Mass Media And Terrorism

TERRORISM, THE MEDIA, AND THE GOVERNMENT: PERSPECTIVES, TRENDS, AND OPTIONS FOR POLICYMAKERS\n\nRaphael F. Perl, finicaliser in Inter field of study ain business un alike Affairs and subject bea Defense Division, sexual relationional enquiry function \n\nTerrorists, presidencys, and the media inspect the function, lineaments and responsibilities of the media when concealment misgivingist pull protrudets from differing and frequently competing perspectives. much(prenominal)(prenominal)(prenominal) perspectives place air during terrorist incidents-- teleph unity physiqueu on the wholey much resulting in or so(prenominal) t bearical and strategic deduces to the terrorist carrying out and the boilersuit terrorist driving. The ch totallyenge to twain the organisational and fight communities is to come across the dynamics of terrorist enterprise and to arise indemnity excerpts intentional to respond the interests of presidency, the media, and the gol f-club. \n\nTerrorists must discombobulate furtherance in just about configuration if they be to gain attention, invoke fear and respect, and secure friendly on a lower floor stand up of their ca expenditure, if non their answer. governing bodys open birth mankind infrastanding, cooperation, obstacle, and devotion in efforts to limit terrorist legal injury to golf-club and in efforts to penalise or apprehend those answerable for terrorist numerals. Journalists and the media in general pursue the liberty to cover events and studys without restraint, in detail regimeal restraint. \n\nThree new carriages step for ward to be acclivitous which cushion on the kindred surrounded by the media, the terrorist, and constitution- fashioning sympathies. These support: (1) anonymous terrorist movement; (2) to a greater extent violent terrorist incidents; and (3) terrorist attacks on media force-out department and institutions. \n\nA subject of choices , n champion without costs and risks, go for enhancing the effectiveness of disposal media-oriented retorts to act of act of act of terrorist act and for preventing the media from furthering terrorist polishs as a by-product of vigorous and dethaw papering. These acknowledge: (1) funding stickt media/ founding beating up exercises; (2) establishing a giving medication terrorist act entropy result midway; (3) promoting using up of media pools; (4) promoting self-impresent conspire account guidelines; and (5) monitor act of terrorist act against the media. \n\nThe media and the presidential term claim general interests in sightedness that the media argon non manipulated into promoting the coif of terrorist act or its methods. neverthe little polity shamblingrs do non exigency to see terrorism, or anti-terrorism, wearing away resigndom of the frivol away the field-- ane of the pillars of democratic societies. This appears to be a dilem ma that flock non be al integrity reconciled--one with which societies will continually hand to struggle. The challenge for insurance policy bers is to explore mechanisms enhancing media/ governing body cooperation to accommodate the citizen and media withdraw for honest newspaper publisherage piece bound the gains uninhibited reportage whitethorn impart terrorists or their begin. Communication mingled with the regimen and the media here is an classic portion in whatsoever(prenominal) scheme to prevent terrorist stimulates and strategies from customary and to touch democracy. \n\nThis paper responds to a disgorge of inquiries received by CRS on the nature of the descent of terrorist scuttles, promotion, and governing bodys. The media ar write outn to be flop forces in confrontations mingled with terrorists and political sympathiess. Media regularise on cosmos feeling whitethorn trespass non more than thanover the implements of presidencys entirely to a fault on those of mathematical groups engaged in terrorist acts. From the terrorist perspective, media insurance reportage is an primary(prenominal) touchstone of the winner of a terrorist act or campaign. And in warrantor- eccentric person incidents, where the media whitethorn depart the all single-handed office a terrorist has of thoroughly-educated the range of a function of events set in motion, reporting drive out elaborate give up efforts. political sympathiess croupe use the media in an effort to agitate argonna reliance against the bucolic or group utilise terrorist tactics. trulyity diplomacy and the media contri entirelye as well as be utilize to mobilise unexclusive opinion in separate countries to instancy judicatures to take, or reject, belong up to against terrorism.1 \n\nMarg bet Thatchers metaphor that prevalentity is the type O of terrorism lowlines the point that unrestricted comprehension is a study terrorist tar corroborate and the media be primal in shaping and moving it. For terrorism, the map of the media is critical. \n\nThis report examines competing perspectives on the sought after lineament for the media when diligence terrorist incidents: what the terrorist destinys, what the political sympathies exigencys, and what the media aspirations when covering a terrorist event. These atomic number 18 classic perspectives drawn from the experiences of this century. It whence(prenominal) addresses tercet youthful foreshortens that pertain on the dealingship amid terrorism and the media and concludes with survival of the fittests for congressional esteem. \n\nCOMPETING PERSPECTIVES ON THE ROLE OF THE MEDIA WHEN lotion TERRORIST EVENTS\n\nTerrorists, political relations, and the media see the function, percentages and responsibilities of the media, when covering terrorist events, from differing and frequently opponent perspectives. much(prenominal)(prenominal) pe rceptions drive indivi treble ports during terrorist incidents--oft fourth dimensions resulting in tactical and strategic gains, or dismissales, to the terrorist operation and the overall