text:
Be Afraid – Be Very Afraid: Trump, Terrorism, and the Media
During a speech at MacDill Air Force Base in Florida, home to the headquarters of the United States' Central Command and Special Operations Command, President Donald Trump claimed that incidents of terrorism are not adequately reported by news media outlets. He also seemed to suggest that the news media were doing so intentionally, saying, "in many cases the very, very dishonest press doesn't want to report it. They have their reasons, and you understand that." A short time later the White House released a list of seventy-eight terrorist incidents since September of 2014 that it claimed were under-reported or inadequately reported. Oddly, the list of allegedly under-reported terror attacks included high-profile incidents such as the Paris nightclub attacks, the Nice truck attack, and the San Bernardino, California mass-shooting, all of which received extensive news exposure.
For most people the likelihood that they will be killed by terrorist violence remains exceedingly low; terrorism is highly unevenly distributed, being localized in a few places, while most of the world experiences very little.[1] It is also easy to appreciate the fact that news outlets regularly report on terrorism, broadcasting detailed reports almost instantly after an incident of violence occurs. So, the President's claim that terrorism is not receiving the news coverage it deserves challenges what we think we know about terrorism and the media, and raises a few questions: 1.) what is the relationship between the media and terrorism? 2.) how should journalists frame incidents of terror; do different frames change how people perceive terrorist violence? 3.) why would the media seek to under-report terrorism?
"The oxygen of publicity…"
Terrorism can be understood as a form of political communication and terror groups rely on the mass media as conduits of their messages to target audiences. To be most effective, terrorist violence must be telegraphed beyond the immediate locus of the act itself. Fortunately, most people do not experience terrorist violence directly; for them, what they know of terrorism has been mediated through mass-communication institutions. Terrorism researchers Mary Brinson and Michael Stohl describe the crucial connection between terrorism and media: "communication and media are as important to the terrorist and the government as the actual act of violence itself. Therefore analysis of news coverage and its implications are crucial for counterterrorism efforts."[2]
Terrorism is a different sort of criminal act. An act of terrorist violence itself may not have intrinsic meaning beyond those immediately involved, but when violence is broadcast, it obtains greater political and social significance. Former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher once said in a speech to the American Bar Association that the news media provide terrorists with the publicity they require to be effective. "The hijacker and the terrorist thrive on publicity: without it, their activities and their influence are sharply curtailed." She then called for moderation in the coverage of terrorism, "we must try to find ways to starve the terrorist and the hijacker of the oxygen of publicity on which they depend." Her solution was to call for a voluntary code of conduct among those who cover terrorism, that they would not, "say or show anything which could assist the terrorists' morale or their cause while the hijack lasted." So, that during (and perhaps immediately following) an incident of terrorist violence, the news media ought to treat terrorism differently than they might some other dramatic criminal act.
Those who lead terrorist organizations recognize the value of well-placed stories in the media. In 2005 al-Qaeda spiritual leader Ayman Zawahiri wrote a letter to the leader of al-Qaeda in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. His concern was that al-Qaeda's image was being soiled among Muslims because Zarqawi broadcast videos of captives being beheaded and that he was killing too many Iraqi civilians. Zawahiri wrote that while they were in a physical battle, "more than half of that battle is taking place in the battlefield of the media." The legacy of Zarqawi's terror group, Daesh (ISIS/ISIL, the Islamic State) spends considerable effort in publicizing their activity in technically savvy media presentations, to include an English-language on-line magazine Dabiq. Terrorist organizations use media to justify their actions, recruit supporters, taunt enemies, and reinforce positive images to critical audiences. Like any other political organization, a terror group seeks to avoid negative media, and to propagate its own message with supportive imagery and text.
Media Framing and Framing Effects
To frame something is to highlight a certain aspect of perceived reality in such a way that promotes a particular problem definition, causal interpretation, moral evaluation, or proposed solution. Framing promotes certain judgments over others by manipulating the relative saliency of certain aspects of reality, made possible by mediating reality.[3] News framing is the way a story is presented by media outlets that can simplify, prioritize, and structure the narrative of an event. Frames are interpretive structures used by journalists to put an event into context. Episodic framing focuses on the immediate facts of a story; typified by the "who, what, when, where, why?" journalistic questions. Thematic framing tends to focus on understanding a particular facet of a particular story in a deeper way. Framing effects are changes in the perception of or opinion about a story that have resulted from different frames being applied.
