Terrorist attacks and mass shootings in the United States often prompt distinct responses from the media and political leaders, with reactions shaped by the perceived identity and ideological leanings of the perpetrator. When an assailant is linked, even tenuously, to right-wing ideologies, it often becomes a political opportunity for the liberal media to demonize conservative groups and push for stricter gun control laws. However, attacks carried out by Islamist extremists, which present an entirely different threat to national security, are treated with more caution. These incidents are often downplayed or reframed to avoid drawing attention to the broader global threat of radical Islamic terrorism. A recent attack in New Orleans provides a clear example of this media double standard and raises critical questions about the way terrorism is covered in the press.
The New Orleans Terrorist Attack: A Delayed Label of Terrorism
On New Year Day terrorist attack took place on Bourbon Street in New Orleans, which saw assailant named Shamsud-Din Jabbar, drive his vehicle into a crowd of New Year’s revellers. The attack killed 14 individuals and left dozens of others seriously injured. The assault was clearly linked to ISIS, as Jabbar’s car displayed an ISIS flag, and explosives were found inside the vehicle. Despite these clear ties to ISIS and Jabbar’s prior declaration of support for the terror group, both local authorities and officials from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) hesitated to classify the event as an act of terrorism immediately. In the wake of the attack, there was a distinct reluctance from the political establishment to openly label it as terrorism. President Joe Biden himself urged caution, advising the public to avoid jumping to conclusions too quickly. This delay in labelling the event as terrorism stands in stark contrast to how quickly similar incidents linked to right-wing extremism are typically categorized.
Right-Wing Extremism vs. Islamist Extremism: The Media Double Standard
When violent acts are attributed to political extremists on the right, there is typically no hesitation to label the incident as domestic terrorism. Mass shootings and other forms of violence that are linked to right-wing ideologies are often used as an opportunity to demonize conservative politicians and citizens, portraying them as threats to national security. In contrast, acts of terrorism that can be attributed to Islamist extremism tend to be treated more cautiously. These events are often framed in ways that distance them from any broader ideological movements associated with global Islamist terror groups such as ISIS, Al-Qaeda, and Hamas. In the case of the New Orleans attack, much of the media coverage focused on the idea that Jabbar was a ‘lone wolf,’ attempting to isolate the attack from the wider issue of radical Islamic terrorism.
This narrative reflects a broader tendency in both U.S. and international media to downplay the connection between acts of Islamist extremism and the global threat posed by terror groups. For example, while Jabbar’s motivations and affiliations with ISIS were clear, media outlets emphasized his individual act rather than addressing the ideological basis of his actions. This reflects a broader trend of avoiding discussions about the continuing threat posed by radical Islamist groups, even as these organizations continue to operate globally and inspire individuals in the U.S. and abroad to commit violent acts.
Furthermore, in the aftermath of the attack, there was an alarming absence of discussion linking Jabbar’s actions to the broader political climate in the U.S., which has seen an increasing tolerance for antisemitic rhetoric and anti-Western sentiments. The pro-Palestinian protests that erupted in the wake of the October 2023 Hamas-led assault on Israel have been marked by widespread chants in support of terrorism, including calls for violent uprisings and revolution. Despite these developments, media outlets have been reluctant to connect this rhetoric with the growing threat of terrorism on American soil.
Since the conclusion of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the U.S. has increasingly distanced itself from addressing the ongoing threat posed by Islamist extremism. Public fatigue from these prolonged military engagements has contributed to a general reluctance to address the ideological roots of global terrorism.
The administrations of both George W. Bush and Barack Obama took steps to distance the U.S. from the notion of a “clash of civilizations” with the Muslim world, largely in an attempt to prevent the stigmatization of all Muslims. However, this approach, while politically motivated, failed to address the underlying causes of terrorism. Instead, it created an environment where the real threat posed by radical Islam was minimized, allowing groups like ISIS and Al-Qaeda to continue their operations relatively unhindered. This mischaracterization of the threat contributed to a broader failure in U.S. law enforcement and intelligence efforts to adequately combat radical Islamism both domestically and abroad.
Politicizing Terrorism
The Biden administration has prioritized the fight against domestic terrorism in recent years, but the focus has often been misdirected. Resources have been disproportionately allocated to investigating right-wing political groups, as well as individuals and organizations critical of the 2020 presidential election results. While these efforts may be politically motivated, they have diverted attention and resources away from addressing the real and growing threat posed by radical Islamist groups. This misallocation of law enforcement resources has allowed the threat of Islamic extremism to fester, with the government reluctant to take strong action against Islamist terror groups for fear of alienating Muslim advocacy organizations or appearing to target an entire religion.
In light of the New Orleans attack, the U.S. must acknowledge that Islamist extremism is a domestic issue that poses a significant threat to national security. This is not merely a problem confined to foreign shores; it is a growing threat in the U.S. as well. There is a rising tide of support for extremist groups like Hamas, and this must be addressed before it manifests in more acts of violence on U.S. soil. The next U.S. administration, regardless of its political makeup, must take proactive measures to confront the growing Islamist extremist threat. This includes carefully monitoring groups like CAIR, which have downplayed the danger of radical Islam, and ensuring that U.S. universities and institutions do not foster an environment that tolerates violence, antisemitism, or the promotion of terrorist ideologies.
Confronting Terrorism Without Denial
The tragic attack in New Orleans is a stark reminder that terrorism in the U.S. is not simply a problem of right-wing extremism, but one that is deeply connected to global Islamist movements. If the U.S. is to effectively address this growing threat, it must confront it head-on, without the political bias and media denial that have characterized much of the discourse on terrorism in recent years. The attack on Bourbon Street is not an isolated incident, and the lessons learned from it will shape the future of how the U.S. and other countries approach the threat of terrorism.
