Deep sympathy for the victims of Norway terror attack. Not merely for being killed but also for being undermined by media. Their life has been down-valued by many media outlets since they knew that the suspect wasn’t from the group they prematurely accused. That was when they started to avoid the word ‘terror’, ‘terrorist’ or ‘terrorism’.
Major news channels irresponsibly speculated that it was a ‘classic’ attack obviously carried out by a much referred terror group. In an early report, BBC News recklessly linked the attack to Norway’s involvements in the publication of a controversial religious cartoon, the invasion of Libya and Afghanistan. Only until they were shocked by the fact that the attacker was a ‘non-classic’ individual and a rather photogenic bloke. They weren’t ready to face the reality. Then suddenly those T-words disappeared from their dictionary. News lines were, by then, flooded with the word ‘killing’, ‘massacre’ or simply ‘crime’. The victims’ life was, by then, consequently, revalued down from being taken by a terrorism act to being taken by just a criminal act.
As much as media outlets weren’t ready with the conclusion of the tragedy, public was hard to believe when a picture of a smiling blonde-hair, blue-eyed, white-skin chap came up on the screen and was said to be the terrorist. Or the one whom media refers to as the gunman, the madman, or the killer. Extremist is the worstest word from the media for Anders Behring Breivik. Some people thought that it was too bad to be true. “It doesn’t make sense,” a few say.
It seems unlikely the Norwegian terrorist will anytime soon get acknowledged, particularly, by the western media even though Norwegian police have charged him with acts of terrorism. News sources in Norway, including ministers and experts, have apparently referred to him as a terrorist or his attack as an act of terrorism in many live interviews. Yet, media outlets stand still to prove that there’s no such a thing as objective journalism. Sad!