Terrorism And Media And Difficult Questions: The Trap Of Exaggerating Or Sensationalizing
18 April 2013
By Osman Mirghani
Amid the feverish race between traditional media and
modern digital media—particularly social networking
websites—numerous mistakes were committed while
covering the Boston Marathon bombings and while in
pursuit of the proverbial journalistic scoop.
Accusations were made without legitimate evidence and
before the sequence of events could be clarified. Even
the police had to correct or modify some of its news,
after hastily posting any developments on Twitter.
Live feeds from different television channels were
dispatching every single detail, relevant or not, and
social networking websites were posting information
without scrutiny or examination.
Less than twenty-four hours after the bombings,
certain websites exposed the name of a suspect, a
university graduate, as other news outlets circulated
these claims and even published his photo. Later on,
however, the news item proved to be incorrect. Some
websites also claimed that the police had detained a
Saudi Arabian national, information that was later
refuted.
In the race to offer news analysis, experts familiar
with the situation appeared on some television
channels while others invited figures who based their
comments on Wikipedia posts and superficial knowledge.
Simultaneously, the numerous TV cameras set up at the
scene of the crime did not have anything new to
broadcast, prompting the networks to rebroadcast old
footage.
Within the context of this race for exposure, several
media outlets described the Boston bombing as the
worst incident to have taken place in American since
the 9/11 attacks. Statements such as this seem
somewhat exaggerated, considering the obvious
disparity between the two occurrences in terms of
magnitude, the number of victims, and the strategy of
destruction. Why should the Boston bombing be
considered the most vicious terrorist attack since
9/11, in comparison, for example, to the attack
carried out by Major Nidal Hassan in 2009 killing 13
people at the Fort Hood Base in Texas ? Is the
distinction between the two based on the use of
gunfire in Texas versus a bomb in Boston? Or is it
based on the fact that Nidal Hassan targeted his
military colleagues, whereas brothers Tamerlan and
Dzhokhar Tsarnaev targeted civilians?
The exaggerated coverage of the Boston attack took
place in the midst of a feverish rivalry between
different media outlets and television networks—a
rivalry that only worsened when social networking came
into the picture. All this contributed to intensifying
the distressing climate that completely crippled life
in the city.
This prompted questions regarding the manner in which
this event was covered by the media. Many media
outlets favored speed over accuracy and dispatched
news without waiting for confirmation from police or
the authorities in order to keep up with social media.
These social networking websites also circulated
numerous rumors, some of which contained exaggerated
and inaccurate information. At least in the case of
other media outlets, especially television networks,
the facts where later corrected or amended if proven
inaccurate.
The extensive days-long coverage of the Boston
bombings received more attention than other terrorist
attacks in other parts of the world or non-terrorist
incidents that had a higher death toll. This was made
apparent when Obama had to directly address the
families of the victims of the Texas fertilizer plant
blast stating, "You are not alone, you are not
forgotten."
Based on this, the Boston Marathon bombing did not
only put terrorism in the limelight once again, but it
also put the media to the test and renewed discussions
about its role in presenting information and analysis
versus falling into the trap of coverage based on what
is termed "reality television." This method includes a
cameraman dispatching every singly detail of a
particular scene regardless of whether it is
significant or not.
Everybody agrees that the media is fascinated by
terrorism and terrorists purposely carry out
operations to draw attention to their acts.
This was explained by Ayman Al-Zawahiri, Al-Qaeda's
then second-in-command, who stated that the media is
half the battle. However, it is also true that the
massive coverage given to terrorist crimes is
presenting a moral quandary since the media, though
unintentionally at times, is offering these terrorist
the attention they seek. It is true that the media is
not responsible for any terrorist phenomenon, nor does
it initiate such acts, but it falls victim to these
terrorists when it allows their acts to
psychologically affect viewers at home.
The issue is not that simple because it is the nature
of the media to inform the public of what is happening
and it cannot abstain from doing this. On the
contrary, viewers encourage media outlets to expand
their coverage. Also, terrorism is a complex subject
and does not rely solely on media coverage; if the
media were to disappear, it would not necessary follow
that so would terrorism. Combating terrorism requires
security and political efforts to redress the
grievances that may lead to extremism, and hence,
terrorism.
The medias role in this is to dispatch news and
information, and present analyses that help the public
understand and answer specific questions. The
difficulty lies in the mechanism by which to do this
and in making sure not to fall into the trap of
exaggerating or sensationalizing a certain incident,
to prohibit terrorists from stealing the limelight.
©
EsinIslam.Com
Add Comments