Terrorist Attacks by Muslims Receive 357% More Media Coverage

[luckyshot]

According to a study done by the University of Alabama, an act of violence committed by a Muslim between 2006-2015 generated an average of 105 headlines— compared to 15 for non-Muslims.

The same study found that over the same period right wing attacks were twice as frequent as Muslim attacks.

Violence by Muslims is also exponentially more likely to become a national, rather than merely local, headline.

Thanks a lot Muzlim loving liberal media.

https://www.axios.com/terrorist-att...age-61a7f964-d28f-4250-b625-42eb7fa61b35.html

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jul/20/muslim-terror-attacks-press-coverage-study

 

[Losfer Words]

Orientalism

 

[bushman505]

I suppose the fact that there are a lot more of them doesn’t account for any of the extra reporting?

 

[LiLoMMA]

I suppose the fact that there are a lot more of them doesn’t account for any of the extra reporting?

You should read the OP

 

[bushman505]

You should read the OP

Never heard much about “right wing” attacks before Trump was elected. It seems like slanted journalism. Take a look at some of the Islamic attacks in that time period and compare the body count to “right wing” attacks and I’d imagine you can figure out why there’s so much more reporting of the Islamic attacks. I’d expect that that the San Bernardino shooting, Orlando night club shooting, Jewish federation shooting, fort hood shooting, Boston marathon bombing (I’m leaving out 9/11 because the article said 2006 convieniently) would garner much more attention than “right wing” “terrorism” like shouting at people for being from other countries or not speaking English. Not saying there is no “right wing” violence but if you want to compare the reporting numbers, look at the body counts.

 

[kenetics]

I suppose the fact that there are a lot more of them doesn’t account for any of the extra reporting?

Media does this to minorities in America as well...

 

[luckyshot]

Never heard much about “right wing” attacks before Trump was elected. It seems like slanted journalism. Take a look at some of the Islamic attacks in that time period and compare the body count to “right wing” attacks and I’d imagine you can figure out why there’s so much more reporting of the Islamic attacks. I’d expect that that the San Bernardino shooting, Orlando night club shooting, Jewish federation shooting, fort hood shooting, Boston marathon bombing (I’m leaving out 9/11 because the article said 2006 convieniently) would garner much more attention than “right wing” “terrorism” like shouting at people for being from other countries or not speaking English. Not saying there is no “right wing” violence but if you want to compare the reporting numbers, look at the body counts.

You “never heard much of right wing attacks,” eh?

Could be because— as the study points out— the media doesn’t cover them as widely.

According to that known liberal trash rag Forbes— if you subtract 9/11 (which accounts for 89% of all terrorist deaths on US soil)— right wing terrorist have killed twice as many people than Muslim terrorists in America since 1992. And 10x as many people as “left wing” terrorists.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/realsp...n-terrorist-attacks-on-u-s-soil/#232f914e1e74

 

[dontsnitch]

This changes everything. We should beg for more uneducated Muslim migrants.

 

[Factory]

The fact that most terror attacks have an Islamic background creates prejudices and fear, and rightly so. A natural defense mechanism, which is reflected in this statistic.

 

[JonnyRingo84]

Never heard much about “right wing” attacks before Trump was elected. It seems like slanted journalism. Take a look at some of the Islamic attacks in that time period and compare the body count to “right wing” attacks and I’d imagine you can figure out why there’s so much more reporting of the Islamic attacks. I’d expect that that the San Bernardino shooting, Orlando night club shooting, Jewish federation shooting, fort hood shooting, Boston marathon bombing (I’m leaving out 9/11 because the article said 2006 convieniently) would garner much more attention than “right wing” “terrorism” like shouting at people for being from other countries or not speaking English. Not saying there is no “right wing” violence but if you want to compare the reporting numbers, look at the body counts.

ok. show us the body counts. not assumptions.

 

[oldshadow]

Link to list of these right wing attacks

 

[luckyshot]

The fact that most terror attacks have an Islamic background creates prejudices and fear, and rightly so. A natural defense mechanism, which is reflected in this statistic.

Do you ever read any links provided in threads—like EVER?

This changes everything. We should beg for more uneducated Muslim migrants.

 

[MicroBrew]

According to a study done by the University of Alabama, an act of violence committed by a Muslim between 2006-2015 generated an average of 105 headlines— compared to 15 for non-Muslims.

The same study found that over the same period right wing attacks were twice as frequent as Muslim attacks.

Violence by Muslims is also exponentially more likely to become a national, rather than merely local, headline.

