Terrorism, Communication, and the Media

Abstract

This chapter examines the approaches to the study of terrorism that emphasise its communicative dimension. The field’s conceptual gaps highlighted in the first chapter particularly help in placing into context the current problems in making sense of the role of the media. Indeed, Brian Simmons (1991: 36) observes that “much literature concerning the mass media’s coverage of terrorism is speculative in nature”: “Often, sweeping statements are made without any substantive proof.” Robert Picard (1991), assessing the “contagion hypothesis” — the idea that media reporting of terrorism generates more of it — talks about “dubious science” (ibid.: 49) and a “lack of scientifically acceptable evidence” supporting the arguments (ibid.: 60). David Paletz and John Boiney (1992: 12) write that the literature which tends to see media coverage as beneficial to terrorists is marked “by a reliance on the same incidents and on anecdotal information.” Jeffrey Ross (2007: 215–216), reviewing research on the relationship between media and terrorism finds that “there is a striking similarity among ... monographs; they cover many of the same topics and often reprint well-cited journal articles, therefore adding little new information.”