News reporting of terrorism (and other criminal activity) is mostly episodic; when violence occurs, people tend to want to know the facts about the incident. As the drama of the act fades, more thematic framing can occur. Stanford Political Scientist Shanto Iyengar found that episodic framing affects public opinion by shifting attention toward individual perpetrators, their specific acts, and increases support for government security enhancements. Episodic frames tend to focus on individual victims and perpetrators, which reinforces the idea that responsibility lay with individuals who need to be brought to justice. On the other hand, thematic framing can shift public attention toward societal conditions in which terror groups grow and operate and ways to address underlying conditions that might give rise to terrorist grievances.[4]
Why do media outlets favor episodic framing when covering acts of terrorism? In the simplest terms, episodic framing makes "good pictures." "Episodic framing depicts concrete events that illustrate issues, while thematic framing presents collective or general evidence."[5] In surveying editors of news organizations in various countries, terrorism researcher Alex Schmid found that episodic frames are emphasized because thematic stories might be perceived as explaining away a violent act, or legitimating terrorist violence.[6] Others have found a similar motivation: media outlets tend to use official government frames of a terrorist incident rather than risk inadvertently lending legitimacy and credibility to a violent terrorist group.[7]
Why does this matter? Media framing is an important function of how the public perceives actual threats to their security. Many researchers have suggested that one effect of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks was to increase the perceived threat, whereas the actual threat remained constant or even declined.[8] Episodic framing is naturally going to dominate coverage in the moments after a terrorist incident—people want to know the immediate effects on themselves and people like them. If Iyengar's research is correct, lots of episodic framing of terrorism stories will tend to cause people to prioritize security measures when they think about terrorism. If John Mueller is correct, people are thinking entirely too much about terrorism. If combined, then the public is both overly concerned about the threat of terrorism, and calling for ever more costly counter-terrorism security measures, which may not be entirely justified. The extent to which media cover incidents of terror, and the manner in which they frame those stories, can affect public opinion which may then shape policy.
"They have their reasons…you understand"
The general consensus is that terrorism is not under-reported—in fact many believe that terrorist incidents receive more media coverage than they ought and that more coverage results in more violence. However, if we assume for a moment that the President is correct, and that some media outlets avoid covering terrorism, why would they do so; what are "their reasons" to which Present Trump alluded? What could he have meant? I believe there are three possible interpretations: 1.) the media have taken Thatcher's admonition to heart and they do not wish to contribute to the terrorists' cause; 2.) there is too little public demand for information about terrorist violence to bother with extensive reporting; 3.) the media are actively trying to mislead the public into a false sense of security by downplaying the threat posed them by terrorist violence. The first seems unlikely since the President actively chastises the media for being "dishonest;" if their theoretical under-reporting was happening because they were trying to blunt terrorism's effectiveness, then that might earn them some praise from the Commander in Chief. The second is probably not what the President meant either: if it were true that no one cared enough about terrorism for the media to report on it, the President would have been critical of the public, not the media.
The third interpretation seems the most likely candidate. Perhaps the best indicator of this is an interview of White House adviser Kellyanne Conway by CNN reporter Jake Tapper. Conway pitched several alternative meanings behind the President's MacDill Air Force Base statement. First, Conway refined his position to say that while mass-casualty incidents receive attention, smaller incidents are not covered as thoroughly. Second, she suggested that his intent was that he didn't want people to become "inured" to terrorist violence. This is patently illogical: over-reporting may lead to an audience being "inured" to something; under-reporting would simply make people unaware of a threat. Tellingly, she asserted that President Trump's worry that the public may become "inured" is based on his concern that the public may accept terrorism as, "the new normal." According to Conway, the President worried that the American people could come to believe that they were adequately protected against a relatively unimportant threat of terrorism. This might, she explained, undermine their support for President Trump's so-called "extreme vetting" program. Conway then turned to a favorite campaign trope that their former opponent's use of the phrase "determined enemies" was a "light way of referring to 'radical Islamic terrorism.'" Thus, by under-reporting incidents of terrorism, the media are intentionally undermining President Trump's national security agenda. The President's message was that the media were not being tough enough, and were making the same mistake others have made by underestimating the threat the American public faces.
