Reporting of terrorism (North London incident)

This is quite a radical idea that I'm expecting will be met with universal disagreement and I'm not even sure I agree with it so hear me out.

This morning it's looking very likely that we've seen another incident of a terrorist nature in the UK and it's hard to see any lives that will have been lost won't have been lost had the previous incidents recently not been reported to the extent they have been.

We know terrorism is fuelled by the idea perpetraters will get publicity after they carry out these evil acts. If the very incentive of these acts is media coverage how can we justify giving such media coverage? After all TV sports broadcasters annoyingly don't show people that run onto the pitch in fixtures for the very reason it would encourage others to do the same to get publicity. And that happening in football is really trivial and just gives most people a bit of a laugh and adds to the spectical and sense of occasion of say a World Cup final. So why do we afford those who want to take lives the oxygen of publicity and do something that will ensure more lives will be lost on future occasions?

There is a problem of planting the ideas into people's head. It only needs a minute percentage of the population to have an idea into their heads for hundreds of lives to be lost in the future.

I don't know what the answer is, if lots of people are killed in a public place it can't go unreported clearly but maybe we now have to have some form of controlled coverage. So I think anyone who carries out an attack of this nature should never have their name published for starters, their background and reasons behind the act also can't be reported when it can only encourage others with the same cause (or lack there of) and retaliations.

Media censorship of this nature is scary territory but I think some kind of 'major incident reporting law needs to be inacted. It's scary and seems very totalitarian but I believe it can save lives and to allow people who would be killed in this incidents to continue living their lives is more important than an idea of a free press or broadcast media. Clearly there is a chance any such law could be abused by people in power so we need to be carefull. But it just seems so obvious something has to be done.

I can see where you're coming from Jon.

For reference, there's this incident in Cardiff 5 years ago

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-22789299

It was broadly the same severity in terms of loss of life and injuries, yet I don't
recall it having anything like the coverage of last night's attack has already had.

I don't think you can stop/censor the reporting of such attacks, however how it is reported can be improved. It would be better if bare minimum details of the attacker were given, and the media did not report on their background & speculate on their motives. Instead they should (and do) focus the attention on the victims and those that helped the victims.

At the moment some parts of the media give unwarranted & undeserved attention to the attacker, which potentially can inspire others as well as try to justify their actions. I seem to recall this issue being cover on Charlie Brooker's Newswipe or similar with regards to coverage of attacks in the United States.

Very valid points being raised here, and certainly something to think about going forward and with the nature of terrorist attacks in the current day/age.

I'm not sure a reduction in focus on these sorts of attacks is likely, it would need to be industry wide as everyone is of course trying to get an edge on each other, broadcasters and online outlets. Completely agree though and more often that not coverage becomes hyperbolic.

The instant you intervene & tell media how to report an event you lose credibility and the idiots will go elsewhere for the publicity.

It might help if the government and the media stopped calling them terrorists. Even that label gives credibility is some eyes. They are not 'terrorists' they are socially dysfunctional individuals who have a mental deficiency & have lost their humanity. Remove their label & it might remove some of their motivation.

My sympathy to all those hurt.

BBC just switched the rolling news coverage to BBC One

I'm afraid this just plays even further into the hands of terrorists. It would push people away from verified and reliable sources, to social media (how would you stop 'citizen journalism'?) and spread 'fear of the unknown'.

The minute you start trying to control reporting of events - you are moving in a very dangerous direction. We do have D-Notices and similar legislation to prevent reporting of certain stories - but this is taken incredibly seriously before it is enacted.

We live in a free society. If we become less free - we are playing into the terrorist's hands.

We saw what happened with IRA reporting restrictions in the 80s. 'The Oxygen of Publicity' is very difficult to control.

I think we need to consider the effects 24 hour news reporting (TV, Radio, Online and Social Media based) has on our society - but it is incumbent on journalists to consider their role, not the state.

I wouldn't call it a mental deficiency because that stigmatizes people with mental deficiencies and psychiatric problems. In reality those with psychiatric or mental deficiencies are more likely to be the victims of crime.

Whoever has done this has lost all humanity. We have to accept peoples differences not stigmatise nor murder those who you do not agree with.

That is what this comes down to murder - brutal murder.

These people clearly aren't well though and of a sound mind. It might stigmatise people with mental problems but that doesn't change the fact those that commit these acts are not well people. It's not a very politically correct thing to say but it doesn't make it not true.

And you can't pretend mental illness doesn't ever make people do bad things. Just as there are those people mentally ill who'd never hurt anyone.

We are always quick to focus our hatred on those who commit these mass murders, but it should really be focused on those and the cultures who convince these people they are doing the right thing.

Really do get where Jon is coming from and it's a post I've nearly written myself in recent weeks, but also completely agree that censoring the media is moving into very dangerous territory and does the victims a complete dis-service. We've seen this week what happens when people think the whole truth is being "micro managed" by the government.