ISLAMABAD – Global research has found that the international media ishesitant to term extremist attacks perpetrated by far-right non-Muslims asterrorist attacks.
The study found that violent Islamists are three times more likely to becalled terrorists in the media as compared to the far-right attackers.
The study reviewed over 200,000 news articles and broadcast transcripts tocome to this conclusion. This dichotomy was evident in the internationalmedia’s coverage of the terrorist attacks on two mosques in New Zealand onMarch 15, 2019. Although it covered the incident as ‘terror attacks’ whilegoing soft on the perpetrators. Now, the statistics have vetted the premise.
The research discovered that the media linked the Islamist attacks toterrorism in 78 percent of the news reports on the incidents while theattacks conducted by the far right (non-Muslims) were called as terroristsonly 24 percent of the time.Reporting by Media Outlets
The study has been compiled by Signal AI that has prepared a database ofnews output to assist firms in monitoring the way they are covered in media.
The company has reviewed the news reports of about 11 different terrorattacks that took place in the past two years along with the TV transcriptsand radio broadcasts in 80 different languages. The study’s objective wasto point out a consistent hesitation from the media outlets in callingfar-right attackers as terrorists.
“Reporting on Islamic extremist attacks is quantifiably different toreporting on far-right attacks,” concludes the company. The research alsounderlined that the media was inclined to label the far-right attacker ofthe two mosques in Christchurch as the terrorist.
Read Top Stories
However, it suggested that this was probably because of the decision of NewZealand’s premier to brand it as an act of terror. This proposition is wellfounded as a swift change can be seen in the media coverage of the incidentafter the premier’s decision.
“The Christchurch shooting is actually exceptional in how willing the mediawere to label the shooter a terrorist,” concludes Signal while indicatingthat media reports tend to follow the inclinations of the political leaders.
Signal further found that TV and radio outlets are more reluctant than thewebsites and newspapers to dub incidents of any variety as terror acts,probably because of the comparatively short length of broadcast newsbulletins.
*Via: Guardianlink*