The relationship between terrorism and media is critically important. As a public safety issue, countering terrorist threats has captured the attention of policy makers and the public. It is evident that how terrorism is framed in the news can affect public opinion. Governments and violent groups will both attempt to apply the most compelling and sympathetic frames to incidents of terrorist violence. In communicating their political messages, terror groups will try to co-opt news media as unwitting enablers. In its pursuit of public safety, governments will try to balance manifest danger against much valued freedoms.
The Trump White House presented a unique challenge to understanding the relationship between the media and terrorism. The consensus has long been that just as terror groups rely on the media to broadcast their acts of violence, journalists have an incentive to cover dramatic events for busy, easily distracted consumers of news. President Trump challenged that consensus by suggesting that the media are in fact not giving terrorist violence enough coverage. His intimation that such under-reporting was intentional was especially vexing. Interviews given by one of the President's senior advisers sought to clarify his assertion and revealed a cynical emphasis on the political effects of failing to adequately report on terrorism. The media have a responsibility to accurately report the news; a government has a responsibility to adequately shield its people from physical threats. In a democratic society the relationship between the media, the people, and their government is vitally important. The practical, policy effects of terrorism on modern society are transmitted through this tri-partite relationship. Deficiencies in perception and inaccuracies in the transmittal of facts can produce inefficiency and lead to inappropriate responses.
[1]. LaFree, Gary, Laura Dugan & Erin Miller. 2015. Putting Terrorism in Context: Lessons from the global terrorism database, New York: Routledge.
[2]. Brinson, M. & Stohl, M. 2009. "From 7/7 to 8/10: Media Framing of Terrorist Incidents in the United States and United Kingdom," in David Canter, (ed) The Faces of Terrorism: Multidisciplinary Perspectives, New York: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
[3]. For a classic experimental study of framing effects, see: Thomas Nelson, Rosalee Clawson, and Zoe Oxley. 1997. "Media Framing of a Civil Liberties Conflict and Its Effect on Tolerance," American Political Science Review, 91:567-583.
[4]. Iyengar, S. 1991. Is Anyone Responsible? How television frames political issues. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
[5]. Iyengar, S. 1991. Is Anyone Responsible? p. 14.
[6]. Schmid, A. 1992. "Editors Perspectives," in Paletz & Schmid, (eds), Terrorism and the Media.
[7]. Norris, P., Kern M., & Just, M. 2003. "Framing Terrorism." in P. Norris, M. Kern, & M. Just (eds), Framing Terrorism. New York: Routledge Press.
[8]. See for example: Mueller, John & Mark G. Stewart. 2011. Terror, Security and Money: Balancing the Risks, Benefits and Costs or Homeland Security. Oxford: Oxford University Press.


text:
[amazon_carousel widget_type="SearchAndAdd" width="600″ height="200″ title="" market_place="GB" shuffle_products="False" show_border="False" keywords="Wantage" browse_node="" search_index="Books" /]
Wantage is a market town and civil parish in the Vale of the White Horse, Oxfordshire, England. The town is on Letcombe Brook, about 8 miles (13 km) south-west of Abingdon and a similar distance west of Didcot.
Wantage was part of Berkshire until the 1974 boundary changes transferred it to Oxfordshire. It is notable as the birthplace of King Alfred the Great. Wantage is a gateway town to White Horse Hill, in the care of English Heritage and the National Trust (seven miles west by road), and the site of the bronze age Uffington White Horse, and a hill fort on the Ridgeway national trail. Close by is Wayland's Smithy, in the care of English Heritage.
The Market Square and surrounding streets are a conservation area, as is Charlton to the East.
Wantage was a small Roman settlement but the origin of the toponym is somewhat uncertain. It is generally thought to be from an Old English phrase meaning "decreasing river". King Alfred the Great was born at the royal palace there in the 9th century Wantage appears in the Domesday Book of 1086. Its value was £61 and it was in the king's ownership until Richard I passed it to the Earl of Albemarle in 1190. Weekly trading rights were first granted to the town by Henry III in 1246 Markets are now held twice weekly on Wednesdays and Saturdays Royalist troops were stationed in Wantage during the English Civil War.
