Terror-fying

I am particularly interested in the role the media has in defining who and what actually is terrorism. Some discourse would indicate that terrorism involves some act of force for a political agenda. However it is not always this clear cut. Yet there is a tendency to exclude analysis of broader structural processes or explanations in stories about political disorder (Halloran et al. 1970). This is particularly so for stories about terrorism. politics and the media alike would have terrorism portrayed as an issue of good vs evil / us vs them/ democracy v anarchy (Anandam et all, . Yet i doubt that the world is made up of such strong dichotomies.

I think we all remember where we were on September 11, 2001. Our eyes were invariably glued to the television screen. That iconic image of the plane crashing into the twin towers was replayed countless times, and this went on for weeks. I think it is safe to say that a large scale moral panic ensued.

In the political sphere there had been a knee-jerk rejection with the likes of Anti- Terrorism legislation including:

• Security Legislation Amendment (Terrorism) Act 2002

• Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism Act 2002

• Criminal Code Amendment (Suppression of Terrorist Bombings) Act 2002

• Telecommunications Interception Legislation Amendment Act 2002

• Border Security Legislation Amendment Act 2002

• Anti Terrorism Act (No.2) 2005

The most concerning aspects of such legislative schemes (and a stark example of the magnitude of the moral panic) is the substantial infringement they make on the rights and liberties of the average citizen. For example, the sedition and control order provisions. Such legislation, of itself, has the potential to criminalise behaviour which would otherwise not be thought of as such.

The Us vs Them mentality is quite poignantly depicted in the "Ban the Burqa" debate that arose earlier this year. The debate was prompted by the introduction of a Bill by Fred Niles into the NSW upper house to ban the wearing of veils in public. While the Bill was ultimately rejected, it succeeded in gaining a lot of media attention. Inherent in the bid to ban the burka, is the idea that the burqa represents a threat to Australian security, and furthermore, that the wearing of the burqa is a criminal or terrorism act. I have severe doubts about such an idea. Indeed, what this does indicate is that ethnic minorities associated with Islam are effectively marginalised. So that it might be suggested that the media (perhaps without even meaning to) is able to define terrorism as identifiable with a religious background.

This ideological representation might indicate a trend within whereby Islam and those associated with it become "folk devils".

Wellington (2009, p30) describes this process aptly; in an era when society is shaken by the collective insecurity that terrorism generates, the section of society that adheres to a “different” religion and culture becomes more susceptible to being labelled as a threat even if a majority of its number are law-abiding"

References

• HALLORAN, J. et al. (1970), Demonstrations and Communication, London: Penguin