Covering terrorist attacks responsibly
Are journalists the “best friends” of terrorists? Is terrorism, primarily, a media act?
Is there a newsroom anywhere in the world now that does not have to think through these questions, to determine its proper role and responsibilities in communicating to its readers about deadly incidents — the most recent being last week’s attacks on two mosques in New Zealand that took the lives of 50 people?
Much research tells us of the inextricable link between terrorism and journalism.
“Terrorism is above all a media act. Without publicity there would be no point for the terrorist,” Charlie Beckett, a media professor of the London School of Economics, wrote this week in a Medium article titled “Lessons for Journalists from the New Zealand terror attacks.”
Beckett is a worldwide expert on media and terrorism, author of a 2016 report called Fanning the Flames: Reporting Terror in a Network World. There, he cites the work of American terrorism historian Walter Laqueur, who, in 1999 — well before the emergence of social media platforms that now amplify terrorism in terrifying ways — wrote: “It has been said that journalists are terrorists’ best friends, because they are willing to give terrorist operations maximum exposure.”
Beckett’s 2016 report advises that newsrooms and journalists think carefully about what we publish about terrorists and acts of terrorism — what we choose to amplify and provide with “the oxygen of publicity.”
But, clearly, he says, journalists are obligated to report on and seek to explain terrorism.
“Terrorism is vital news: a dramatic, important story that the public needs to know about and understand,” Beckett states. “The fact that news media gives publicity to the killer is a problem that cannot be completely resolved.”
However, we can think more about how to cover terrorism in a manner that reduces the “propaganda effect” for the terrorist, he says. Beckett and others who have studied media and terrorism advise that news media organizations need to have detailed guidelines on all aspects of terrorism coverage in place well before we are caught in the deadline decisions of covering breaking news violence linked to terrorism.
The Star currently does not have such detailed guidelines communicated widely to the newsroom. Sadly, given events in the world at large and within our own community, I think the time has come to do this.
Certainly, Star Editor Irene Gentle has given considerable thought to these issues in recent months following last April’s van rampage in Toronto that killed 10 people and the mass shooting on the Danforth that killed two young women and wounded 13 other people.
In any such incidents, the Star and other media increasingly face calls not to name the killers or show their faces. That is not an option for the Star, Gentle says. I agree.
“We name. We look for photographs of them and we publish photographs of them,” Gentle said in a guidance note to the Star’s digital team this week. “Information is our work. Our job is to help reveal, explain and understand. Understanding something or someone requires shining a light on who and what they are.”
But, Gentle says, “naming is not the same as glorifying.” The killer’s name and face need not be the focus of coverage, or appear on Page 1. Telling the stories of the victims, heroes and acts of kindness matters more.
“Our job is to help filter, validate or curate the torrent to be responsible, fair and accurate,” she says. “We can’t change something by hiding a crucial part of it, but we can ensure a balance or focus in other areas.”
What is responsible reporting on terrorism within the Star? Every incident brings its own questions and need for extensive newsroom discussion in making critical judgment calls. But generally, if there is a video of people being killed — as was the case in New Zealand — the Star does not publish or link to it, Gentle said.
If there is a killer manifesto, senior management must be involved in any discussion about giving the killer’s views greater oxygen. “There should always be a reason to publish — do we know what the reason is?” she says.
In any incidents of terrorism and violent extremism, journalism has an obligation to report verified information in the public interest. It is a grim fact that newsrooms need to establish best practices for reporting on both global terror and terrorism in our own communities.