[antimedia] antimedia: In a groundbreaking academic study....

[Email subscription to blog articles]

Posted by antimedia:
In a groundbreaking academic study....
http://www.antimedia.us/posts/1150433627.shtml


   ....two researchers have found that [1]media coverage increases
   terrorism. Bruno S. Frey of the University of Zurich and Dominic
   Rohner of Cambridge University applied game theory principles to the
   study of terrorism and media coverage and found that the two have a
   symbiotic relationship. Terrorism attracts media coverage because it
   sells more newspapers, and more media coverage encourages terrorists
   to commit more acts of terrorism.

     The present contribution emphasises the symbiotic relationship
     between terrorism and the media. Terrorist attacks are a particular
     form of communication by terrorist groups. The media are used as a
     platform for securing a broad dissemination of the terroristsâ
     ideology. The media benefit from terrorism, as reports of terror
     attacks increase newspaper sales and the number of television
     viewers. There is a common-interest game, whereby both the media
     and terrorists benefit from terrorist incidents and where both
     parties adjust their actions according to the actions of their
     opponent.
     The first part of the paper formalises this intuition with the help
     of a simple common-interest game. Terrorists have the choice of how
     much of their time they want to dedicate to terrorist activities.
     The media can choose how much of their news space they want to use
     for reporting on terrorism. Following the parameter values, one,
     two or three equilibriums were found. The extreme cases of very
     high and very low levels of terrorism and media coverage were both
     stable, whereas the intermediate equilibrium was unstable.
     The analysis allows us to draw policy recommendations. Avoiding, as
     far as possible, to attribute terrorist attacks to particular
     groups and subsidise (indirectly) high quality journalism have been
     found to increase the likelihood of a low terrorism outcome.
     Further policy options, such as increased educational spending,
     more decentralisation and better perspectives for living a
     satisfying, law-abiding life could also decrease the risk of
     terrorism.

   In other words, if the media would simply report terrorist acts the
   way they report American troop deaths, terrorism would decrease.
   When Americans die in Iraq, they usually get a one-liner; (e.g. two
   Marines were killed by a roadside bomb today, three more Americans
   died in Iraq today.) When the terrorists behead two people, the media
   glamorizes it. They talk about who might have committed the act and
   why they might have committed it. (E.g. when Nick Berg was beheaded
   there was much clamoring about whether or not that was caused by Abu
   Ghraib, what it meant for the future, etc., etc.) They speculate over
   whether the deaths can be attributed to Al Qaeda in Iraq or Ansar al
   Islam or some other group which they name. In other words, they spend
   a lot of time and ink talking about it, acting as public relations
   outlets for the terrorists.
   In fact the constant drumbeat of coverage of reporters killed and
   injured by IEDs encourages the terrorists to kill even more
   journalists. That might be something the editors want to think about
   when deciding what to print tomorrow. (Hat tip to [2]AJ.)

References

   1. http://www.leftwinghate.com/?p=415
   2. http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/1993