HomeCan The Media Do More Towards Containing International Terrorism?
As the victims of the latest Tiger Terror and Carnage in Sri Lanka pick up the pieces of what remain of their lives, it is appropriate to reflect on what factors have permitted such carnage for so long. Among the many, one such factor is the dilution of the horror of such terror, through sections of the media labelling immediately after such carnage, the responsible Tigers as rebels rather than terrorist, carrying their predictable denials that are often orchestrated across the globe and then repeating with monotonous regularity as a suffix to the reporting, "the Tigers are fighting for a separate state alleging discrimination of the minority Tamils in the hands of the majority Sinhalese".
If targeting defenseless and unsuspecting civilians for maximum carnage with no warning as the Tigers have done and continue to do repeatedly, is not Terrorism but "being rebels", what qualifies one to be called Terrorist? Is this impartial reporting or detracting from the horror of the crime? When denials of complicity have been found to be false in the fullness of time and repeatedly so, is reporting such denials without drawing attention to the track record of such denials impartial reporting or detracting from the horror of the crime? Is reference to alleged discrimination under such circumstances, especially in the absence of hard evidence, relevant or impartial reporting or detracting from the horror of the crime?
In this context I can’t help but recall how once a young BBC resident correspondent in Sri Lanka mysteriously appeared at the sight of such carnage barely a few minutes after the blast almost as if forewarned, perhaps through clairvoyance! The thrust of the reporting and discussion in the immediate aftermath of the Colombo bomb of 31st January ’96 was more on its impact on the forth coming one day world cup cricket competition than on the impact on the victims! Even as recently as May this year, a female BBC correspondent followed up a report of a "Tiger Kangaroo Court" meeting out their own brand of the "Rule of the Jungle", with a reference to the Tigers as a "government in waiting"! I doubt if the Tigers could have even hired for rewards a better advertiser, to conceal their true nature and present a soft image!
I believe that the media has an obligation to contribute positively to the international effort to eliminate terrorism in the world. This cause is not served by such reporting. The reason for presenting these reflections is the hope that at least in the future reporting of such events and Tiger terrorist activity is done so that it is as impartial to the victims as it has so far been to the perpetrators!
Contributed by a Reader