News At A Distance

Australia’s first anti-terror laws were enacted in response to the terrorist attacks of September 11 (Prof Andrew Lynch 2010). In recent years, increasing Australian involvement in international conflict has seen these laws shift to accommodate alarming trends in home grown terrorism (Australian Security Intelligence Organisation 2014). Sydney’s 2014 terror raids prompted the most significant changes to Australia’s counter terrorism legislation in the last decade (Commonwealth of Australia Department of Defence 2015). Amendments granted law enforcement and intelligence agencies new and somewhat controversial powers, in the name of national security.

Now I realise it seems a bit hypocritical of me to attack the media’s representation of a news event when I myself am a part of the hype-generating circus we call mass media. However, the voice of my wise, high-school English teacher echoes in my subconscious that we should always be critical of the texts we consume and conscious of the

In 1978, on Monday the 13th of February, Australia faced what is believed to be its first experience of terrorism, when a bomb hidden in a bin outside the Sydney Hilton Hotel exploded, killing two council workers and a policeman (Cahill & Cahill, 2006). At the time, the hotel was hosting eleven heads of government who were in Sydney for the Commonwealth Heads of Government Regional Meeting (Cahill & Cahill, 2006). The Australian government reacted by mobilising the military, which came to be referred to as ‘Siege of Bowral’, that highlighted issues with the legislation that dealt with terrorism and how unprepared Australia was at responding to a terrorist event (Hancock, 2002). Over the following years, a range of legislation was enacted to handle matters associated with terrorism, laws such as allowing for defence to aid to the civil power, aviation and shipping safety, chemical, biological or nuclear weapons, surveillance and intelligence services (Hancock, 2002).

Since the beginning of aviation, aircraft have been used for other intentions besides carrying passengers and cargo. They have been used as weapons of war dating all the way back to the first world war, and the use of aircraft has enlightened the advancement of the aviation. “Throughout the history of aviation, the greatest progress in flight has been made during time when either war or the threat of war was present” (Millspaugh, et al., 2008, p. 33). However, the war we face today has been triggered by the deliberate use of aircraft to cause death, destruction, and mayhem.

Airport security before the attacks was minimal, which is why the attack was able to orchestrated successfully. Airlines hired their own agents to screen passengers. These employees were described as having “poor training due to unattractive wages and benefits which resulted in the hiring of an unskilled, inexperienced labor force” (Taylor). Carry-ons were not extensively searched as they are today, and many threats including knives, guns and explosives made it past security onto passenger-carrying aircraft. Instead of the modern day Advanced Imaging Technology screening machines that can detect a variety of possible threats, airports used to use simpler metal detectors (TSA.gov).

Prior to 9/11, commercial airport security was minimal. The most an individual had to do was remove the coin change in their pockets or maybe even taking off belts that had particularly large buckles and walking through a metal detector. Not today. Now there are full body scanners at some airports. Twelve years ago, non-ticketed visitors could escort their loved ones departing to airline gates. No today. Security prior 9/11 was what I would say is lackadaisical. There was a point in time where pilots would fly with the cockpit doors open, and they would even invite younger children to the cockpit to take a glimpse at the controls. Not today. Currently, the cock pit door stays closed, usually with a flight attendant standing guard in front of it. Prior to 9/11, you only had to show ID when you were checking in and only two questions were asked: Did you pack your own bags? Have your bags been seen outside your control? No today. Now all luggage, carry ons included, are searched by TSA agents. Today, on every flight, there are at least one to two officers disguised for

Law enforcement response to counter-terrorism fundamentally changed as a result of the unprecedented events of September 11th 2001 in New York and Washington (Kaldas, 2002, p61-62). This essay will examine how law enforcement has evolved in response to the changing nature of terrorism, with an emphasis on how this has impacted Australia. An analysis of arrests and subsequent

As worldwide terrorism continues to grow, and the need for even tighter security increases, we are constantly reminded through public announcements and signs to be on the alert for suspicious packages or luggage left unattended in public places. DO NOT TOUCH THEM, LEAVE THE AREA, and REPORT THE ITEM TO SECURITY PERSONNEL IMMEDIATELY we are told. Unfortunately, after the Jewell affair, the majority opinion of people seems to be that they will follow the first two instructions, and IGNORE the last about notifying security personnel; it appears that NO ONE wants to be the person that points out a potential bomb, lest they become the initial suspect of law enforcement, to be treated in the same manner as Richard Jewell.

