"Militants" and "Gunmen"--When will the media call terror by its name?

HonestReporting.com/Frontpagemagazine ^ | 12-4-08 | HonestReporting.com

[SJackson]

"Militants" and "Gunmen"

By HonestReporting.com
HonestReporting.com | Friday, December 05, 2008

The murderous terrorist attack in Mumbai, India has shocked all decent human beings around the world. Armed men targeting civilians, taking hostages and shooting and murdering indiscriminately can only be described as an act of terror carried out by terrorists.

HonestReporting has long campaigned for the media to call terror by its name. Too many times, media outlets report on terrorist acts in Israel referring to "militants", "activists" or any number of other descriptions, meticulously avoiding the "T" word.

"MILITANTS" & "GUNMEN"

We took a look at some of the initial media coverage of the Mumbai terror attack to see if the media is consistent with its terminology or if there are different rules for terror in Israel and terror elsewhere.

• The BBC, at least, was consistent in its refusal to break from its style guide. As per usual, the perpetrators were referred to as "militants" or "gunmen" who carried out an "attack". However, some deviations managed to slip through. For example, an analysis by Sumantra Bose of the London School of Economics begins with the statement: "India's cities are no strangers to indiscriminate terror attacks." [emphasis added]

The BBC did try to correct its "errors" but perhaps the sheer scale of the events taking place may have strained even the BBC editors' ability to downplay terror. In the example below, the same story featured on the BBC website started off headlined as "Terror tactic switch" and later changed to "Method amid madness". This amendment, however, referred to "urban terrorism", perhaps indicating a certain amount of confusion.

• Equally, The Guardian did its best to describe the terrorists as "militants", although the "T" word was used in a number of places.
• Reuters also stuck with the term "militants".

USING THE "T" WORD

• CNN and particularly Sky News freely employed the "T" word.

• The LA Times and New York Times both used the term "terrorist attacks" while The Daily Telegraph and even The Independent referred to "terrorists".

• Others who used the term "terrorists" included the Associated Press, The Sunday Times, The Observer and The Scotsman.

MUMBAI "TERRORISTS"; PALESTINIAN "MILITANTS"

"Terrorism" is the correct term to describe politically motivated attacks that do not differentiate between civilian and military targets and are designed to create a sense of terror in the minds of the general public. The term has been correctly used by much of the world media to describe attacks such as the September 11, Al-Qaeda attack on the United States, the London bombings, the Madrid train attacks, and many more.

Even the BBC used the word "terrorist" at the outset of the London bombings before embarrassingly removing it:

In the Middle East, it has been used to describe attacks within Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan. However, within Israel, the terms "terrorism" and "terrorists" are often left out of media reports and replaced with "militants", "gunmen" or even "activists". This implies that attacks by groups like Hamas and Islamic Jihad are somehow different and perhaps justifiable.

For example, in March 2006, the AP demonstrated how it sees Palestinian terrorism as different to that of Al-Qaeda:

The issue is best summed up by The Jerusalem Post's editorial:

even though this was clearly an assault against innocent civilians and exclusively against civilian targets - hospitals, hotels and a train station - why does much of the British media, including the BBC ... label the killers "militants" instead of terrorists? Why does the The Guardian join Al-Jazeera in calling them "gunmen"?

This may sound like a marginal concern, but nomenclature matters: The primary, often only, target of terrorists are civilians. Anti-civilian warfare is a key tool of Muslim extremists. Terrorism is a cruelty that has become the scourge of modern civilization and changed the way we live. It has debased humanity.

The international community, together with responsible elements in the media, should show zero tolerance for the kind of depravity manifested in Mumbai.

And a vital step to confronting it effectively is to recognize terrorism and call it by its name.

[SJackson]

When will the media call terror by its name?---When conservatives start blowing things up, or when victims defend themselves.

[SJackson]

If you'd like to be on this middle east/political ping list, please FR mail me.

High Volume. Articles on Israel can also be found by clicking on the Topic or Keyword Israel. or WOT [War on Terror]

----------------------------

[MrB]

Just more evidence that the prince of the air ONLY considers Christianity to be a threat to his power.

[ripley]

“when will the media call terror by its name?”

never. the mainstream press supports them.

IMHO

[vimto]

They are correctly to be identified as members of the international self exploding community.

[fuzzybutt]

As virtually every word out of the MSM is a lie my vote will be, NEVER.

[angkor]

>>>>>CNN and particularly Sky News freely employed the “T” word.<<<<<<<

I don’t know what “CNN” did, but the screen shot above is from IBN Live in India, which yes is a CNN partner station and partially owned by Turner Broadcasting.

But it’s an Indian network run by Indians, and is not the CNN we’ve all grown to disrespect.

[Uversabound]

That is right the main stream media supports them because they want the world to like us. I could not care less if they like us even now. I know I don't have to remind all of you but, hey, the two freaking buildings fell on 911. I work 15 miles away. The left will never get it.

Would that not be enough of a reason to be fighting this home and abroad to eternity? Unbelievably, Americans have forgotten, the left I mean. You know the country tune: *Have you forgotten?, those that died that day?*

[halfthenotes]

The world should call these morons what they are losers.It would go a long way in fighting these dopes to call them something derisive rather than giving them a name that invokes an image.

[Fishrrman]

Question:
“When will the media call terror by its name?”

Answer:
They won’t.
Orwellianism has prevailed.
Newspeak reigns.

Prediction:
The more widespread the Islamic war upon Western civilization grows, the LESS the media will speak about its true nature.

Eventually, this struggle will come to be called “the war against Western racism”.

- John

[RobinOfKingston]

When will the media call terror by its name?

When a newspaper is the target of a terror attack. When a "gunman" or "militant" kills some of their own tribe.

[dbz77]

The name to use is “sand Nazi”.

[AmericanInTokyo]

“activists”? “youths”? “gunmen”? “community organizers”?

[ripley]

“the left will never get it.”

because they are psychotic adolescent.

IMHO