How Legacy Media Increases the Risk of Terrorism

Terror Groups, Media, and Social Learning Theory

Table of Contents

Abstract 3

Introduction 4

Discussion 4

Future Implications 7

References 9

Abstract

Terror groups are thriving thanks in no small part to the rise of social media, which allows these groups to propagate their message instantly and universally. Impressionable young people are often recruited via social media because their own real-world society offers them nothing of any significance to believe in or to embrace. The radical ideologies of terror groups become far more attractive because they fill a hole in the lives of the young and because these groups are capable of forming relationships with them. This paper examines how social learning theory explains the issue of terrorism’s spread in the modern world.

Introduction

The main idea of social learning theory is that individuals are socialized to embrace or believe in the values and standards of their society (Grusec, 2006). As Bandura (2018) points out, the main ways in which socialization occurs is by way of interaction with peers, groups and media. The main assumptions of social learning theory can be used to explain why different societies and groups develop and thrive in a given environment. This paper will examine and explain how terror groups have been able to thrive in modern day society by applying the principles of social learning theory to the topic.

Discussion

Terror groups are growing rapidly around the world, with extremist organizations developing networks and cells using an informal structure and social media campaigns to advance their causes and increase their visibility (DeCook, 2018). Groups like Antifa and Proud Boys are just two examples of domestic groups that have been linked to terrorist activities by the US government, but there are many other groups, such as ISIS, that have used technology to propagate their aims and attract attention from young people who have no direction in their own lives (Vitolo-Haddad, 2019).

Social learning theory provides an explanation for how these groups have been able to grow and thrive in the modern world (Mills, Freilich, Chermak, Holt & LaFree, 2019). One of the ways that researchers have found terrorists use to lure individuals into their groups is social media (Chatfield, Reddick & Brajawidagda, 2015; Costello & Hawdon, 2018). Social media is a particularly useful way for information to be spread across the world, and it allows terror cells to attract lone wolves who might otherwise never really find a group to call their own. However, social media amplifies the presence and existence of groups, from domestic terror groups to foreign terror groups (Klein, 2019). It gives people a way to identify messages and messengers and develop a sense of identity based on the things they are seeing said on social media platforms to which they belong.

Extremist views, either to the left or to the right, tend to be the proximal mode by which one’s environment is transformed. First, one is exposed to such views via media, peers and groups, as Bandura (2018) shows. Then one becomes radicalized and willing to join a group so as to serve that group and its ideology. That is essentially the process by which terror groups thrive, and social media plays a big part in the process because it serves as the platform for interaction, cultivation and recruitment. Without social media it would be a lot harder for terror groups to get out their message and connect with potential new recruits (Chatfield ete al., 2015).

The essence of social learning theory applied to this understanding is that individuals learn to embrace extremist views because they are living in a radicalized world where extremist ideologies can permeate all environments via social media, which in turn affects how peers and groups see the world (Bandura, 2018; Costello & Hawdon, 2018; Grusec, 2006). Rhetoric is applied on these forums in a way that fires the imaginations, particularly of vulnerable young people who might already be feeling isolated or withdrawn from more immediate groups or peers (Vitolo-Haddad, 2019). This in turn leads to the propagation of memes that foster a new collective identity for the individual who is caught in the net of online extremism (DeCook, 2018).

Young people are especially vulnerable to online extremist campaigns in which memes are generated and radical ideologies propagated because they are still developing a sense of self and their identity is not linked to any one group or belief system within their own immediate environment (DeCook, 2018). Instead of looking for a place of belonging in the real-world, they latch onto virtual worlds in which they are seen as valuable to a radicalized group that cares about their needs and wants them to be an active member of their society. This gives the young people a sense of value and self-worth that they do not have because of their detachment from any significant organizations or institutions within their own real-world environment. They socially learn to espouse extremist views because those are the ones that they meet with online and the groups putting out those views are the ones that reach out to them on social media platforms.

The media plays a big role in the construction of terrorism as a concept as well (Chermak & Gruenewald, 2006). As Chermak and Gruenewald (2006) show, certain types of terrorist activities tend not only to be covered more in the press but also to be sensationalized when covered. These types of terrorism include acts of terrorism that result in casualties, acts that are associated with domestic terror groups, acts that involve airlines, or hijackings. The nature of these types of articles is typically enticing enough that they will attract and command the attention of readers or viewers within the public. But acts of terrorism that do not meet these criteria are rarely reported on in the press, which suggests that the construct of terrorism is unduly shaped by media to convey a bombastic and sensationalized opinion of what terrorism is. This can have effects on viewers, readers and the general public as a whole that are unintended.

