T

he media perspective is pivotal in the global fight against terrorism and extremism amid the widespread promotion by militant groups of their violent acts and ideologies on social media, says a leading media analyst.

Although the effort to curb terrorism and radicalism is collective work involving various stakeholders, the media must have its own independent agenda, and be aware about the danger of violence being sugar-coated as acts designed to defend religion.

Media reports on terror attacks by the militant Islamic State (IS), also known as ISIS group, around the globe have had a role in inspiring more actions perpetrated by its supporters in other parts of the world. Thus, providing context when covering terrorism is an important aspect that media should consider.

Media outlets should have on their agenda measurable aspects that can be used as a standard in deciding whether terrorism and radicalism-related issues are newsworthy, Courtney Radsch, advocacy director of the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) told The Jakarta Post on the sidelines of the 2016 Jakarta World Forum for Media Development in South Tangerang, Banten, on Wednesday.

“For example if you are going to write a story about how many likes the ISIS Facebook page has got, why not include context about how many civilians ISIS has killed,” Radsch said.

She said the selection of appropriate context supporting the media’s own agenda with regard to extremism and terrorism would ensure that the reporting did not aggrandize or build up terrorist organizations.

“I also think that it is the role of the media to be independent of government to make sure that they are not tarnished by appearing to collaborate and coordinate with the government,” Radsch said.

She further said that the media should also avoid using terms promoted by terrorist groups because using their choices of words could legitimize them.

“Is calling them ‘Islamic State’ a great idea? So now media call them Islamic State. They could have chosen to say ‘the self-declared Islamic State’, or ‘Daesh’,” she said, using another name for IS.

Speaking at the forum, Endy Bayuni, who is the Post’s editor in chief, agreed that media should have a separate counterradicalism and terrorism agenda in order to avoid being dragged into the government’s narrative in the fight against radicalism.

“We, the media, are interested in fighting against terrorism and the rise of radicalism, but we don’t want to be part of any government propaganda machine, which CVE seems to be advocating,” Endy said, referring to the US-sponsored antiextremism campaign, Countering Violent Extremism.

Endy further said that media should have a strict rule of not quoting sources seeking to spread hate messages, because by disseminating such messages, the media would be doing exactly what terrorists
wanted.

“For example, cleric Abu Bakar Ba’asyir, who is currently in prison on terrorist-related activity offenses, opened himself up for interview by the media in prison. He used that opportunity to voice his hate messages such as ‘Kill President Bush’, ‘Kill Americans’ etc.,” Endy said.

“It is not our job to publish such statements but it is our job to counter those messages in the stories we write so as not to give them space to spread their propaganda,” Endy added.

Endy said it was acceptable to report on terror attacks as long as the journalist explained how violent the terrorist group was and provided background on the group’s activity.

With regard to reporting on terrorism in Indonesia, Endy said it was important for the media to include the context that Indonesians joining IS in Syria represented only a very small portion of the Indonesian population.