Search

Drawing on previous research about journalistic news sources, this study explores the use of experts and other sources in coverage of the London suicide bombings (7 July 2005) in British, American, and Russian newspapers. Using content analysis of news reports of these attacks, it assesses the differential usage of information sources across newspapers published in countries with different media systems. The comparative analyses indicate that the use of government officials, non-government experts, and other journalistic sources in this context varies both between and within nations' media systems. However, despite their media systems-related differences, ideological orientation, and source utilization, the cross-national newspaper coverage of the London bombings often reflected similar themes and a common dialogue that affirmed each nation's shared mourning and condemnation of the bombings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Existing studies have examined the significance of UK media coverage of the 7/7 London bombings. This article seeks to widen this analysis by exploring the coverage of 7/7 in the leading newspapers of the United Kingdom, the United States, and Poland comparatively using a new agenda-setting perspective that is grounded within network analysis. The study is devised to respond specifically to the contrasting arguments about the influence of media globalization versus religion and ethnicity on this reporting. It finds that the diverse approaches to religion within the countries of the analyzed newspapers appear to mitigate the reproduction of shared religious narratives in this reporting. Nevertheless, the analyzed coverage does carry common attributes and these, it argues, can be explained broadly by the influence of a US-dominated 'lens on terror'. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is now commonplace to suggest that acts of terrorism on home soil impact the media's ability to challenge the anti-terror policies that follow immediately from them. Still, complex contexts can emerge, and this article focuses on one that shapes a media response to a proposed UK anti-terror policy in 2006. It observes how proposed legislation for an identity card scheme, following closely after the 2005 London bombings, is reported in the elite press according to different 'thresholds'. Emerging from an initial (1) observing of political conflict and a (2) detailing of claims made about the policy are (3) moments of performed criticism of the policy as a 'threat' to the British public's 'civil liberties' by these newspapers. This verbally 'empowered' coverage provides an important exception to the previously observed media passivity in response to anti-terror policies/propaganda. Furthermore, the article argues that this is instigated by a complex context of political contest and reproduced cultural associations that encourage the performance of these newspapers' 'fourth estate' role. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article investigates the #WalkTogether initiative which commemorated the 10th anniversary of the 7 July 2005 London bombings by encouraging people to individually re-enact and share on social media the moment when following the bombings, in the absence of a functioning public transport network, Londoners walked to and from work together. It asks what forms of togetherness did the initiative promote and what was the role of professional journalists and news organisations in facilitating this togetherness? To answer these questions, the article conceives of togetherness as hybrid and unfolding within broader media and memory ecologies. This encourages the use of innovative combinations of methods and the introduction of the concepts of 'mediatised performative commemoration' and 'digital gestural remains'. In turn, this allows a number of specific enquiries into the characteristics of #WalkTogether's commemoration, communities, remembrance and reporting a decade after 7/7 took place and a discussion of the extent to which the initiative resulted in forms of clicktivism and commemorative silos. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The suicide bombings of 7 July 2005 remain the most serious terror attacks in the United Kingdom to date in the so-called 'war on terror'. Much has been published on the war on terror but few journalists have reflected on their practice post 9/11 and none on their domestic coverage of the 7/7 attacks. This article is written by a journalist who covered the London bombings for a UK national newspaper and more recently is a practitioner-academic. Using academic texts focusing on the domestic reporting of the war on terror as stimuli for scholarly reflection, this article reviews the author's own coverage using reflexive practice and content analysis. This article places 7/7 in the continuum of reporting subsequent to 11 September 2001 (9/11) and issues discussed. Some 63 authored articles were considered from the period. Scholarly texts have proposed a range of concepts to analyse coverage from including political ritual, trauma, national wound and hegemony. This article concludes by noting that while many academic texts see coverage of terrorism as an elite discourse, dominated by political economy drivers and responding to events in a homogeneous reactivity, in practice, news organisations can have complex responses and journalists, agency in their coverage of major terrorism events. