Publicity of terrorism?

Question

What is the best way to stop terrorism?
It is my opinion that it is the media coverage and publicity of terrorists and terrorist attacks that they thrive on. Terrorist attacks rely more upon the fear and the threat that is felt by the witnesses (ordinary people) than the deaths of the terrorist's victims themselves. If we really want to stop terrorism, shouldn't we stop portraying terrorism and terrorist attacks so much?

I have lost count of how many times I have seen the picture of the world trade centre, an icon of America and western capitalism burning after the jets were flown into them. This along with the London bombings, the Bali bombings, the sarin gas attacks in Tokyo, attacks in Madrid etc... although none of these is more iconic of a terrorist attack than 11 September.

Am I wrong?
Does anyone agree with me, if not, what are your thoughts?

Answer 1

I do not think it is like the stars who do something stupid just for the attention. I think the leaders want the publicity to convince their followers how powerful and successful they can be so they will follow them, not some other leader. So they attack the most powerful(US, England etc) to show how powerful. What did osama have before 9/11. He couldn't even get Clinton to pay much attention to him.

Answer 2

Really show the dead people that would have a better impact than giving it to the nut case in charge glorifying them by even showing their face show what they are doing it is much more effective