Opinion by James Paterson, Tanveer Ahmed, and Damian Spruce
THE LIBERTARIAN JAMES PATERSON
鈥淭he media - like everybody - has a moral duty to exercise restraint, particularly when it comes to relaying views as disgusting as Breivik鈥檚.... Ultimately, whether to cover Breivik鈥檚 trial is an editorial judgement to be made by individual news outlets.
Yet it is not clear what would be gained if the media did decide to collectively suppress the broadcast of his trial.
Repellent beliefs flourish in the dark. Censoring the trial could suggest that Breivik鈥檚 opinions are more powerful and persuasive than they actually are.... Conversely, having his views out in the open presents the community with an opportunity to rebut and reject them.鈥�
THE PSYCHIATRIST TANVEER AHMED
鈥淎nders Breivik鈥檚 actions as a mass murderer could hardly be more despicable.... The irony, however, is not just that Breivik鈥檚 hatred of Islam should lead to the sort of terrorist act many had taken to be Islamic, but also that nothing so resembles Breivik鈥檚 mindset as that of an Islamist jihadist.
Both view themselves as political soldiers but are driven not so much by political ideology as by a desperate and perverted search for identity, a search shaped by a sense of cultural paranoia and a claustrophobic victimhood.
Islamists want to resurrect an 鈥榓uthentic鈥� Islam that never existed and Breivik similarly wants to establish a mythical, authentically 海角大神 Europe.鈥�
THE LAWYER DAMIAN SPRUCE
鈥淭he primary argument against reproducing Breivik's stunts and statements in the media is that it is bad journalism. A newspaper that simply printed word for word a politician's press conference would be rightly criticised for uncritical coverage. But this is what the media is doing when it prints a picture of Breivik's raised fist in far right salute: it is carrying out his job for him, conveying his message, unedited and without analysis, to the public.
Part of the job of the media is to cut through the spin and refuse to be a mere conduit for a political agenda.
From the beginning, global media exposure has been central to Breivik's strategy. He has used mass murder to gain levels of attention that could not be bought with millions of dollars in an advertising budget.... In focusing the world's attention on his ideology, on his motivations and emotions he is excluding the concerns of victims and voices in support of democracy and multiculturalism. This is not freedom of speech, it is a denial of that freedom to those who we need to hear from most: people speaking on behalf of the 77 victims, and more broadly from those speaking for democratic values.鈥�
