The way in which terrorism is presented in British media has an obvious bias however I will explain as best as I can why this bias exist.
The biggest factor into how terrorism is portrayed in the British media is religion. Britain is a Christian country; this fact has been reinforced by the likes of David Cameron who in both of his Christmas messages to the public stated this fact. With the UK being a Christian country media within the country will promote these values, maybe not obviously but in the underlining of their articles. This promoting of the Christian faith in the media has a direct impact on terrorism coverage as modern-day terrorism is mostly related to the middle east crisis, the middle east is majority Muslim and therefore there is an instinct conflict with the Christian values of Britain. Due to the crisis in the middle east many terrorist organisations have formed, and these organisations typically promote themselves to be Muslim. Michael A Sheehan (2000) stated that this portrayal of religion is a "transparent tactic designed to conceal political goals, generate popular support and silence opposition." So, when a terrorist is attacked in the name of these organisations it is not just a political attack, by bringing in the religious factor it has now become an attack on 'Englishness'. The other major factor in the way in which terrorism is portrayed by the British media is due to the fact that the UK is a capitalist nation therefore the prime goal for the media is to make a large profit, therefore the media will exploit using religious attacks on the UK’s ‘Englishness’ in order to sell more papers or gather more viewers, by stating that an attack was caused by a Muslim (even if this is not the case) they bring in more revenue, the media knows this as they are aware of the political climate and the rampant islamophobia in the UK and so exploit this as much as they can. Therefore, in the British media today terrorism is displayed as Muslim, even if the perpetrator is white, the media will dig up any relation to any known Muslim terror groups or if the individual had recently converted to Islam.
Interestingly Robert Pape said that "There is little connection between suicide terrorism and Islamic fundamentalism, or any one of the world's religions" backing this statement Robert studied 315 suicide attacks between the years 1980 and 2003. Robert summarised that suicide bombers actions do not stem from religious beliefs but rather from political conflict.
If in the event of a terror attack the terrorist is not Muslim and not of Asian heritage, then the media will then most likely not headline the attack as a "Terrorist" attack but simply an attack as today the word “Terrorist” is reserved solely for Muslims and non-white people. The best example of this reservation of the word terrorist is the 2011 Norwegian terror attack. The culprit was Norwegian born 'Anders Behring Breivik' a white Christian male with right wing extremist values, the terror attack was the worst attack to occur in Norway since World War 2, the attack was in two parts: The first claimed eight lives and 209 injuries at a tower block near the prime ministers building, the second attack claimed 68 lives and injured at least 110 people, the second attack took place at a labour party youth camp. By far one of the worst terrorist attacks to take place in the west, it was not initially referred to as a terror attack but rather a massacre. An American religious scholar called Stephen Prothero pointed out that in the case of the 2011 Norwegian terror attack Christians “swiftly denounced him (Anders Behring Breivik)” and that his actions were in fact “political and not religious”, Stephen states that this generosity is not extended to Muslims who murder for political-religious reasons.
Another example of a terror attack being called otherwise is the Dunblane school massacre which occurred in 1996 (Scotland), the perpetrator was 43-year-old Thomas Hamilton, a Scottish born, white former shopkeeper. The attack shocked Britain as this was very new to the people of Britain at the time, furthermore due to 16 of the 17 victims being children and the 17th victim being a teacher, public outrage over Thomas Hamilton's use of legally owned firearms even led to the banning of firearms across the England, Scotland and Wales. Headlines such as the 'Daily record’ named Thomas "Evil" while the ‘Daily Mirror’ mentioned his gender, the word terror was not mentioned.
The increase in the use of the word “Terror” (in relations to Muslims) in news headlines may originate from the events of 2001. The horrific World Trade centre terrorist attack of September 2001 really moved Muslim terrorist into mainstream media with a stark increase in media coverage of Muslim specific attacks on the West, the heightened coverage of Muslim specific terror attacks along with the anger of the events of 9/11 escalated islamophobia in the West, this was increased further when the US and Britain retaliated with military action in the Middle East. With the so called “War on Terror” taking place in the Middle East, the word terror became a daily norm both in conversation and in the media. With military casualties caused by Muslim terror groups being reported, an increase in islamophobia and hate crimes against Asians in the UK skyrocketed which eventually lead to retaliation by Asians in the UK which resulted in attacks which the media was quick to call “Terror Attacks”. Before this the use of the word terror didn’t instantly relate to Muslim individuals but instead the Irish, more specifically the IRA who were responsible for a very large amount of terror attacks in Britain between the 1940s to 2010. These IRA attacks were correctly called terror attacks by mainstream media in Britain.
There is change occurring however. The increase in social media has severely damaged mainstream media with individuals becoming reporters and voicing their opinions to the public in a way previously impossible. People started to become more knowledgeable on global events without need for tabloid newspapers or having to sit and watch the news and mixed with public opinion dropping on the war on terror the blind islamophobia finally began to decrease. People have become more critical of the mainstream media, noting how blatantly racist headlines had become especially towards Asians, Muslim Asians in particular. The medias fear mongering on terror has begun to slip as people call for more equality in the media. This criticism seems to be having an impact on new coverage. An example being the 2017 Finsbury Park attack (England), in the attack a 47-year-old white British man named Darren Osborne drove a van into a crowd of Muslim worshippers outside of a mosque. In the past this terror attack would usually not be called such, however the incident was correctly called a terrorist attack and Darren Osborne was found guilty of terrorism.
The future of how the media portrays terrorism in the UK is uncertain, however if common trends continue and the British media continue to listen to the criticisms of the public then it is likely that the use of the word terrorist will no longer be solely linked to Muslims and Asians but is instead correctly used to refer to any terror attack no matter the ethnicity or religious beliefs of the terrorist. Though if people continue to rely on social media for their news rather than the mainstream media then it is unsure whether or not their will even be a mainstream media to report on the terror attacks, and if left in the hands of the people to report on the news, it is unlikely that terrorism will be solely linked to Muslims as people have become more open minded and these same people are those who criticised the mainstream media in the first place for their blatant bias towards the use of the word terrorism and the individual who took part in the attack.
References:
Religion and Global Society. 2018. The conflict between religion and media has deep roots | Religion and Global Society. [ONLINE] Available at: http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/religionglobalsociety/2016/08/the-conflict-between-religion-and-media-has-deep-roots/. [Accessed 28th April 2018].
CrimeTV.com. 2018. Dunblane massacre. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.crimetv.com/page/true/massacres/dunblane-massacre/1376. [Accessed 28th April 2018].
2011 Norway attacks - Wikipedia. 2018. 2011 Norway attacks - Wikipedia. [ONLINE] Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Norway_attacks. [Accessed 28th April 2018].
The Guardian. 2018. Norway attacks: at least 92 killed in Oslo and Utøya island | World news | The Guardian. [ONLINE] Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/jul/23/norway-attacks. [Accessed 29th April 2018].
