Introduction
The media has often been regarded as the “Fourth Estate” in the context of legitimacy and democracy (Dabir-Moghadam & Raeesi, 2019). Media provides diverse resources that can be used as a source of information without forgetting the influence of media exposure on the attitudes and intentions of people, which also develops and shapes their points of view on some social issues. Language exists in media as a form of social practice in that the shared texts build meanings and consequently change the readers’ minds. Based on the description above, media discourses and texts considerably influence minds. The people in power can reproduce or enforce ideologies besides reinforcing the power structures to produce their desired outcomes. As a social domain or institution, the media provides a powerful tool for conveying ideologies as language becomes an instrument of social force. The language and texts used in media can therefore be considered to establish, strengthen, manage, and direct the opinions of the public.
The instrumental and role-shaping function ascribed to language is liable to critical analysis. The discourse analyses mostly focus on assessing the ideologies and biases presented through language or keeping societal power relations in check. According to Fairclough (2002), studying the language used in media provides avenues for describing and interpreting representations besides explaining the forms of processes, structures, and relations which affect the individuals concerned with the discourse. The description above brings out the essence of critical discourse analysis, which entails the study of language to provide insights into how it shapes reality. Discourses are understood based on perception, framing, and interpreting the world where the legitimation of the power relationships occurs (O’Regan & Betzel, 2015). This essay addresses the sport-media theory through critical discourse analysis. This essay focuses on two articles by political figures referencing the events that occur in sports between 2021 and 2023. By focusing on these two articles, this essay sought to answer the question: How are ideologies and power relations replicated and strengthened in sports media? In answering the question posed above, this essay will cover the influence of sports media on the ideologies and dominant discourses of the different groups concerned.
Part 1 CDA of the “NO REGRETS” Article
The recent developments in the analysis of sport-media dynamics have focused on racism and ethnicity-related factors (Bradley, 2015). The growth in sectarianism in sport-media remains one of the under-developed critical discourse analyses in sport-media theory. The analysis and interpretation of texts relating to Scottish football with a bearing on sectarianism are important, considering the persistent lack of sensitivity in political, cultural, and social contexts in Scottish sports that characterized the crippling ambiguity detailed by McGeechan (2020). Based on the description provided above, the rhetorical devices used in the analysis in this essay either reinforce or challenge the meaning tied to sectarianism in football in relation to the press reporting on the comments made by Humza Yousaf, who was then the Justice Secretary in Scotland. The discourse analysis provided here, therefore, captures the appropriate circumstances on how the comments of the Justice Secretary resonated with the Rangers fans in Scottish football as part of shedding light on the ideologically laden comments.
Figure 1 Article 1. Source ((Watson, 2023))
In analyzing sectarianism in the “No Regrets” article published in 2023 by The Scottish Sun, the consequences of prevailing strains in football were present in which Protestants are associated with the support of Rangers and Celtic supporters are associated with the Catholic faith. In this aspect, sectarianism is developed as an outcome of a symbolic labelling process that defines and maintains the divisions within the community. In the “No Regrets” article, HUMZA Yousaf retweeted a tweet by the Scottish police regarding the Ranges fans celebrating their title win with chants of “f*** the Pope” (Watson, 2023). The comments made by HUMZA Yousaf on the incident confirmed the longstanding and powerful ideological conception of sectarianism within the sport-media with a potentially latent power-laden trajectory. The power dynamics came into play when the then Justice Secretary stated that
“I have also been made aware of this clip, if (and I stress if) this clip is genuine then any player or staff member found to be guilty of anti-Catholic hatred should be shown the door by the Club.It is right Police Scot investigate & determine the facts around it” (Watson, 202In this case, the
The tweet by HUMZA Yoase was considered to illuminate the construction of messages in a manner that supported a particular interpretation of the events that had unfolded. The actions of HUMZA Yousaf, in this case, had already provided a pre-judgement to the incident even before the police held investigations on the matter to ascertain the wrongdoing by the Rangers fans celebrating their title success. In this case, the ideology of HUMZA Yousaf on the matter could not be submerged as it reinforced the power dynamics that reproduce the desired ideologies that support Catholics in a manner that could have directed public opinion against the celebrating fans (Bradley, 2015). The discussion provided above could be interpreted based on the suggestions of Willis (2014; 127), who indicated that:
“Even if ideology cannot totally submerge itself as common sense, it can at least forward plausible suggestions for the reinterpretation of events. Ideology can never afford to let contradictory interpretations of reality go free from at least a crippling ambiguity.”