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper, I first retrace some aspects of a dynamic theory of humans in society, and then highlight what appear to me as major contributions of two papers of this special issue. This leads me to highlight a series of questions, which I address through two other consonant studies on remembering, the work of Harald Welzer and his team on the memory of WWII in three generations in German families, and the study by Steve Brown and Paula Reavey on people’s remembering of the London bombings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Major terrorist events, such as the recent attacks in Ankara, Sinai, and Paris, can have profound effects on a nation's values, attitudes, and prejudices. Yet psychological evidence testing the impact of such events via data collected immediately before and after an attack is understandably rare. In the present research, we tested the independent and joint effects of threat (the July 7, 2005, London bombings) and political ideology on endorsement of moral foundations and prejudices among two nationally representative samples (combined N = 2,031) about 6 weeks before and 1 month after the London bombings. After the bombings, there was greater endorsement of the in-group foundation, lower endorsement of the fairness-reciprocity foundation, and stronger prejudices toward Muslims and immigrants. The differences in both the endorsement of the foundations and the prejudices were larger among people with a liberal orientation than among those with a conservative orientation. Furthermore, the changes in endorsement of moral foundations among liberals explained their increases in prejudice. The results highlight the value of psychological theory and research for understanding societal changes in attitudes and prejudices after major terrorist events. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines newspaper reaction in the immediate aftermath of the London bombings 2005 to identify the repertoires they use to respond to this large-scale terrorist incident perpetrated on UK soil. It introduces to our established view of media reporting of terrorism, a moment when traditionally differentiated newspapers respond collectively to this incident with coverage marked by its representations of condemnation, solidarity and law and enforcement brought together within human-interest story treatments. These findings point to newspaper journalists employing a generic reporting template at this time to reproduce copy so ordered as to respond consensually to this incident. Newspapers’ performances across this period privilege official responses and collective national reaction to the bombings as they cauterise an identified social wound produced by the incident. Their investigation calls attention to the ritual character of reporting produced against this context, pointing in particular to the enacted images of ‘Britishness’ central to its performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Muslim public opinion polls are mostly taken at face value as the direct and unbiased voice of British Muslims, but, as this article argues, most of the public opinion polls are commissioned by the media and suffer from similar framing effects to those seen in the general media coverage of Muslims. At a time of national crisis, following the London terrorist attacks in 2005, it has become especially clear that the media have been following their pre-existing narrative on Muslims rather than responding to public interest. We analyse all public opinion polls conducted in the 18 months following the 7 July attacks and all their broadsheet newspaper coverage to show that the media-framing effects influence both the creation of Muslim opinion polls and their reporting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Particularly since the London bombings in July 2005, Muslim communities in Britain have faced extensive criticism for their alleged inability to assimilate to British cultural mainstream expectations. Various government schemes have attempted to tackle ‘Islamic radicalism’ and ‘violent extremism’, thought to emanate from within Britain’s long-standing Muslim communities. Based on extensive ethnographic research conducted among a sizable Muslim community, this article questions the thesis that British-born Muslims represent a threat to social cohesion and embody the failure of multiculturalism. Observation of their everyday lives, particularly in the realm of work and during leisure time, suggests that for Luton’s young Muslims, apart from working for the family, religion and strong community relations act as innovative means to strengthen bonds of nationality and citizenship, despite perceptions of widespread hostility and detachment from society beyond. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

