How We’re Inadvertently Helping ISIS

There are no bad intentions. But by spreading ISIS’ pictures, we’re helping to disseminate their terror.

Tents at a temporary camp set up to shelter Iraqis fleeing violence on June 16, 2014 in Aski kalak, 40 kms west of the Kurdish autonomous region's capital Arbil.
National Journal
Matt Berman
June 17, 2014, 1:20 a.m.

You might have seen the pic­ture: on the left, a row of stand­ing men, mostly masked, aim­ing rifles; on the right, a line of men ly­ing face-down with their hands be­hind their heads. What you can as­sume comes next is as ob­vi­ous as it is ter­rible: mass ex­e­cu­tion, bod­ies left in shal­low graves.

The photo, and oth­ers like it, come from the Is­lam­ic State of Ir­aq and Syr­ia, the vi­ol­ent ex­trem­ist group that has taken sev­er­al of Ir­aq’s ma­jor cit­ies in re­cent weeks and ap­pears to be on an in­ev­it­able col­li­sion course with Bagh­dad. CNN has been broad­cast­ing the pic­tures since the week­end. They’re all over Twit­ter. The Wash­ing­ton Post ran them as a series head­lined, “These dra­mat­ic im­ages show ap­par­ent mass ex­e­cu­tion of sol­diers by IS­IS.”

The im­ages are without a doubt dra­mat­ic. But be­fore we blast the pho­tos out, it’d make sense to ask ourselves: Who ex­actly are we help­ing by spread­ing these im­ages?

When we re­print or re­post or retweet pic­tures taken by a ter­ror­ist or­gan­iz­a­tion, pic­tures that were taken with the ex­pli­cit pur­pose of be­ing dis­sem­in­ated to as many people as pos­sible, to cre­ate as much fear and spur as much sec­tari­an vi­ol­ence as pos­sible, it’s a ques­tion worth ask­ing.

We’re drawn to pic­tures of hor­rible vi­ol­ence. That’s not in­her­ently in­hu­mane. Con­tra this Politico troll clas­sic about Ukraine, there’s noth­ing ne­ces­sar­ily wrong with be­ing drawn to­ward dis­aster porn. By and large, people ac­tu­ally care about people. See­ing graph­ic pic­tures of oth­er hu­mans in dis­tress is dis­turb­ing and en­gulf­ing. When we share these kinds of pic­tures, we’re not say­ing, “THIS IS AWE­SOME,” but rather, “This is ter­ri­fy­ing. Someone make this stop.”

Shar­ing dis­aster porn — the di­git­al equi­val­ent of grabbing someone by the shoulder and say­ing, “Stop, ser­i­ously, look at this” — is of­ten an act of em­pathy.

But the latest round of pixelated vi­ol­ence cir­cu­lat­ing on the In­ter­net is dif­fer­ent. Un­like the tra­gic pho­tos from Syr­ia or Ukraine, which were of­ten cap­tured by ma­jor me­dia or­gan­iz­a­tions or cit­izen journ­al­ists, these are taken by ter­ror­ists. The ter­ror­ism in the pho­to­graphs isn’t just the dozens be­ing killed — it’s the broad­cast of vi­ol­ence. IS­IS has a soph­ist­ic­ated pro­pa­ganda dis­tri­bu­tion net­work, high­lighted by a suc­cess­ful Ar­ab-lan­guage Twit­ter app. When the group com­mits vi­ol­ence, it has the ma­chinery in place to make sure you can feel it.

There’s journ­al­ist­ic and so­cial mer­it in spread­ing the evid­ence of what’s hap­pen­ing in Ir­aq, but this par­tic­u­lar evid­ence is man­i­cured by the people who are car­ry­ing out the ab­uses. It’s not journ­al­ism, and without veri­fic­a­tion, it’s not even an ac­cur­ate de­pic­tion of what’s hap­pen­ing. It’s pro­pa­ganda, and it’s play­ing on our em­pathy for dis­tri­bu­tion.

IS­IS is not what most people think of when they think of ter­ror­ist or­gan­iz­a­tions. IS­IS is, for one thing, loaded. The group op­er­ates as if it were an in­de­pend­ent state, with an in­cred­ible level of or­gan­iz­a­tion. Dis­pers­ing video and im­ages of its vi­ol­ence has been one of its greatest suc­cesses.

The me­dia sat­ur­a­tion cre­ates an at­mo­sphere of fear, a fear that has helped res­ult in hun­dreds of thou­sands of Ir­aqis flee­ing rather than fight­ing IS­IS as the group moves through their coun­try.

IS­IS wants us to pub­li­cize their pic­tures. Without a healthy level of In­ter­net vir­al­ity, IS­IS could not gen­er­ate the wide­spread fear it needs to suc­ceed. Most people who are dis­trib­ut­ing the group’s work, wheth­er it’s CNN or your uncle on Face­book, don’t have bad in­ten­tions. But be­fore mak­ing that photo es­say, take a mo­ment to fig­ure out who most be­ne­fits from it.

What We're Following See More »
BACKING OUT ON BERNIE
Trump Won’t Debate Sanders After All
2 days ago
THE LATEST

Trump, in a statement: “Based on the fact that the Democratic nominating process is totally rigged and Crooked Hillary Clinton and Deborah Wasserman Schultz will not allow Bernie Sanders to win, and now that I am the presumptive Republican nominee, it seems inappropriate that I would debate the second place finisher. ... I will wait to debate the first place finisher in the Democratic Party, probably Crooked Hillary Clinton, or whoever it may be.”

AKNOWLEDGING THE INEVITABLE
UAW: Time to Unite Behind Hillary
3 days ago
THE DETAILS

"It's about time for unity," said UAW President Dennis Williams. "We're endorsing Hillary Clinton. She's gotten 3 million more votes than Bernie, a million more votes than Donald Trump. She's our nominee." He called Sanders "a great friend of the UAW" while saying Trump "does not support the economic security of UAW families." Some 28 percent of UAW members indicated their support for Trump in an internal survey.

Source:
AP KEEPING COUNT
Trump Clinches Enough Delegates for the Nomination
4 days ago
THE LATEST

"Donald Trump on Thursday reached the number of delegates needed to clinch the Republican nomination for president, completing an unlikely rise that has upended the political landscape and sets the stage for a bitter fall campaign. Trump was put over the top in the Associated Press delegate count by a small number of the party's unbound delegates who told the AP they would support him at the convention."

Source:
TRUMP FLOATED IDEA ON JIMMY KIMMEL’S SHOW
Trump/Sanders Debate Before California Primary?
4 days ago
THE LATEST
CAMPAIGNS INJECTED NEW AD MONEY
California: It’s Not Over Yet
4 days ago
THE LATEST

"Clinton and Bernie Sanders "are now devoting additional money to television advertising. A day after Sanders announced a new ad buy of less than $2 million in the state, Clinton announced her own television campaign. Ads featuring actor Morgan Freeman as well as labor leader and civil rights activist Dolores Huerta will air beginning on Fridayin Fresno, Sacramento, and Los Angeles media markets. Some ads will also target Latino voters and Asian American voters. The total value of the buy is about six figures according to the Clinton campaign." Meanwhile, a new poll shows Sanders within the margin of error, trailing Clinton 44%-46%.

Source:
×