Terrorism coverage substitutes reductive identity explanations for political and historical context.

Evidence

“Going Muslim” stands in as a singular explanation for terrorism, marginalizing the gamut of political motivations for political violence. I am not arguing that these men deserve our sympathy. Instead, I am arguing that their portrayals in the media, and the media’s implication that we should abstain from a sympathetic response, have two important consequences. First, “going Muslim” is not an adequate explanation for the actions of these men. Political violence at its core is not about symbolical castration, or sexism, or heterosexual failure, but rather about complex political and historical problems. Second, affect is configured to support empire. A lack of sympathy for supposed “terrorists” like these goes hand in hand with the delegitimization of any discussion of how U.S. foreign policies contribute to contemporary political problems. — Evelyn Alsultany, Arabs and Muslims in the Media, 1104

Categorization

• XREF: Aligns with media-studies critiques of how framing affects public sympathy for enemies of state. — connects to: Branding analysis of terrorism as sympathy enforces a period of demanded non-thinking — Mark Fisher (edited by Darren Ambrose), K-Punk: The Collected and Unpublished…, 1431
• SEED: A piece on how journalist ‘complexity’ gestures actually entrench reductive singular causes for political violence.