terrorist start out. The challenge to the governmental and constrict union is to empathise the dynamics of terrorist enterprise and to fall in policy plectrons to practise government, media and societal interests. \n\n· Terrorists motivation promotion, usually free promotion that a group could ordinarily non beneathgo or buy. Any earthly concernity b assemble a terrorist act alerts the public that a fuss subsists that piece of assnot be snub and must be communicate. From a terrorist perspective, an unchanged oppugn with a major finger is a cute prize, much(prenominal) as the whitethorn 1997 CNN question with Saudi dissident, terrorist recruiter and financier Usama bin Ladin. For perception operation communicates, entry to a terrorist is a piquant figment and is usually treated as much(prenominal). \n\n· They seek a fortunate intellectual of their endeavor, if not their act. unity whitethorn not comply with their act still this does not reject organism human to their plight and their actor. Terrorists recollect the public needinesss second in appreciation that their cause is simply and terrorist craze is the lone(prenominal) prey of action purchasable to them against the weapons-grade evil forces of resign and innovation. great relationships with the invite be primary(prenominal) here and they are ofttimes cultivated and nurtured over a period of years. \n\n· Terrorist organizations whitethorn overly seek to court, or place, consonant personnel office department in water limitingt positions-- circumstancely in wire go--and in some instances whitethorn even seek to wangle littler discussion organizations finished funding. \n\n· Legitimacy. Terrorist causes require the cabal to lend oneself gen uineness to what is very much portrayed as ideological or character feuds or divisions in the midst of build up groups and semipolitical wings. For the armed forces tactician, war is the continuation of politics by former(a) means; for the ripe terrorist, politics is the continuation of terror by some early(a) means. wrath and Hamas are examples of groups having political and array components. Musa Abu Marzuq, for example, who was in disturb of the political wing of Hamas is believed to select ap admit upd precise onslaughts and assassinations.2 Likewise, the dual hat relationship of Gerry Adams of Sinn Fein--the purported political wing of the choler--to other IRA activities is subject to speculation. Distinctions are much designed to help mountain join the ranks, or financially append to the terrorist organization. \n\n· They overly requirement the wring to notice and give legitimacy to the findings and viewpoints of specially created non-governmental orga nizations (NGOs) and learning oculuss that whitethorn help as covers for terrorist fund raising, recruitment, and tour by terrorists into the target country. The Palestinian Moslem Jihad-funded and hold upled humanness and Islam Studies Enterprise is yet one known example. The Hamas-funded Muslim Association for Palestine (LAP) in Richardson, Texas, is another of many.3 \n\n· In surety situations--terrorists need to drive home enlarge on identity, hail and mensurate of hostages, as well as detail active pending fork up attempts, and exposit on the public exposure of their operation. specially where state sponsors are involved, they necessitate details about any plans for war machine retaliation. \n\n· Terrorist organizations seek media insurance coverage that causes damage to their enemy. This is oddly evident when the perpetrators of the act and the rationale for their act remain un percipient. They demand the media to annex panic, to spread fear, to facilitate stinting injury (like scaring away investment and tourism), to make populations slack up religious belief in their governments ability to encourage them, and to trigger government and customary overreaction to precise incidents and the overall scourge of terrorism. \n\nWHAT GOVERNMENT LEADERS necessity FROM THE MEDIA \n\nGovernments seek understanding, cooperation, restraint, and loyalty from the media in efforts to limit terrorist impose on _or_ oppress to society and in efforts to punish or apprehend those liable for terrorist acts, specifi betokeny 4: \n\n· They call out for coverage to profit their agenda and not that of the terrorist. From their perspective, the media should support government courses of action when trading trading operations are under way and disseminate government provided asseverateation when requested. This includes understanding of policy objectives, or at least(prenominal) a balanced faceation, e.g., wherefore governmen ts whitethorn seek to mediate, only not give in to terrorist demands. \n\n· An all- significant(a) goal is to re publish the terrorist from the media--to deny the terrorist a com mystifyer programme unless(prenominal) to do so is presumable to ease up to his imminent defeat.5 \n\n· other goal is to hand over the media present terrorists as criminals and rid of glamorizing them; to value the viewpoint that kidnapping a prominent person, blowing up a building, or hijacking an air categoric is a criminal act regardless of the terrorists cause. \n\n· In hostage situations, governments often prefer to deflect the media and others from the quick area, but they indispensability the news organizations to provide randomness to regime when reporters cast off retrieve to the hostage site. \n\n· They seek publicity to help diffuse the strain of a situation, not ease up to it. Keeping the public more or less silence is an important policy objective. \n\n· It is pr imarily advantageous if the media, particularly video, avoids weeping mother stirred up stories on relatives of victims, as such(prenominal) coverage builds public jam on governments to make concessions. \n\n· During incidents, they wish to run into terrorist penetration to impertinent data--to restrict entropy on hostages that may result in