts being committed. Given the changing scenario, it’s time we have a debate about how Sri Lankan media should respond to atrocities.
Michael Jetter, a Professor in economics, analysed more than 60,000 terrorist attacks for 40 years as reported in the New York Times. Jetter notes that over the past 17 years “the world has experienced a terrifying, exponential increase in the number of terrorist attacks”. The total number of fatalities from terrorist attacks has soared from 4,403 in 2000 to 26,445 in 2017. At the same time, terrorist groups have increasingly sought to use the media to promote their agendas.
Graphic videos of beheadings filmed by Islamic State and released on the internet have turned the group into a globally feared brand. But they have also prompted anguished questions about how much such organisations should be given “the oxygen of publicity”.
“Terrorist organisations receive extensive media attention,” Jetter says. “Whether it is the Taliban, al-Qaida, Boko Haram or IS, terrorism is everywhere on TV stations, newspapers and the radio. We also know that terrorists need media coverage to spread their message, create fear and recruit followers.”
Limit of reports
The findings raise the question of whether limiting the reporting of acts of terrorism would result in a decline in attacks. Jetter pointed out that only 42 people die every day from terrorist attacks, compared with 7,123 children who die from hunger-related causes.
What his presentation is suggesting is that we may need to rethink the sensationalist coverage of terrorism and stop providing terrorists a free media platform. Media coverage of other events that are causing more harm in the world should not be neglected at the expense of media marathons discussing the cruelties of terrorists.
Terrorism label
Jetter is right. Today, in the hands of terrorist organisations, media has become a vital pawn in the game they are playing. Sending the perfect message in the way the terrorist desire is much more important that the act itself.
The challenge in the relationship stated is the conflict of interests between the media having to broadcast unbiased information about the event, the social responsibility they carry and the prospect of giving sensational news that may alter the reality in order to have a wider audience.
Is it media who creates labels about terrorism?
Mass-media has the power of forming and influencing the public’s opinions and views on the phenomenon of terrorism. The media can create labels on fundamental topics such as poverty, culture, religion and ethnicity. The most common identification they create is confusing terrorists with Muslims, making the general public believe that everyone of this religious affiliation has extremist tendencies.
The truth being that the Islamic fundamentalist organisations suffer from social marginalization within the very societies to which they belong. The media does not have to share the values of terrorist ideologies but it heavily depends on the free society and the relative vulnerability to the manipulation in front of the terrorist organisations.
Terrorism and mass-media evolved in a symbiosis, each benefiting from the others’ capabilities and actions. However, mass-media can exist without terrorism, but the latter cannot. They cannot survive without the international echo and the impact provided by the media’s distribution channels or the platforms on the Internet.
modernism, what had happened in 15th and 16th centuries in Europe is the introduction of one-God concept, leaving the concept of multiple Gods. They believe in one God……With the introduction of this new philosophy in Europe, it was spread throughout the world in the name of Protestantism, science, modern art and culture. It is the spreading of Maradivyaputhra’s power.” And then he says, “Actually, we have had a great tradition of medicine based on Buddhist teachings. We have had a great knowledge system. It is basically dependent on spiritual development….. Still, we have a few such good persons with spiritual development who can communicate with invisible spirits and gain knowledge.” 
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu speaks during weekly cabinet meeting at Prime Minister's office in Jerusalem, on Sunday (AFP)
