Within the Louisiana metropolis of New Orleans, the brand new yr started with a horrible tragedy after a person ploughed his truck right into a crowd of revellers within the early hours of January 1, killing no less than 15 folks and wounding dozens of others.
The attacker was quickly formally recognized as Shamsud-Din Jabbar, a 42-year-old United States citizen from the neighbouring state of Texas. Because the story unfolded, information shops zeroed in on two key particulars talked about within the FBI’s preliminary assertion on the incident: an ISIL (ISIS) flag was present in Jabbar’s car, and his social media accounts contained posts that recommend he could have been “impressed” by the group. For a lot of, this was sufficient to border Jabbar, who was killed on the scene by police gunfire, as a terrorist “linked” to ISIL.
Whereas the FBI says it’s investigating the assault as an act of “terrorism”, on the time of this writing, there may be no evidence to suggest Jabbar was ordered by ISIL to hold out an assault on US soil. The FBI has not specified what proof it has used to make that authorized dedication, or launched detailed data on a attainable motive.
What we do know is that Jabbar was a US Military veteran who served within the US army for 13 years, together with a deployment to Afghanistan. He was reportedly going by a divorce and had expressed a want to kill his whole household. All this complicates the narrative considerably and calls into query the assumptions being made about what drove him to kill so many individuals.
Difficult official statements
The declare by FBI officers and even US President Joe Biden that the attacker was “impressed” by ISIL raises necessary questions on journalistic duty. How will we, as journalists, extrapolate our reporting from official statements versus the broader context of details?
Context is vital. Our reporting on what authorities officers say ought to instantly be adopted with the opposite details we all know in regards to the attacker’s background, statements and private life. That is very true when protecting growing tales like this one, the place authorities launch conflicting data within the warmth of the second, solely to quietly stroll it again later.
Jabbar was not an impressionable youth however a middle-aged army veteran with important life expertise and loads of baggage. For all we all know he could have been “radicalised” by what he skilled throughout his time within the US army. What in regards to the trauma of his divorce and the anger he reportedly had for his family?
The purpose is, we simply don’t know sufficient but. What we do know is that we needs to be asking extra questions.
To date, the Western media appears to be selecting the straightforward path, and following a well-tested method when protecting this tragic story: “Dangerous Brown Muslim dedicated terrorism within the title of ISIL.” This narrative conveniently ignores the complexity of Jabbar’s circumstances and sidesteps deeper questions on his psychological state, his time serving in Afghanistan and the non-public crises he confronted.
Distinction this with how tales involving white male shooters are sometimes handled. Reporters pedal onerous to humanise the perpetrators and illuminate their psychological well being points, remoted lives and private struggles.
This double commonplace not solely prevents the general public from studying the entire fact about an incident that impacts their lives in a well timed method, but additionally reinforces dangerous stereotypes and additional alienates marginalised communities. The Muslim communities in New Orleans, and the attacker’s hometown of Houston, lots of whom seemingly by no means knew Jabbar, for instance, may now face collective blame for his actions as a result of irresponsible actions of media organisations.
A headline’s life cycle
As journalists, we all know that the method of reporting growing tales is a journey. First, we break the story with the few details we all know, typically counting on official traces as a result of that’s all now we have on the time. That is an comprehensible and crucial first step. However as extra data involves gentle, it’s our duty to keep away from oversimplifying what is usually a fancy and multilayered story.
There have been different instances the place assaults had been credited to ISIL however later revealed to be the acts of only one individual. In 2016, preliminary stories about Pulse nightclub shooter Omar Mateen emphasised his declared allegiance to ISIL, however additional investigation revealed a deeply disturbed particular person with no operational ties to the group.
This issues due to the implications such narratives have on actual lives. When media protection fixates on tenuous connections to ISIL, it fuels anti-Muslim sentiment and coverage. After the 2015 San Bernardino shooting, misinformation linking the attackers to a broader ISIL community contributed to public help for then-candidate Donald Trump’s proposed “Muslim ban”. Following 9/11, obscure and unsubstantiated claims about Saddam Hussein’s ties to al-Qaeda had been instrumental in justifying the invasion of Iraq, which led to the deaths of lots of of 1000’s of Iraqi civilians and the political instability that birthed ISIL.
We additionally owe it to the households of the victims to uncover and report the entire fact of what occurred that day. They should know the true motives of the attacker and whether or not something may have been executed to stop the tragedy.
None of that is to say we should always ignore potential proof of one thing greater at play right here. However discernment is vital. As we proceed to report on this tragedy, allow us to centre the details, and the context crucial to color probably the most correct and accountable image.
