As ‘terror’ hits print more often, it
risks packing less punch
Since Jan. 1, the word “terrorism” has appeared in
more than 1,000 articles on news and editorial
pages of The Oregonian. The word showed up in
about 110 articles in the same few months in 2001.
The main reasons are apparent: Sept. 11 and events in the Middle East.
On another front, last Tuesday’s editions presented an update on
“eco-terrorism.” The article by reporter Bryan Denson said that destructive
or violent actions aimed at activities deemed harmful to the environment
and wildlife have subsided since last summer.
Terror, terrorism, terrorist: Some readers have questioned and criticized
the newspaper’s use of these words, most often in regard to articles about
“eco-terrorism.” What some people see as terrorism, others call a protest
against exploitation of the natural world.
In terms of the Middle East, some readers don’t want “terrorism” limited to
the actions of Palestinian suicide bombers. They see Israeli Prime
Minister Ariel Sharon’s military actions in Gaza and the West Bank as
terrorism committed by a state or its leader.
So: What is “terrorism”?
From my Random House dictionary: “1. The use of violence and threats to
intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes. 2. The state of fear
and submission produced by terrorism . . . 3. A terroristic method of
governing or resisting a government.”
A “terrorist,” the same tome says, is: “A person, usually a member of a
group, who uses or advocates terrorism.”
These definitions — which do not require injury or death of a person — open
the door for debate and interpretation.
In Minneapolis, the Star Tribune has been the target of sharp criticism
because editors avoid use of the word “terrorist” when referring to suicide
bombers. The newspaper uses “terrorism” and “terrorist” in general
references, to al-Qaida, for example. However, depending on the details,
the newspaper prefers precise terms such as “suicide bomber” or
“gunman.”
Peter Bhatia, executive editor of The Oregonian, said there’s no doubt
suicide bombers are terrorists.
However, he said, in journalism, “The more specific we are, the better
we’re doing our job in terms of conveying very clear information to
readers.”
Therefore, a suicide bombing, an arson or a sniper attack is called what it
is. At the same time, the newspaper also uses broader terms such as
“terrorism.”
As for “eco-terrorism,” the term has had a troubling implication for me. I
have found it hard to equate blowing up pickups or damaging logging
equipment — violent sabotage, yes — with the deaths of human beings.
Denson said that he, reporter James Long and Len Reed, an editor, came
up with their working definition of “eco-terrorism” in 1999, when they
worked on a series on such assaults. They needed a definition for the
sake of consistency, to separate smaller acts from larger ones.
The short definition for such acts, Reed said last week, is “violence in the
name of protecting the natural world.”
More specifically, Denson said, for the newspaper’s purposes,
“eco-terrorism” includes a crime — a violent felony such as bombing or
arson — that is coercive and advocates a political agenda. Or it could be a
nonviolent, coercive act that results in damages of $50,000 or more. In
addition, victims likely will feel threatened or fearful. The acts also
potentially could injure or kill people.
With the bar set reasonably high, I can accept “eco-terrorism” as a
working term in reporting. Even if human beings are not hurt, continued
violence and threats can inspire fear: They can terrorize.
At the same time, we need to avoid excessive use of the phrase if other
words, such as “sabotage,” work as well. We can have a valid purpose for
“eco-terrorism” without using it exclusively.
“Terrorism” is a frightening reality. The word should not be diluted or
turned into a meaningless catch-all.
————————————————————————-
You can reach Dan Hortsch at 503-221-8221 or toll free from outside the
503 area at 877-238-8221, by e-mail at
publiceditor@news.oregonian.com.
User Agreement | Privacy Policy | Help/Feedback | Advertise With Us
2002 OregonLive.com. All Rights Reserved.