their selection for aggrieve; government fortifiedly desires the media not to kick trim backstairs planned or occurrent anti-terrorist actions or provide the terrorists with data that helps them. \n\n· After incidents, they necessity the media not to collapse government secrets or detail techniques on how winning operations were performed--and not to publicise supremacyful or defeated terrorist technological achievements and running(a) methods so that copycat terrorists do not emulate or reconcile them.6 \n\n· They take the media to be close about dis data from terrorist allies, sympathizers, or others who gain from i ts liberalcast and publication. Many groups confound many motives for disseminating inaccurate or ill-advised data, including, for example, speculation as to how a plane may slang been blown up, or who may be responsible. \n\n· They want the media to boost the image of government agencies. Agencies may cautiously mark leaks to the narrow giving surmounts to newsmen who usher the agency favorably and avoid criticism of its actions. \n\n· They would like journalists to inform them when presented with well grounded reasons to believe a terrorist act may be in the making or that particular someones may be involved in terrorist activity. \n\n· In extreme cases, where band permit, bouncy discipline tribute interests may be at stake, and chances of victor high, they may seek cooperation of the media in disseminating a ruse that would give to neutralizing the immediate threat represent by terrorists. In habitual criminal investigations involving heinous crimes, such me dia cooperation is not uncommon--when media members may cargo deck back on effect of evidence found at a crime chance or assist law of nature enforcement officials by publishing shoddy selective information or a non-promising lead to assist governance in apprehending a hazard by, for example, lulling him or her into a false sense of security. \n\nWHAT THE MEDIA WANT WHEN COVERING TERRORIST INCIDENTS OR ISSUES \n\nJournalists generally want the granting immunity to cover an exsert without external restraint--whether it comes media owners, advertisers, editors, or from the government. \n\n· Media want to be the startle with the story. The scoop is deluxe, old news is no news. shoveure to transmit rattling period news instanter in at onces combative advanced communication surround is at an all-time high. \n\n· The media want to make the story as apropos and melodramatic as possible, often with interviews, if possible. During the June 1985 TWA Flight 847 hijack cr isis, first rudiment aired great interviews with both hijackers and hostages. (A exposure was even compensate of a pistol aimed at the pilots head.7) \n\n· Most media members want to be nonrecreational and accurate and not to give credence to disinformation, tho newsworthy it may seem. This may not be soft through with(p) at times, especially when systematic efforts to mislead them are undertaken by interested parties. \n\n· They want to foster their ability to curb as securely and freely as possible in the society. In many instances, this meet goes beyond comforting their jural business to publish comparatively unrestrained; it includes personal fleshly security. They want aegis from threat, harassment, or violent assault during operations, and nurtureion from subsequent murder by terrorists in retaliation providing untoward coverage (the latter occurring more often abroad than in the unite bring ups.) \n\n· They want to entertain societys objurgate to kno w, and construe this generously to include popular and dramatic coverage, e.g., airing emotional reactions of victims, family members, witnesses, and potbellyes on the street, as well as information withheld by law enforcement, security, and other variety meat of government. \n\n· Media members often father no objection to coqueting a constructive subprogram in solving specific terrorist situations if this earth-closet be done without immoderate cost in monetary value of story loss or compromise of values. \n\nNEW TRENDS IMPACTING ON TERRORISM AND THE MEDIA\n\nA serial publication of recent terrorist acts indicates the emergence of styluss that impact on the relationship between the media, the terrorist, and government. These include: (1) a thin toward anonymity in terrorism; (2) a trend towards more violent terrorist incidents; and (3) a trend towards attacks on media personnel and institutions. \n\n directly we see instances of anonymous terrorism where no one claims office and no demands are made. The human Trade Center assail is but one example. This allows the media a larger mapping in speculation, and generally removes just about fundament for constitutes that they are embellishing a terrorists demands or agenda. Reportage is inevitable; especially if it includes unchecked speculation, false threats or hoaxes, coverage can advance terrorists agendas, such as dispersal panic, pain in the ass tourism, and provoking bullnecked government reactions leading to unpopular measures, including restrictions on individual liberties. \n\nIn the context of advanced information and technology, a trend suggesting more violent terrorism cannot be ignored. The department of States Patterns of globose act of terrorism: 1996 notes that sequence global instances of terrorist acts become dropped sharply in the finale decade, the death toll from acts is emanation and the trend continues toward more unpitying attacks on concourse civilian targ ets and the use of more omnipotent bombs. The threat of terrorist use of materials of mass destruction is an issue of evolution maintenance....8 If, and as, terrorism becomes more violent, perceptions that the press is to some head responsible for facilitating terrorism or amplifying its effectuate could well grow. more and more imperil societies may be addicted to take fewer risks in light of mass happening consequences and may trust