Packaging Terrorism investigates how American media have identified and covered international terrorism and violence since September 11, 2001. - Compares US coverage with that of British and Arab media
- Discusses the priorities, assumptions, political debates, deadline pressures and bottom-line considerations that will continue to influence coverage in the future
- Suggests how terrorism could be better covered by the media going forwards
Table of Contents:
1. What is Terrorism?. Introduction: A Very Simple Idea.
Are You Ready.
Words and Trojan Horses.
Political Correctness: can I use the word “terrorist”?.
Why Do News Standards Matter.
What is Terrorism?.
2. How is Terrorism Covered?.
The Politics of Coverage.
Making Terrorism the “Big Story”.
Tragedy and Politics: What We Hear, Why We Hear It.
The Voices of the Powerful.
When Caring About Victims Sells News.
Parsing the Difference Between Terrorism and War.
Co-opting the News / Co-opting the Public.
The Stories That Are Told.
Why Some Media Do a Better Job.
3. What Are the Images of Terror?.
The Politics of Images.
When Did Pictures Start to Matter?.
“It’s No Time to Be Squeamish”: The “Jumpers” at the World Trade Center.
The Public’s “Picture of the Year”: The Flag-Raising at Ground Zero.
“Is American Blood More Precious Than Iraqi Blood?”: Ali Abbas and Pfc. Jessica Lynch.
Terrorists Want an Audience, Too: Daniel Pearl, Nicholas Berg and Beyond.
“Cleaning Up” the Pictures: Madrid and Fallujah.
Losing Control of the Image: Official photos, Snapshots and Cameraphones.
What Do We Need to See? What Do We Need to Do?.
.
4. Conclusion: Packaging Terrorism.
The End.