Besides friends using social media to connect with other friends or families keeping in touch with other relatives who are at a distance, in the recent years, terrorists have taken advantage of social media and used it as a platform to threaten and send jaw dropping messages to some of the most popular outlets across the nation. For this paper, I will examine how terrorists have used social media as propaganda. I will also analyze the trends in media and terrorism, and how it has provided access for the promotion of the violent messages as well as allowing the news of terrorist attacks and assassinations to reach many parts of the world within a matter of minutes.

Liddy is not the only one that agrees that communication to the bystanders was important on 9/11. Emily Goldberg interviewed Ken Goldberg about what he saw on the streets that horrific day, “Was there a general sense of panic?” she asked, “People were definitely worried…,” (Goldberg). This interview shows the chaos on the streets because little was known about the attack at that point and how to react. Through this evidence, communication to those on the streets is crucial to maintaining a calm and collected city that knows what to do in the face of danger.

There was a possible security threat regarding a tractor-trailer that occurred in Times Square in New York City. The New York Police Department issued an advisory that a possibly dangerous tractor-trailer had deviated from its original course and was headed towards Times Square after being paid $10,000. After proper communication and information was shared between the New York Police Department, Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Rhode Island Fusion Center, Northern California Regional Intelligence Center, and the Connecticut Intelligence Center, the Connecticut State Police was able to intercept the vehicle and determined it was not a threat. It only took three hours from the time the New York Police Department issued an advisory to the time that the Connecticut State Police stopped the vehicle and determined it posed no threat to the public (5). Even though the truck was not a threat, this was a great example of proper communication, fusing of information, teamwork, and dissemination of information to counter a possible terrorist attack.

The purpose of the text by John Howard is to inform Australian citizens of the current situation of the possible terrorist threat that may face Australia and requests that all people report suspicious behaviour of those around one another to the National security hotline in which, all reported behaviour will be investigated to protect Australia. Uniting the community as one, to help protect Australia. The letter containing information of the counter-terrorism also includes reassuring information about Australia’s ‘strong counter-terrorist capability’ and emergency preparedness, to avoid panic from the public. The purpose of the text is to acknowledge Australia’s vulnerability to international terrorism following

“Things will never be the same.” (Miller, Stone & Mitchell, 2002, p. 3) Law enforcement has undergone dramatic changes as a result of the devastating events in the United States on 11 September 2001 (9/11). This essay will examine how law enforcement, specifically within Australia, has shifted its policies and strategies to fight the post-9/11 terrorist threat. An analysis of police actions towards terrorist related incidents since 9/11, displays how law enforcement agencies have demonstrated their

While one author thinks that Twitter can be a good resource for information concerning public events or breaking news, Bradley thinks otherwise. Bradley argues that social networking sites such as Twitter can be detrimental to society. Bradley disputes that although Twitter is a public forum, the content on Twitter be should be monitored. Bradley states that Tweeting the agenda of your day may not seem like any harm, “however when the ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee sends out tweets like 'Just landed in Baghdad. I believe it may be the first time I've had bb [short for Blackberry] service in Iraq. 11th trip here.’ and then proceeds to tweet about the movements of his party through the Green Zone, flying by helicopter, etc.” This gives valuable information to terrorists because now they know that a high ranking official is in the country and they know his whereabouts. Terrorists can then use this information to plan an attack. This official was probably not aware of the mistake that

“If the media were not there to report terrorist acts and to explain their political and social significance...terrorism as such would cease to exist” said John O'Sullivan, an editor of the Times of London.1 This is also the way many other people feel about the recent increase in terrorist activity; they feel that the media is causing it. The media is doing this by fulfilling the terrorists' need for publicity.2 Terrorists need media publicity in order to get their views spread to the public.3 Because of this need for publicity, terrorists are committing their acts of terrorism in areas where a lot of publicity will be gained; the United States and Western Europe are the most recent targets. The bombings of the federal building in