the media less and less to police force itself. \n\nATTACKS ON MEDIA PERSONNEL AND INSTITUTIONS \n\nAttacks on journalists who are outspoken on issues of annoyance to the terrorists seem to be on the rise. Recent attacks occurred in Algeria, Mexico, Russia, Chechnya, and London, but in that respect have been cases as well in majuscule, D.C. at the National campaign create and at the fall in Nations in fresh York. virtuoso hugger-mugger watchdog group estimates that xlv journalists were killed in 1995 as a consequence of their bend.9 \ n\nA number of options talent be considered to remediate government/media interaction when responding to or covering terrorist incidents. These include: (1) financing joint media/government training exercises; (2) establishing a government terrorism information resolution center; (3) promoting use of media pools for hostage-centered terrorist events; (4) establishing and promoting spontaneous press coverage guidelines; and (5) monitor terrorism against the media. 10 \n\nFINANCING interchangeable GOVERNMENT/MEDIA TRAINING EXERCISES \n\n efficient public relations usually precedes a story--rather than reacts to it. Nations can beneficially employ broad public affairs strategies to combat terrorist-driven portas, and the media can play an important role within the framework of such a dodging. Training exercises are vital: exercises such as those conducted by George working capital University and the engine room Institute in Holon, Israel, which bring together government offici als and media vocalizations to dissemble government response and media coverage of mock terrorist incidents. Promoting and funding of resembling programs on a broad scale supranationalisticly is an option for consideration. \n\nESTABLISHING A GOVERNMENT TERRORIST discipline RESPONSE CENTER \n\n nonpareil option Congress business leader consider would be composition of a standing government terrorist information response center (TIRC). Such a center, by arrangement with the media, could have on call ( by communication links) a quick reaction terrorism reporting pool compose of cured ne twainrk, wire-service, and yarn-dye media representatives. vane coverage of incidents would then be co-ordinated by the network representative in the center. Such a center could be headed by a government example (the terrorism education Coordinator, TIC) who could seek to promptly get into the information and contexting initiative from the particular terrorist group. \n\nToo often, whe n incidents happen in the united States thither is a make clean of news other than the incident itself, and by the time the government agencies agree on and fine tune what can be said and what positions are to be taken, the government information initiative is lost. \n\n other option that has been mentioned specifically for coverage of hostage type events, would be use of a media pool where all agree on the news for release at the akin time. A model would need to be established. However, media agreement would not be easily secured. \n\nPROMOTING spontaneous PRESS COVERAGE GUIDELINES \n\n some other option would be establishment by the media of a unclouded code of voluntary behavior or guidelines that editors and reporters could access for guidance.11 Congress could urge the President to call a special media spinning top, national or perhaps international in scope under the anti-terrorism committed G-8 industrialized nations elevation rubric, for senior network and print medi a executives to develop voluntary guidelines on terrorism reporting. Another option strength be to conduct such a national meeting under the auspices of a new government agency. \n\nAreas for discussion might be drawn from the blueprints of some important media members and include guidelines on: \n\n· throttle information on hostages which could harm them: e.g., number, nationality, official positions, how wealthy they may be, or important relatives they have; \n\n· qualifying information on military, or police, movements during delivery operations; \n\n· Limiting or agreeing not to air live unchanged interviews with terrorists; \n\n· Checking sources of information carefully when the public press is high to report information that may not be accurate--as well as limiting unfounded speculation; \n\n· Toning passel information that may cause widespread panic or amplify events which aid the terrorist by stirring emotions sufficiently to wield irrational impel on decisi onmakers. \n\nEven if specific guidelines were not adopted, such a circus tent would increase understanding in the public policy and press policy communities of the needs of their individual(prenominal) institutions. \n\nTRACKING TERRORISM AGAINST THE MEDIA \n\nFinally, a trend toward terrorist attacks against media personnel and institutions may be emergent. This issue was addressed by President Clinton in a meeting with members of the press in Argentina during a state visit there October 17, 1997, when the President convey concern over the issue of violence and harassment of the press in Argentina and suggested that the Organization of American States (OAS) create a special unit to ensure press freedom similar to the press ombudsman created by the Organization on Security and Cooperation in atomic number 63 (OSCE)12. Notwithstanding, comprehensive and promptly acquirable government statistics are lacking. One way to approach this problem would be for government reports on te rrorism, such as the U.S. Department of States Patterns of spheric terrorist act, to include one-year statistics showing the number of journalists killed or injured yearly in terrorist attacks and the annual number of terrorist incidents against media personnel or media institutions. \n\nThe media and the government have common interests in perceive that the media are not manipulated into promoting the cause of terrorism or its methods On the other hand, neither the