...to think that the level of media coverage on these terror attacks is exactly what DAESH wants?

[Bunnyfuller]

Just that really. I have visions of them sat gloating watching the non-stop footage and media tidal wave after each incident. The events are horrific, and my heart goes out to people each and every time, but I just wonder if the intensity and volume of coverage makes them think their message of terror is being constantly replayed across the world.

YANBU. That's exactly it

YANBU.

And by tomorrow no doubt the bombers picture will be all over the place in every paper and on every news channel. They should name him once and not show his picture at all. These people want to be made into martyrs. In some ways the press is playing right into their hands.

YANBU. I switched off the breakfast news, it was ghoulish. Especially the BBC, gawping over the scene, interviewing traumatised children on the sofa. It was appalling, and will only encourage terrorists. T

Have to agree.

I am not sure how much of it comes down to martyrdom / wanting to be infamous / wanting their "message" splayed across every media platform for all to see (and nor am I sure how much this coverage effects potential extremists to jump on the bandwagon) but we have to assume that wanting to be notorious is a motivating factor? On at least some level?

And others who are on the path to extremism see acts like Manchester and want to perpetuate it?

The "hyperdermic syringe" model of media cause and effect was counter argued decades ago, but never fully disproven? Obviously extremism isn't media driven but is it media effected.

I wonder how naming perpetrator, and then not mentioning name again (just calling them "the terrorist") and having a media blackout on all pictures and related info would effect future incidents.
If there is no media acclaim for the terrorist/s, would the appeal be somewhat less? I'm not an expert so can't be sure but I am convinced the media coverage is a factor on some level for these kind of atrocities.

I caught some of Sky News today. Awful Kay Burley had been sent out as is always the case. Nothing new to be said or report but yet the news kept rolling on and on with the same clips and interviews.

Really unnecessary.

Agree OP. But I guess it needs to be balanced between not minimising the atrocities committed against the victims, and not giving a big media platform to the terrorist. If there was only minimal coverage, the victims' families may feel the situation is not being given adequate importance.

Also hated the coverage on a Radio 4 this pm, where people who got caught up in it were interviewed and were being pushed to describe in great detail about the scenes witnessed, i.e. every tiny detail of the injuries seen and we even had a description of body parts lying at the scene, of the presumed terrorist. Just totally not necessary.

The media should focus on the victims and the people who helped. They should give police updates in a minimal way e.g. "The terrorist has been identified" not naming him and splashing his photo everywhere.