In the 19th century, Lord Wantage became a notable local and national benefactor. He was very involved in founding the British Red Cross Society. In Wantage, in 1877 he paid for a marble statue of King Alfred by Count Gleichen to be erected in the market place, where it still stands today. He also donated the Victoria Cross Gallery to the town. This contained paintings by Louis William Desanges depicting deeds which led to the award of a number of VCs, including his own gained during the Crimean War. It is now a shopping arcade. Since 1848, Wantage has been home to the Community of Saint Mary the Virgin, one of the largest communities of Anglican nuns in the world. Wantage once had two breweries which were taken over by Morlands of Abingdon.
Wantage has a town council and is also part of the district of the Vale of White Horse.
Wantage is at the foot of the Berkshire Downs escarpment in the Vale of the White Horse, amidst prime horse racing country. There are gallops at Black Bushes and nearby villages with racing stables include East Hendred, Letcombe Bassett, Lockinge and Uffington. Wantage includes the suburbs of Belmont to the west and Charlton to the east. Grove to the north is still just about detached and is a separate parish. Wantage parish stretches from the northern edge of its housing up onto the Downs in the south, covering Chain Hill, Edge Hill, Wantage Down, Furzewick Down and Lattin Down. The Edgehill Springs rise between Manor Road and Spike Lodge Farms and the Letcombe Brook flows through the town. Because of its central location in the Vale and proximity to the Downs, Wantage tends to be the main touring centre for the area and is home to the Vale and Downland Museum. There is a large market square containing the famous statue of King Alfred, surrounded by many shops with 18th century facades. Quieter streets radiate out from there, including towards the large Church of England parish church. Wantage is the 'Alfredston' of Thomas Hardy's Jude the Obscure.
Wantage is at the crossing of the B4507 valley road, the A417 road between Reading and Cirencester and the A338 road between Hungerford (and junction 14 of the M4 motorway) and Oxford.
Wantage Road railway station on the Great Western Main Line was at Grove about 2 miles (3 km) north of the town, on what is now the A338 road. The Wantage Tramway used to link the town with Wantage Road. The tramway's Wantage terminus was in Mill Street and its building survives, but little trace remains of the route. One of the tramway's locomotives, Shannon, alias Jane is preserved at Didcot Railway Centre.
Part of the Wilts & Berks Canal remains within the parish.
Wantage has been the site of a church since at least the 10th century and the present Church of England parish church of Saints Peter and Paul dates from the 13th century, with many additions since. SS Peter and Paul also contains seventeen 15th century misericords.
King Alfred's Grammar School was designed by the architect J. B. Clacy of Reading and built in 1849–50 but incorporates a highly carved Norman doorway from a demolished chantry chapel that formerly stood in the churchyard.
A water-powered mill with an undershot water wheel still stands from the time that Wantage was a major centre of the wool trade following the building of the Wilts and Berks Canal at the end of the 18th century.
As of 2007, Wantage is developing and changing. In recent years four or more significant housing developments have been constructed bringing large increases in population to the town. At least one development (including the new health centre) has been on a greenfield site adjacent to the A338 road towards Oxford. The other three, however, have been on brownfield sites, converting a scrapyard next to the Letcombe Brook. While making the town tidier, the impact on the wildlife, particularly around the Letcombe Brook, may not be positive.
In 2006, a large commercial development began construction with a Sainsbury's supermarket as a central focus. This supermarket is double the size of the previous one and was intended to have a significant impact on the town by drawing more visitors from outlying villages. Although the impact was projected as being positive, aimed at preventing the town becoming a commuter town and retaining some commercial activity, it has proved to have a negative effect, driving many of the few remaining independent retailers out of business. An action group, Wantage Rejuvenated, is being sponsored by the town's chamber of commerce to try to bring business back into the area and inject new life into the town.
Activism in the town regarding development is increasing in 2011, with a campaign to stop the demolition of a building close to the town centre by Vanderbuilt Homes, who initially gained permission to convert an early Georgian bank of shops into a mixed commercial and residential block. Following initial planning permissions for conversion, Vanderbilt applied to have the buildings completely demolished, prompting a local petition and campaign for the application to be refused at the discretion of the Town Council, as although the building is old, it is not listed.