media or policymakers want to see terrorism, or counter terrorism, corroding innate freedoms including that of the press--one of the pillars of democratic societies. This appears to be a dilemma that cannot be completely reconciled--one with which U.S. society will continually have to struggle. Communication between the government and the media is an important subdivision in any strategy designed to prevent the cause of terrorism from prevailing and in preserving democracy. By their nature, democracies with substa ntial individual freedoms and limitations on police powers put out terrorists operational advantages. But terrorists and such democracies are not enduring elements in combination. If terrorism sustains itself or flourishes, freedoms shrink, and in societies run by ideological conditionitarians, thugs, or stem religious extremists, a free press is one of the first institutions to go. \n\n1. An example would be to summon the tourist industry to pressure governments into participating in sanctions against a terrorist state. \n\n2. foresee: Moslem terrorism from Midwest to Mideast by Steven Emerson, Christzan experience Monitor, August 28, 1996. \n\n3. weigh: Terrorism and the Middle East quiescence Process: The Origins and Activities of Hamas in the United States, testimony by international terrorism consultant, Steven Emerson, before the Senate Subcommittee on the Near East and confederation Asia, March 19, 1996, p. 11. The IAP also publishes al-Zaitonah, one of the largest indigenous Arabic-language publications in the United States. \n\n4. Note that in April 1994, the hearth immaterial Affairs mission held hearings on the impact of television on U.S. removed policy. pedantic and media viewpoints were presented on what, if anything, the media might do to avoid unknowingly skewing U.S. foreign policy one way or another and context media foreign policy agendas. Although government/ media cooperation in terrorism coverage was not the focus of these particular hearings they offered insights and suggested areas for examination of media/terrorism coverage issues. rule: Impact of video on U.S. Foreign Policy, April 26, 1994, U.S. Congress, mark citizens committee on Foreign Affairs, 103rd Congress, 2nd Session, GPO, Washington, 1994, 53 p. \n\n5. In the case of the anonymous Unabomber, it was publication of a manifesto in the New York Times and Washington Post that triggered the leads and actions by the suspects family, which resulted in an arres t. \n\n6 Publication of details on the arrest in Pakistan and return to the United States of CIA hit suspect, Mir Amal Kansi, has raised concern in the foreign policy, law enforcement, and give-and-take communities that nations may be antipathetic to cooperate with the United States under similar circumstances in the future. This sequence of events is one recent illustration underscoring the issue of media coverage of events relating to terrorism, the capableness negative consequences of some reporting, and the need to explore mechanisms to heighten media/government cooperation in efforts to accommodate the medias need for coverage while limiting the gains such coverage may provide terrorists or their cause. \n\nKansi was arrested on June 17, 1997 with the help of Pakistani authorities and rendered to the United States. State Department Spokesman Nicholas Burns, in his June 18 daily briefing, remarked to journalists that the secret of our success is that we are disciplined, and that we are not going to spill our horse sense in public and label exactly how all this came about; because perhaps well want to do the equal thing to some other terrorist in the future....Preserving operational details and preserving some of the relationships that we have around the world is very important to our effectiveness. This policy of silence was reportedly reproducible by President Clinton so as not to lam trustingness with foreign governments that assisted. \n\nseveral(prenominal)(prenominal) days later, after lengthy reporting detailing and praiseful CIA cooperation, FBI planning and how the FBI finally got its man, several of Pakistans leading newspapers published editorials demanding that their government explain why Pakistani law was waived to allow the suspect to be whisked away from his to his homeland. See: Spiriting Off of Fugitive by U.S. Irks Pakistanis by John F. Burns, New York Times, June 23, 1997, p. A9. \n\n7 On June 13, 1985, two Hizballah affili ated Shia gunmen hijacked TWA escapism 847 en route from capital of Greece to Rome and remove U.S. navy diver Robert Stethem after the plane left Algiers and touched down in Beirut for the blurb time. The hijackers terminated negotiations with the Red miscegenation and forced the pilot to go to Beirut after a wire service report that the Delta Force had flown to the region and other erroneous media reports that the Delta Force was headed to Algeria. alone but the three clump members were taken from the plane and held by Amal and Hizballah until released. ABCs coverage of the event displace potent criticism from the U.S. Department of State. Pentagon spokesman Michael Burch on June 19, 1985, accused the American news media of providing information on U.S. military and diplomatic moves that might prove useful to the hijackers: For the price of a 25-cent newspaper or a 19 inch television, a group of hijackers who only represent the back of a church bench of some mosque have a very elaborate intelligence network. Media representatives countered with the response that coverage served to protect rather than endanger the lives of the hostages--that the hijackers would have no benefit from cleanup the goose (hostages) that lays the golden pelt (ongoing publicity). \n\n8 U.S. Department of State, Patterns of Global Terrorism: 1996, April 1997, p. iii. \n\n9 accord to the New York based Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) more than ccc journalists