ArticlePublisher preview available

US Media and Post-9/11 Human Rights Violations in the Name of Counterterrorism

Authors:
To read the full-text of this research, you can request a copy directly from the authors.

Abstract

This article adds to earlier research revealing that the American news media did not discharge their responsibility as a watchdog press in the post-9/11 years by failing to scrutinize extreme and unlawful government policies and actions, most of all the decision to invade Iraq based on false information about Saddam Hussein’s alleged weapons of mass destruction arsenal. The content analyses presented here demonstrate that leading US news organizations, both television and print, did not expressly refer to human rights violations when they reported on the torturing of foreign detainees during “enhanced interrogations” in US-run prison facilities abroad and the killing of civilians, including children, in US drone strikes overseas and outside theaters of war. Moreover, by framing torture and the “collateral damage” caused by drone-launched missile attacks episodically rather than in the context of human rights, the news media failed to alert the American public to the grave humanitarian violations in the so-called war on terrorism during the George W. Bush and Barack Obama administrations.
US Media and Post-9/11 Human Rights Violations
in the Name of Counterterrorism
Brigitte L. Nacos
1
&Yaeli Bloch-Elkon
1
Published online: 17 February 2018
#Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018
Abstract This article adds to earlier research revealing that the American news media
did not discharge their responsibility as a watchdog press in the post-9/11 years by
failing to scrutinize extreme and unlawful government policies and actions, most of
all the decision to invade Iraq based on false information about Saddam Husseins
alleged weapons of mass destruction arsenal. The content analyses presented here
demonstrate that leading US news organizations, both television and print, did not
expressly refer to human rights violations when they reported on the torturing of
foreign detainees during Benhanced interrogations^in US-run prison facilities abroad
and the killing of civilians, including children, in US drone strikes overseas and
outside theaters of war. Moreover, by framing torture and the Bcollateral damage^
caused by drone-launched missile attacks episodically rather than in the context of
human rights, the news media failed to alert the American public to the grave
humanitarian violations in the so-called war on terrorism during the George W. Bush
and Barack Obama administrations.
Keywords Tort ure .War fare .Collateraldamage .Civilian victims .Media responsibility.
Public opinion .Episodic and thematic framing patterns
BGovernments who fight terror often become guilty of human-rights abuses
themselves.^
William F. Schulz, Executive Director Amnesty International 19942006
Hum Rights Rev (2018) 19:193210
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12142-018-0498-2
*Brigitte L. Nacos
bn1@columbia.edu
1
Columbia University, 420 West 118th Street, 736 IAB, New York, NY 10027, USA
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
Book
This book examines how de-radicalisation programmes have been portrayed in the media and details the role of public relations (PR) strategies employed by such programmes and Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) to create positive coverage of their work. CVE and de-radicalisation programmes have seen a significant rise in recent years and are now cornerstones of many countries’ counterterrorism strategies. Despite the increased importance of these tools to counter violent radicalisation leading to terrorism, they remain controversial and sometimes receive fierce public criticism and opposition. This work looks at how CVE and de-radicalisation programs are able to influence a country’s discourse on de-radicalisation, and how far governmental programs differ from non-governmental initiatives in terms of their PR strategies. The book also provides a theoretical basis of how the discourse on CVE is constructed in the media. As major case studies, this book examines the United Kingdom, Germany and Nigeria. For these countries, the authors have gathered and assessed roughly 3,000 newspaper articles on de-radicalisation programmes over a decade to provide an empirical base. This book will be of much interest to students of countering violent extremism, de-radicalisation, and terrorism studies.
Article
Full-text available
Journalists play an important role in the realization and protection of human rights worldwide, framing and shaping the public’s understanding of issues. In the United States, however, studies show that media coverage of human rights is inadequate and frequently inaccurate, with US journalists typically framing human rights as an exclusively international issue. This study helps to explain why this is the case through an examination of the human rights content of journalism education in the United States. Journalism education is dominated by undergraduate programs in the United States, yet data from this study show that human rights education is not part of journalism training programs at the undergraduate level (at the top 10 schools, ranked according to the number of graduates, there are no human rights courses for journalism majors) and is not a focus of most graduate-level training programs. Those schools that do teach human rights do so largely with a focus on events and violations abroad. The fact that journalists are not educated about international human rights law and standards or taught to view events through a human rights lens means that crucial opportunities are missed to frame topics as human rights issues, to inform the public, and to hold governments and other human rights violators accountable.
Article
The international rule of law hinges on the existence of a shared lexicon accepted by states and other actors in the international system. With no independent judicial system capable of determining (and enforcing) the meaning of words and concepts, states must develop shared interpretations of the law and the concepts and terms it relies on, and be willing (mostly) to abide by those shared interpretations. When such shared interpretations exist, key aspects of the rule of law can be present even in the absence of an international judicial system; state behavior can be reasonably predictable, nonarbitrary, and transparent; and accountability can also be possible, albeit mainly through nonjudicial mechanisms. Copyright
Article
With American parties finally acting more like those in most other industrial democracies, with lines of ideological dispute clearly drawn, 1995 created an opportunity for the media to move toward their ideal role as civic educators. This case study explains how and why they missed this opportunity, highlighting the impact of the persistent nonideological and nonpartisan biases that structure the news. These biases led journalists to frame the debate over environmental policy reform in ways that prevented the average citizen from engaging in rational deliberation.
Article