Another area of development which has provoked local protest has been on the north of the town, where a 1,500 home estate is proposed, increasing housing in the town by 35%. Residents have raised petitions and the local MP, Ed Vaizey, has raised concerns, especially about the ability of local road infrastructure to cope. The town is served by the A338, A4497 and A417, which are single carriageway roads. The proposed Wantage development is one mile from a similar mass of 2,500 homes proposed for the village of Grove and which will use same road network. The area for the Wantage development is farmland and used by local walkers, cyclists and dog owners.
Wantage is twinned with Mably, France; and Seesen, Germany.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
14 weeks 3 days
Total weight gain/loss: have not had a minute to weigh myself. Still in the moving process! That scale could literally be a.n.y.w.h.e.r.e......
Maternity clothes? Contemplating bringing them out. If I can find them....
Stretch marks? no
Sleep: normal.
Best moment this week: nightmare week. Long story short we were supposed to close on our house, had a pretty major leak from our ice maker valve that didn't get fully turned off when the refrigerator was moved out. Resulted in an insurance claim the day before closing. Needless to say that was probably the worst moment this week. Oh you wanted best moment? Hanging out with my Landon & my husband! They are my rock and my lifesavers.
Miss Anything? Beer - needed some this week. Bad!
Movement: 98% sure I felt him or her!
Food cravings: Hamburgers and French fries, monte cristo sandwiches are my latest obsession. Peanut butter pretzels, I could go on an on. I typically LOVE fruit, but I am having a very difficult time getting it down lately. Watermelon and blueberries in yogurt seem to do the trick for now.
Anything making you queasy or sick: not much. Really feeling good. I do get to be starving before bed & normally a piece of toast and some mostly pulp OJ will do the trick.
Gender: I don't know or care, I want my baby to be happy and healthy!
Labor Signs: No
Symptoms: Just this growing belly!
Belly Button in or out? Out
Wedding rings on or off? on
Happy or Moody most of the time: I think I'll go with stressed this week. Can that be my answer?
Symptoms: Just this growing belly!
Belly Button in or out? Out
Wedding rings on or off? on
Happy or Moody most of the time: I think I'll go with stressed this week. Can that be my answer?
Looking forward to: This week being over. I am ready to be done with this house business! Seriously! Also, the nice weather this weekend & heading to Wonderscope!


text:
David Quessenberry is going to be drafted, but he still might enlist.
The San Jose State offensive line prospect said that if his NFL dreams didn't pan out, he might join the military, as so many in his family have done.
Quessenberry earned notice during the Senior Bowl for playing every position along the line, and figures to be a mid-round prospect. But after growing up listening to his father's stories about the Navy, he said he's considering pursuing his own career in the service when he's finished.
"Yeah, it's definitely something I have thought about. It's something I've been around my whole life," Quessenberry told Mike Garafolo of USA Today. "Playing in the National Football League is a dream of mine, but [military service] is not off the table."
Of course, he might find in an NFL locker room part of what draws him to the armed forces.
"You see that camaraderie they have, it's special," Quessenberry said of his father's Navy buddies. "It's an intense bond that you get from basically that feeling you're laying it all on the line. You just get that feeling when you're around them that these guys would literally do anything for each other.
"It's something you only find in the military and on the football field."
He's probably not going to resort to that just yet, as he could go as high as the third round.


text:
This charming and cozy apartment ideally located in a residential five stars hotel of the Herzliya Marina allows you to enjoy all the amenities and services of the hotel, including the SPA, the swimming-pool, the bar, the restaurant and room service, the conference room and the extra service of a luxurious hotel.
The 60 m2 apartment includes a living-room with kitchenette, opening onto a 10m2 terrace, as well as a bedroom in-suite. The entire suite is facing the sea, the marina as well as the hotel outdoor swimming-pool.
The relaxing environment offers variety of activities. You can choose to walk along the Marina and the Mediterranean beach, go for shopping or restaurants, enjoy nautical activities or simply go to Tel Aviv in only 15mn drive.
This residential lifestyle is the perfect choice whether you decide to spend time for business or vacation purpose, with the best hotel facilities, in one of the most sought after location in Israel.
Updated on May 9, 2019 at 4:10 pm
Charming Apartment in Ideal Location
Charming Apartment in Ideal Location