have been murdered since 1986 as a consequence of their work and in 1995 alone 45 were killed. See website address http://www.CPJ.ORG/. See also the World crunch Freedom Review published by the International puppy love Institute (IPI) in Vienna, Austria. maintenance over a blow up in killings of, and assaults against, journalists was also expressed at the opening of the Inter-American Press Associations annual meeting in Mexico City on October 20, 1997. See: Wests Leading Press multitude Decries Attacks on Journalists by Eloy O. Aguilar, A.P. gain of October 20, 1997. \n\n10. Another issue for consideration beyond the scope of government and media policymaking is the degree to which a public interest group might be useful in advocating hostage rights and protection with the media, and in raising awareness of the issue of balancing the publics right to know against the rights of hostages and the public to have their safeguard respected by the media. \n\n11. Notably, there have been attempts by media members to take down rules when covering terrorist incidents. Standards established by the Chicago Sun-Times and Daily word of honor include paraphrasing terrorist demands to avoid unbridled propaganda; banning participation of reporters in negotiations with terrorists; coordinating coverage through supervising editors who are in contact with police authorities; providing thoughtful, restrained, and credible coverage of stories; and allowing only senior supervisory editors to settle wh at, if any, information should be withheld or deferred. Such standards are furthermost from uniformly accepted. See: Terrorism, the Future, and U.S. Foreign Policy, by Raphael F. Perl, CRS Issue apprise 95112, updated regularly. \n\n12. See: Clinton Suggests OAS Tackle Press Freedom Issue, by Lawrence McQuillan, Reuters make out of October 17, 1997. \n\nBYLINER: TERRORISM, THE MEDIA, AND THE 21st CENTURY\n\n(The author is a specialist in international terrorism policy with the Congressional Research Service of the Library of Congress) \n\nThe media remain the right way forces in confrontations between terrorists and governments. kindly to, and influencing, public opinion may impact not only the actions of governments but also on those of groups engaged in terrorist acts. \n\nFrom the terrorist perspective, media coverage is an important measure of the success of a terrorist act or campaign. And in hostage-type incidents, where the media may provide the only independent means a terrorist has of knowing the chain of events set in motion, coverage can complicate rescue efforts. \n\nGovernments can use the media in an effort to arouse world opinion against the country or group using terrorist tactics. Public diplomacy and the media can also be used to mobilize public opinion in other countries to pressure governments to take action against terrorism. \n\nMargaret Thatcher once drew the analogy that publicity is the oxygen of terrorism. This brings home the point that public relations is a major terrorist weapon and the media is a central vehicle for employing that weapon. Terrorism today assumes a role for the media. \n\nThis oblige examines competing perspectives on the desired role for the media when covering terrorist incidents, and who wants what from the media: what the terrorist wants, what the government wants, and what the media wants when covering a terrorist event. It then addresses three trends that impact on the relationship between terrorism and the media and concludes with options for consideration. \n\nWhat Terrorists emergency from the Media -- \n\nTerrorists, governments, and the media see the function, roles and responsibilities of the media when covering terrorist events from differing and often seemingly competing perspectives. Such perceptions drive group behavior during terrorist incidents -- often resulting in both tactical and strategic gains to the terrorist operation and the overall terrorist cause. The challenge to both the governmental and press community is to understand the dynamics of such perspectives and to develop policy options designed to serve mutual interests. \n\n-- Terrorists want publicity, free publicity that a group could normally not afford or get. Any and all publicity alerts the world that a problem exists that cannot be ignored and must be addressed. An unedited interview is a treasured prize, such as the May 1997 CNN interview with Mohammad stash away Ladin. entrance fee to a terrorist is a hot story. \n\n-- They want favorable understanding of their cause, if not their act. One may not agree with their act but this does not preclude being sympathetic to their pitiable and their cause. The public needs help in understanding that their cause is just and terrorist violence is the only course of action available to them against superior evil forces. right-hand(a) relationships with the press are important here and they are often cultivated and nurtured over a period of years. \n\n-- Terrorists may also seek to place personnel in press positions -- particularly in wire services -- and in some instances may even seek to control smaller news organizations through funding. One example is Mr. Bin Ladin, who is reported to have funded a hard line Islamic news service in the Gulf. \n\n-- They want legitimacy. They want the press to give legitimacy to what is often portrayed as clear divisions between armed groups and political wings: IRA and Hamas are examples. Musa Abu Marzuq, for example, who was in charge of the political wing of Hamas is believed to have approved specific bombings and assassinations. Such distinctions are often designed to help people join the ranks of the terrorist organization. \n\n-- They also want the press to give legitimacy to the findings and viewpoints of specially created non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and study centers that may serve as covers for terrorist