Thanks a lot Muzlim loving liberal media.

https://www.axios.com/terrorist-att...age-61a7f964-d28f-4250-b625-42eb7fa61b35.html

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jul/20/muslim-terror-attacks-press-coverage-study

That's because there are far more major attacks by Jihadists than by rightwingers. The last rightwing major attack was Brevik. Attacks by Muslims are a far greater danger because of the number of suicidal jihadists, their trans-national reach, religious justification. People aren't afraid of criticizing rightwing ideology , but people are afraid of criticizing Islam and its prophet . The threat against free speech from Islamists is very real, while it is not even a blip from rightwingers.

 

[bushman505]

ok. show us the body counts. not assumptions.

I think it’s pretty easy to find yourself, just look at the 4 examples I posted, add up those body counts and then see if anywhere near that many people have been killed in “right wing” terrorist attacks on us soil, just going by memory, I think there were around 13 killed in fort hood, 16 in San Bernardino, 9 in Seattle and I for get how many in Orlando what ~20???.

I don’t think it takes a genius to see that if a “right winger” killed that many people it would be all over the news just as much as any Islamic terror attack.

 

[JonnyRingo84]

That's because there are far more major attacks by Jihadists than by rightwingers. The last rightwing major attack was Brevik. Attacks by Muslims are a far greater danger because of the number of suicidal jihadists, their trans-national reach, religious justification. People aren't afraid of criticizing rightwing ideology , but people are afraid of criticizing Islam and its prophet . The threat against free speech from Islamists is very real, while it is not even a blip from rightwingers.

people are afraid of criticizing islam?

 

[GetTheseHands]

Its probably because they end up killing more people. This thread is very lazy

 

[bushman505]

You “never heard much of right wing attacks,” eh?

Could be because— as the study points out— the media doesn’t cover them as widely.

According to that known liberal trash rag Forbes— if you subtract 9/11 (which accounts for 89% of all terrorist deaths on US soil)— right wing terrorist have killed twice as many people than Muslim terrorists in America since 1992. And 10x as many people as “left wing” terrorists.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/realsp...n-terrorist-attacks-on-u-s-soil/#232f914e1e74

But don’t you think if a “right wing” terrorist killed as many people as have been killed in these Islamic attacks it would be all over the news??? It absolutely would.

And why is this study only started in 2006??? I mean I guess you could count the Oklahoma City bombing as a “right wing” attack but the. You’d have to include 9/11 in the data.

It’s simple, kill a shitload of people and it’s going to reported on the news a ton. This isn’t rocket surgery.

 

[RerouteToRemain]

According to a study done by the University of Alabama, an act of violence committed by a Muslim between 2006-2015 generated an average of 105 headlines— compared to 15 for non-Muslims.

The same study found that over the same period right wing attacks were twice as frequent as Muslim attacks.

Violence by Muslims is also exponentially more likely to become a national, rather than merely local, headline.

Thanks a lot Muzlim loving liberal media.

https://www.axios.com/terrorist-att...age-61a7f964-d28f-4250-b625-42eb7fa61b35.html

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jul/20/muslim-terror-attacks-press-coverage-study

Do they list the right wing attacks anywhere? Couldn't find it on the link. A citation link from guardian listed that Islamic attacks did kill more people.

• From January 2008 to the end of 2016, we identified 63 cases of Islamist domestic terrorism, meaning incidents motivated by a theocratic political ideology espoused by such groups as the Islamic State. The vast majority of these (76 percent) were foiled plots, meaning no attack took place.
• During the same period, we found that right-wing extremists were behind nearly twice as many incidents: 115. Just over a third of these incidents (35 percent) were foiled plots. The majority were acts of terrorist violence that involved deaths, injuries or damaged property.
• Right-wing extremist terrorism was more often deadly: Nearly a third of incidents involved fatalities, for a total of 79 deaths, while 13 percent of Islamist cases caused fatalities. (The total deaths associated with Islamist incidents were higher, however, reaching 90, largely due to the 2009 mass shooting at Fort Hood in Texas.)

It's pretty easy to figure out if it's Islamic terrorism, however I'd love to see what qualifies as right wing terrorism. If it is a random racist attack with a single victim that isn't shocking that it's not covered as much as some jihadi.

 

[Cid]

If you run the numbers there's over 500 bombs dropped from US planes on muslim countries for every terrorist attack in the past two years.

 

[luckyshot]

Its probably because they end up killing more people. This thread is very lazy

Pleas see post #7 or #23 in this very thread.