This article asks what happened to racially motivated hate crimes in the wake of the 7/7 terror attack that hit London in July 2005 and the 9/11 terror attack that hit the United States in September 2001. There is anecdotal and descriptive evidence of an increase in bias-motivated crimes since the 9/11 terrorist attacks in the United States, but little quantitative research on the issue. This study offers empirical evidence on the effects of 7/7 and 9/11 on hate crime using rich data from four police force areas in England with sizable Asian/Arab populations. We find significant increases in hate crimes against Asians and Arabs that occurred almost immediately in the wake of both terror attacks, which subsequently decayed, but remained at higher than pre-attack levels a year later. We argue that this demonstrates a significant link between terror attacks and subsequent increases in hate crime and hypothesize that attitudinal changes resulting from media framing and coverage may act as a conduit linking terror attacks and hate crimes. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

This article is a qualitative analysis of nation-state population “resiliency” to several spectacular and/or highly symbolic terrorist assaults that were watershed events. It draws heavily from qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) frameworks to isolate and identify the presence of what Goertz calls the “secondary dimensions” of a “primary concept” such as resiliency to terrorist assaults. In turn, the presence of those secondary dimensions and their strength presuppose and derive from “tertiary indicators” that are the basic metrics and concrete manifestations of those secondary dimensions. The nation-states under consideration include the London bombings of 2005, the United States for 9/11, the Madrid bombings of 2004, the first suicide bombings within pre-1967 boundaries of Israel, and the Russian Federation in the case of the 2002 terrorist assault against the Dubrovka Theater in Moscow. The results serve as the basis for the development of a “resiliency continuum” of nation-states where placement of those countries on the continuum reflect “nonresilient,” “semiresilient,” and “resilient” conditions, themselves defined by the number of secondary dimensions found in each case study. In the process, the analysis illuminates possible interconnections between “context specific” factors, such as a country’s historical experience with terrorism and population characteristics (e.g., education levels, degree of heterogeneity) to the resiliency or nonresiliency condition, and describes possible links between exogenous “systems factors” such as war and power ranking to the resiliency condition. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The question of whether it is possible to ‘tell the same story twice’ has been explored in work on conversational narratives, which has set out to understand the existence of some kind of ‘underlying semantic structure’ and ‘script’ (Polanyi, 1981). In conversational narratives, ‘local occasioning’ and ‘recipient design’ (Sacks et al., 1974) are factors that determine the form and function of the story. Here, ongoing talk frames the narrative while other participants provide a ready made audience, all of which, form part of the storytelling process. What happens, however, when a survivor of 7/7 (the date in 2005 of the co-ordinated terrorist bomb attacks on the London transport system in the morning rush hour, which killed 52 and injured hundreds of people), whose personal narrative was reported globally on the day of the event, is again interviewed two and a half years later for their experience of that morning? Is the ‘same story’ retold? Specifically, how far does the latest story replicate the experience and events of the first and which of the prototypical features of a personal narrative – at the level of both the macrostructure and microstructure – remain constant? By comparing both interviews and using Labov and Waletzky’s (1967) narrative framework as the central model for analysis, it is possible to see whether events within the complicating action or features of evaluation remain the most memorable, that is, they are recalled in the second telling as important aspects of the experience, and may be seen to be core narrative categories. While findings show that both narratives are comparable in form, a closer investigation finds compelling differences as well as unexpected linguistic choices. Not only has the second narrative become informed by other, external narratives to become part of a broader, mediated narrative but various discourse strategies of ‘dissociation’ in both interviews have resulted in a retelling of a traumatic experience that appears to have features of an eye witness report rather than a personal narrative. Moreover, this blurring of two distinct genres of storytelling provides a true insight of how the narrator positions himself inside this terrible experience. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the 150th anniversary of the London Underground (LU) transit system in London, England, which opened in 1863 as the Metropolitan Railway, or the "Met." It comments on commemorations of the system's 50th and 100th anniversaries. Events to mark the 150th anniversary considered include the exhibition of underground trains and posters and various academic events and publications. Traumatic events associated with the LU, including its use for public air raid shelters during World War II and the July 2005 terrorist attacks, are also considered.