For instance, some acts may be defined or labeled as acts of political violence or criminal activity, but depending on the context they may or may not be described as terrorism in the media (Chermak & Gruenewald, 2006). The media thus has a great deal of latitude and power in terms of how events are construed and constructed for public consumption. This ability to frame events within the framework of terrorism or within the framework of political or criminal activity gives the media a unique ability to leverage its influence in terms of how the public thinks about certain events.

The actions of Antifa in 2020 are one example. Antifa-led riots and protests across the US in the summer of 2020 often resulted in violence, destruction to property, and even in the establishment of autonomous zones. These events were routinely depicted in media as politically motivated and only rarely as criminal and almost never as terroristic. But because media is used globally, alternate narratives can be produced that frame the same acts in different lights. Even domestically competing media outlets may choose to frame an act differently (Xu, 2020). This is also true of Antifa-led events and those of other alt-groups like Proud Boys. Right-leaning media outlets like Fox will tend to portray Antifa-led riots as borderline terroristic if not overtly so, while left-leaning outlets like CNN will portray the same incidents as political protests.

The polarization effect of media representations of terrorism can add to the tumult already experienced in the public. Because politics are intertwined with terrorism and with perceptions of criminality, individuals in society may be moved to embrace the actions of one group over another based upon their own political, social and economic beliefs. It must be remembered that Islamic fundamentalism is not the only source of terroristic activity in the world, even though the media often portrays it as the only source. The fact of the matter is that in almost every political struggle of some sort in modern history there has been an accompaniment of terroristic activity, which is justified by those who engage in it by virtue of their political beliefs or affiliation (Xu, 2020). This lends credence to the viewpoint that social learning theory offers on this subject: people can learn to embrace terrorism if they feel that the activities reflect their own beliefs at a fundamentally political or ideological level. People who join groups like Antifa or Proud Boys or extremist organizations or connect with radical terror cells through online networks all have in common the notion that what they are doing is for the good of society, based on their perception of how the world should be. Media provides them with a window on the world, and they may reject or accept what is shown to them, but they are impacted by it all the same.

The role of social media is also important in this context because social media users interact with what legacy media offers them for consumption. They are motivated to engage with other social media users based on the constructs given them by legacy media in many ways (Xu, 2020). On social media they pronounce their own verdicts and assessments, often either pro- or anti- the underlying narrative that has been constructed around the incident in question. Social media becomes the platform upon, which individual views are aired, which then resonate or shock other users, and increase the degree of polarization.

Thus terror groups are able to thrive in the modern day thanks in large part to the content provided by legacy media but also thanks to the rise of social media, which is the number one reason these groups are able to expand, influence others, get their messages out into the world, and recruit new people to join and grow their ranks (Chatfield et al., 2015). Were social media unavailable to these terror groups, they would have a much more difficult time transmitting their beliefs around the world. It would not be nearly as easy to interact with impressionable youths who may already be disaffected by their own surroundings and who are looking for a cause to believe in, no matter how radical it may be.

In the professional setting, it would appear therefore that both legacy media and social media companies do bear some responsibility in addressing the issue of terrorism as their platforms are being used by groups to recruit others and further their own ambitions. These groups cannot possibly thrive the way they do without access to platforms where millions of people can interact virtually, communicate instantly, and develop relationships vital to the spread of terrorist activities. Nor could they get their messages delivered in such a way that inspires others to follow them or join opposing groups that denounce them. There is certainly an environment in existence today in which one group forms and develops based on what another group is doing. For example, Proud Boys grew into being largely in response to the perception that the radical left was getting out of hand; and in turn Antifa developed a strong following in response to the radicalization of the right seen by its followers.

The push-and-pull effect of legacy media and social media has fueled an environment in which terrorism has become not just a way of life for some but an accepted and promoted way of life across both legacy media and social media, depending on the context and frameworks applied. Where CNN promotes the activities of Antifa in a positive light, others see terrorism and respond by engaging in similarly violent methods but from their own political or ideological framework. Instead of reporting on terrorism in an objective and non-biased manner, media outlets engage in a politically- and socially-infused rhetoric or commentary that scintillates and fosters an atmosphere of anger and division. This atmosphere is charged with the particles that feed the social conflicts dividing people at home. Individuals learn to love terrorism insofar as they see it as a way to further their own desire to see opposing groups destroyed. So clearly some steps should be taken to moderate the influence of social media groups and their online potential (Mills et al., 2019).

However, it is important to note that not all expansion of terror groups is a direct result of social media or legacy media influence. Many terror groups are able to thrive, particularly in the Middle East, thanks to the support of other nations that sponsor terrorism (Mills et al., 2019). These nations have ulterior motives for funding terror groups, such as geopolitical ambitions, which are facilitate via proxy warfare. Terror cells that these nations sponsor are able to destabilize and undermine other governments, creating an opportunity for hegemony for the sponsoring states. This is almost certainly the case in Syria.

In parts of the world where destabilization has occurred and the structures of society have been torn down through corruption, war, economic and social collapse, and the problem of migration, terror groups thrive because they offer a way out for people looking for a place to go. There is a level of opportunity presented to individuals in these parts of the world that is not matched any other way. Many terror groups in the Middle East recruit criminals or others who have been marginalized by society because these are easy targets for recruitment and because the recruits basically have nothing left to lose by joining such a group. This happens in the West just as it does in the Middle East, too. Those people who are vulnerable to being exploited and recruited by terror groups typically have nowhere else to go because they are isolated.

Youths from poor nations in the Middle East often join these terror groups because of the effects of forever wars on their immediate environments. They are taught by experience, peers, and groups within their immediate real-world (unlike in the West) to embrace radical or extremist views as a way of combating a foreign enemy that has invaded their land and caused destruction through aerial bombardment and military interventionism. For the people of the Middle East, the social learning process is affected tremendously by their exposure to violence and to propagandists in their own real-world environment. For people in the West, the main conduit is virtual; the main reason terror groups can grow in the West is that social media makes it possible.

Future Implications

The future implications of these findings suggests that unless some intervention is proposed, implemented and enforced in the West, terror groups will continue to thrive on the support they garner from young impressionable and socially-isolated people in the West. In the Middle East and in other states where terror groups persist, the main cause of their growth is the impact of violence from continued warfare. In some places in Africa, there has been progress in the reduction of certain terror groups through targeted militaristic action and through coordinated efforts by state governments to make amendments to their government in acts of appeasement. However, the continuation of wars in the Middle East will likely serve to continue to give cause to individuals there for joining terror groups, as this serves for some as the only meaningful alternative to life in a world that has been devastated by war.

The ongoing wars in the Middle East are responsible for mass migration, as infrastructures are destroyed and migrants have to seek shelter as refugees in other states. This puts a tax on the receiving states in terms of having to provide shelter and support for refugees, but also in terms of social and cultural clashes. Refugees from Syria have struggled to fit into the cultures of other nations like France, Germany or even Turkey, because their cultures and values are different. In Germany it has created a great deal of tension, and tension tends to have a social learning effect on those in the environment as well. People are taught to beware other people based on the anxiety that they experience and the fears that are instilled in them in situations where peace and understanding are not readily promoted.

The destabilization of societies in the Middle East is thus something that has to be addressed because it is destabilization that creates the environment in which terrorism is fostered. In times of peace, respect and understanding there is no need for terrorism or for terror groups because everyone feels appreciated and some fairness exists in society. In today’s media-driven environment, however, there is a palpable divide-and-conquer strategy evident in the way all discourse is framed and in the way all types of narratives are constructed. Destabilization is occurring in the West as well, with polarization occurring in increasing ways, as media-driven narratives push people to extremes, and as individuals learn from media how they should view others who have opposing viewpoints. There is very little attempt in legacy media or in social media to cultivate any moderating influences. Instead, judgments are made and cancel culture has created an environment in which condemnations are leveled and questions are only asked (if ever) much later. This tendency to produce snap judgments fuels the perception among people that their side is correct and justified while the other side is worthy only of scorn. This manner conditions people to believe in their own cause to the point of justifying violence if necessary and sometimes as absolutely essential. Indeed, the defining characteristics of the Antifa and Proud Boys groups are that violence is welcome and useful and should be utilized because these groups have moved beyond the point at which words, discussion or respectful debate can achieve any effect.