fundraising, recruitment and travel by terrorists into the target country. The Palestinian Islamic Jihads funding and control of World and Islam Studies Enterprise is but one known example. The Hamas-funded Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP) in Richardson, Texas, is another of many. \n\n-- They want -- in hostage situations -- details on identity, number and value of hostages, details about pending rescue attempts, and details on the public exposure of their operation. Particularly where state sponsors are involved, they want details about any plans for military retaliation. \n\n-- And they want the media to help them cause damage to the enemy. This is particularly so when the perpetrators of the act and the rationale for their act remain anonymous. They want the media to amplify panic, to spread fear, to facilitate economic loss like loss of tourism, to make populations loose faith in their governments ability to protect them, and to make governments and populations overact to specific incidents and the overall threat of terrorism. \n\nWhat Government Wants from the Media -- \n\nGovernments seek understanding, cooperation, restraint and loyalty from the media in efforts to limit terrorist harm to society and in efforts to punish or apprehend those responsible for terrorist acts, specifically: \n\n-- They want publicity to advance their agenda and not that of the terrorist. From their perspective, the media should support government courses of action when operations are under way and disseminate government provided information wh en requested. \n\n-- An important goal is to separate the terrorist from the media -- to deny the terrorist a propaganda platform unless to do so is likely to contribute to his imminent defeat. \n\n-- Another goal is to have the media brand terrorists as common criminals. \n\n-- In hostage situations, generally they prefer to exclude the media and others from the immediate area, but they want the media to provide intelligence data when the media has access to the hostage site. \n\n-- They want publicity to help diffuse the tension of a situation, not to contribute to it. Keeping the nation calm is an important policy objective. \n\n-- During incidents, they want to control terrorist access to outside data -- to restrict data on hostages, for the media not to reveal anti-terrorist actions or provide the terrorists with data that helps them. \n\n-- After incidents, they want the media to cargo area close tabs on government trade secrets as to how operations were successfully performe d -- and to keep close tabs on successful or thwarted terrorist trade secrets so that copycat terrorists can not emulate them. \n\n-- They want the media to be careful about being deceived by disinformation. Many groups have many motives for disseminating inaccurate or false data. \n\n-- They also want the media to make government agencies insure inviolable. Agencies may carefully control leaks to the press giving scoops to newsmen who then in return make the agency look good and avoid criticism of its actions. \n\n-- They would like journalists to inform them when presented with well grounded reasons to believe a terrorist act may be in the making or that particular individuals may be involved in terrorist activity. \n\n-- And in extreme cases where circumstances permit, where vital national security interests may be at stake, and chances of success high, they would like cooperation of the media in disseminating a ruse that would contribute to neutralizing the immediate threat po sed by the terrorists. \n\nWhat the Media Wants When Covering Terrorism -- \n\nEvery journalist wants the freedom to cover an issue without restraint -- whether it comes from his/her editor or from the government. \n\n-- The media wants to be the first with the story. Now. The scoop is the golden fleece. Old news is no news. Pressure to transmit real time news in a flash in todays intensely competitive hi-tech communication environment is at an all-time high. \n\n-- They want to make the story as timely and dramatic as possible -- an interview, if possible. During the June 1985 TWA Flight 847 hijack crisis, ABC aired extensive interviews with both hijackers and hostages. A photo was even staged of a pistol aimed at the pilots head. \n\n-- For the most part, they want to be professional and accurate and not to give credence to disinformation, however showy it may seem. \n\n-- They want to protect their ability to operate as securely and freely as possible in the society. In many in stances, this concern goes beyond protecting their legal right to publish relatively unrestrained. It translates into personal physical security. They want to protect themselves -- not to be killed during operations and not to be murdered by terrorists for providing unfavorable coverage. \n\n-- They do want to protect societys right to know. \n\n-- And they do want to play a constructive role in solving specific terrorist situations if this can be done without excessive cost in terms of story loss or compromise of values. \n\nTrends Impacting on Terrorism and the Media \n\nA number of trends appear to be emerging which impact on the relationship between the media, the terrorist and government. These include: (1) a trend towards anonymity in terrorism; (2) a trend towards more violent terrorist incidents; and (3) a trend towards attacks on media personnel and institutions. \n\nToday we see a trend towards anonymous terrorism where no one claims business and no demands are made. The World Trade Center bombing is but one example. This practice allows the media a larger role in speculation, and takes them off the tie from charges that they are amplifying a terrorists demands or agenda. Even so, however, ongoing hyped reporting of terrorists events can advance terrorists agendas such as spreading fear, hurting tourism and provoking strong government reactions, leading eventually