The London bombings of 7 July 2005 were a major event shaping the relationship between Muslims and non- Muslims in Britain. In this paper we introduce the idea of 'securitized citizens' to analyse the changing relationship between British Muslims and wider British society in response to this and similar events. Through an analysis of qualitative interviews with Muslims and non- Muslims of a variety of ethnic backgrounds in the areas where the London bombers lived in West Yorkshire we examine the popular perceptions of non- Muslims and Muslims' experiences. We show how processes of securitization and racialization have interacted with Islamophobic discourses and identifications, as well as the experiences of Muslims in West Yorkshire after the attacks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Samuel Huntington (1996) argued that the source of the great divisions and conflicts between peoples of global society would be cultural, and not necessarily ideological or economic as in the last century. Although, the validity of Huntington’s claim was not clear at the time, it certainly began to gain credence in western circles following recent terrorist attacks ranging from 9/11 in the US, 7/7 in London to the bombings in Madrid, the Philippines and Mumbai, all in the space of seven years. These events have undoubtedly reinforced hostile perceptions and attitudes towards ‘other’ cultures and the peoples that live in some distant countries. Drawing on a 2007 study of Germany’s Muslim community which revealed a consistently close link between radicalization and ‘vicarious’ experiences of marginalization and discrimination, this article critically analyses eight British newspapers’ coverage of the 7/7 London terror attacks to determine the extent of the stereotypical representations employed and their implications for intercultural communication and terrorism prevention. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The British government's response to the London bombings sought to make the terror of that day foreign, even though it appeared largely domestic. This helped construct it as unusual, contingent, part of the uncontrollable ‘otherness’ of the ‘foreign’. However, it also drew the response into the arena of British foreign policy, where the ‘failing state’ has been the dominant conceptualisation of insecurity and terrorism, especially since September 11th. When the bombings are examined through the ‘failing state’ disturbing and important problems are uncovered. Primarily, the ‘failing state’ discourse deconstructs under the influence of the terrorism in London, revealing that Britain itself is a ‘failing state’ by its own description and producing a generalisation of state ‘failure’. It thereby reveals several possible sites for responding to and resisting the government's representation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article explores the different ideas of community circulating in the aftermath of the 7 July 2005 bombings in London. Specifically, it compares the idea of a community in unity with a more cosmopolitan, urban idea of community. While these two ideas seem to present sharply different responses, the article questions the extent to which the cosmopolitan model offers an alternative to the nationalist idea of community. Drawing on various discussions about how ideas of community are produced through different understandings of time and origins, the article argues that in this specific case both the national and the cosmopolitan accounts of community worked according to a very similar logic, and therefore risked reproducing similar problems and exclusions. Consequently, the article suggests that the task of exploring alternative conceptions of community must involve greater sensitivity to the politics of time and other approaches to the politics of origins. This challenge is pursued through the motif of the city as a site expressing a different temporality and thus a different idea of community from that expressed in traditions of national belonging. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes in Stockwell Station, South London, on 22 July 2005, was described as a "tragic mistake" by Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Ian Blair. This framing of the killing has come to dominate responses to it in the mainstream media. However, such a framing stymies critical questioning about what happened and colludes in the reproduction of a particular framework of understanding within which sovereign power has retrospectively valorized his death. By contrast this article reads the shooting as one of multiple responses of the British state to the bombings of the London transport network on 7 July 2005 and locates Menezes's death within the broader context of the global "War on Terror." Rather than a "mistake," the author argues that the shooting is symptomatic of systemic features of Western politics and in particular innovations in the ways sovereign power attempts to secure the spatial and temporal borders of sovereign political community. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Britain has been chief accomplice in the ‘global war on terror’ (GWOT) from the outset. This article examines the underside of that voluntary servitude—the complicity in torture and abuse, humiliation and rendition. It asks, inter alia, what we know, and how we know, and why we should care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Discusses the experience of preparing and caring for patients who have received bomb blast injuries and required surgical intervention by the operating theatre staff at The Royal London Hospital during the bombings in London, England, on July 7, 2005. Utilisation of all available resources, such as equipment; Conduction of counselling and debriefing sessions to all staff; Factors to consider in planning for an emergency.

The article focuses on events that helped shaped public policy in Australia towards the war on terrorism. The powers of the Australian Security and Intelligence Organisation were expanded following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. The emphasis on immigration control was shifted to domestic violence after the London, England bombings in July 2005. The major race riot in Sydney, New South Wales alerted authorities on the deterioration in ethnic relations.

The article looks at the role and responsibility of journalism in the society as citizens, focusing on the events surrounding terrorism in London, England. It highlights the understanding of publisher Joseph Pulitzer of the role of journalism, in which he regarded journalism as a privilege. The divergence of the roles of citizens and journalists in the professional domain, particularly its responsibility in informing the nature of the threats that affects the community, is explored.

The article draws parallels between the July 7, 2005 London, England bombings and the Indian Ocean Tsunami on December 26, 2004. The relief response in the London bombings was assisted by the tsunami disaster of December 2004. In both the cases the handling of the dead in mass death situations was carried out by persons who work in what the International Police Criminal Organization, or Interpol, calls D-V-I. The letters stand for Disaster Victim Identification but D-V-I personnel respond in various disasters, natural or man made, whether the cause of death is an air crash, a serial killing, a tsunami or a bombing. But this is not the only link between the two events. The inquiries about missing persons were also related to each other in both the cases. The article then brings to notice two aspects of the London bombings which are relevant to this discussion. The first is that the initial response in any major incident is not by emergency personnel but by those who happen to be on hand. The second is that in the wake of any untoward incident there are incredibly high speed communications other than by the mass media.