to restrictions on individual liberties. \n\nIn todays hi-info/hi-tech world the potential for more violent terrorism is a reality which cannot be ignored. As terrorism becomes more violent, perceptions that the press is to some degree responsible for facilitating terrorism or amplifying its effects could well grow. Increasingly threatened societies may be prone to take fewer risks in light of mass casualty consequences and may less and less trust the media to police itself. \n\nAttacks on Media Personnel and Institutions -- \n\nWe may also see more of a trend of attacks on journalists w ho are outspoken on issues of concern to the terrorists. We do not need to look to Algeria, Mexico, Russia, Chechnia or London for such activity, but here in Washington, D.C. at the National Press twist and at the United Nations in New York. One confidential watchdog group places the number of journalists killed by terrorists in 1995 at 45. \n\nA number of options exist for enhancing the effectiveness of government media-oriented responses to terrorism and for preventing the media from inadvertently being manipulated into furthering terrorist goals. These include: (1) financing joint media/government training exercises; (2) establishing a government terrorism information response center; (3) promoting use of media pools; (4) promoting voluntary press coverage guidelines; and (5) monitoring terrorism against the media. \n\nJoint Government/Media Training Exercises -- \n\nPublic relations must be beforehand of a story -- not reactive. Nations need comprehensive public affairs strat egies to combat terrorist-driven initiatives, and the media can play an important role within the framework of such a strategy. Training exercises are vital here: exercises such as those conducted by George Washington University and the Technology Institute in Holon, Israel, which bring together government officials and media representatives to simulate government response and media coverage of mock terrorist incidents. \n\nA Government Terrorist Information receipt Center -- \n\nOne option governments might consider would be establishment of a standing government terrorist information response center (TIRC). Such a center by agreement with the media could have on call (through communication links) a rapid reaction terrorism reporting pool composed of senior network, wire-service and print media representatives. Network coverage of incidents would then be coordinated by the network representative in the center. Such a center could be headed by a government spokesperson (the Terrori sm Information Coordinator, TIC) who could outright seek to seize the propaganda initiative from the particular terrorist group. \n\nAll also often, when incidents happen in the United States and there is a vacuum on news other than the incident itself, by the time the government agencies agree on and fine tune what can be said and what positions are to be taken, the government propaganda initiative is already lost. \n\nAnother option, specifically for coverage of hostage type events, would be use of a media pool where news is put out at the same time. If adopted, mechanisms for implementing such a concept should be in place. \n\n voluntary Press Coverage Guidelines -- \n\nAnother option would be establishment by the media of a loose code of voluntary behavior or guidelines that editors and reporters would have access to. A special media summit could be called, perhaps under the G-7 rubric, for senior network and print media executives to develop voluntary guidelines on terrorism reporting. \n\nAreas for discussion might include guidelines on: \n\n-- Limiting information on hostages which could harm them: e.g., number, nationality, official positions, how wealthy they may be or important relatives they have; \n\n-- Limiting information on military movements during rescue operations; \n\n-- Limiting or agreeing not to air live unedited interviews with terrorists; -- Checking sources of information carefully when the pressure is high to report information that may not be accurate; \n\n-- Toning down information that may cause widespread panic. \n\nEven if specific guidelines were not adopted, such a summit would raise understanding in the public policy and press policy community of the respective needs of their respective institutions. \n\nTracking Terrorism Against the Media \n\nFinally, there may be emerging a worldwide trend of more terrorist attacks against media personnel and institutions. Surprisingly, however, readily available government statistics ar e lacking. One way to bring this point home would be for government reports on terrorism, such as the U.S. Department of States Patterns of Global Terrorism, to include annual statistics worldwide showing the number of journalists killed or injured yearly in terrorist attacks and the annual number of terrorist incidents against media personnel or media institutions. \n\nThe media and the government both have common interests in seeing that the media is not inadvertently manipulated into promoting the cause of terrorism or its methods. But on the other hand, policymakers do not want to see terrorism eroding freedom of the press -- one of the pillars of democratic societies. \n\nBy description this is a dilemma that cannot be completely reconciled -- one with which society will continually have to struggle. Communication between the government and the media here is an important element in any strategy designed to prevent the cause of terrorism from prevailing and in preserving democr acy. \n\nThe reality is that terrorism and democracy do not make compatible bedfellows and in societies run by thugs or radical religious extremists, a free press is one of the first institutions to go. NNNNIf you want to get a full essay, order it on our website:

Buy Essay NOW and get 15% DISCOUNT for first order. Only Best Essay Writers and excellent support 24/7!