In this case, it is apparent that even though the comments made by HUMZA Yousaf were based on his personal view and ideology, they provided some plausible suggestions on how to re-interpret the events that have characterized the association of Protestants and Catholics to the support of Rangers and Celtics sports clubs in Scottish football. The potential outcomes of the events contradicted the interpretation of the reality where the causality in relation to the club’s support as a way to poke a jibe at the rival Celtics fans was foregone. The potential for prejudice in the investigations into the incident, therefore, increased considering the position of power that HUMZA Yousaf held at the time as the Scottish justice secretary. The ever-present power relations in Scottish football characterized the contextual sensitivity towards the comments, which presented the judgment that should be presented even though investigations were not concluded, with the police finally concluding that no wrongdoing was found in the “f*** the Pope” chants in title celebration of the Gers fans.
HUMZA Yousaf, in this case, supported his comments based on his position as the Justice Secretary. He stated that:
“I do have to remind you, of course, it was members of the press, quite rightly, who asked me my opinion on that matter and I caveated it appropriately by saying it should be investigated. It was investigated” (Watson, 2023).
Indeed he indicated that the police should investigate the issue, but it is important to note that he had rushed his verdict. In this case, the perception that the anti-Catholic chants were detrimental to religious diversity in Scotland was not the case, as these chants had roots in the Old Firm discourse between the Rangers and Celtic fans (Idham, Subramaniam, and Aljangawi 2022). The outcomes presented above characterize the symbolic labelling process that characterized sectarianism in the text in that it was important to understand the basis of the chants. Symbolic labelling is an issue that characterizes the fans of both Rangers and Celtic fans in Scottish football, which informs the position of both clubs in the sectarian narrative. Justification for discrimination appears in this context backed by the practices and culture of the clubs. According to Kelly (2011), the Celtic club is referenced as sectarian based on its Irish-Catholic links, while the Rangers fans labelling as anti-Catholic coming from the Unionist-Protestant links. The justification for discrimination among the Gers fans is more elaborate, considering that the club did not employ Catholics until 1989 compared to Celtic, which was more open to employment. The aftermath of the HUMZA Yousaf comments on the title celebrations of the Gers fans re-opened the debate on the affirmation of the long-standing sectarianism where the apportioned blame should go both ways and not unilaterally to the Gers fans who chanted “f*** the Pope” (Watson, 2023).
In the scene referenced above, the media failed to provide the right contextualization to the matter following the comments of HUMZA Yousaf highlighting the major flaw in sports media, especially referencing the direction which the sectarianism debate holds in relation to the ideologies of the Rangers and Celtics football clubs. The version of sectarianism presented in Scotland is rather culturally naïve which high proportions of institutionalization in that it has manifested and become legitimate regarding how it is revealed (Bradley, 2015). The rules regarding how the issue is covered are, therefore, different in that it rules other ways of addressing the issue and the knowledge about it. HUMZA Yousaf’s comments before investigations into the matter concluded provided the perception that he supported a verdict of the events favouring the Celtic fans, where Celtic was considered to have strong Irish-Catholic links as opposed to Rangers with the Unionist-Protestant links (Wilson & Stapleton, 2016). The “Old Firm” dualism constructs a powerful ideological imperative highlighting the persistence of equal culpability where the masses are aware of the nuances to the same extent as the media. In this case, the texts and language used by the press strongly influence how the masses interpret them and how the issues captured apply to them in the social world.
The use of the chants by the Gers supporters to insinuate anti-Catholic sentiments is a crippling ambiguity that shapes the prejudice associated with sectarianism in Scotland. It allows it to characterize the power dynamics in describing the protestant/catholic prejudice. The legitimate discussion on sectarianism should therefore be based on facts rather than making comments about matters which have not been investigated, which is perceived to shift the power towards the Irish-Catholic links which resonated with the Celtic fans at the expense of the Rangers fans. It was, therefore, important to note that the anti-Catholic chants by the Gers fans were tolerated in Scotland and were not a song aimed to perpetuate sectarianism. Through the years, such divisions have existed. They are the basis of the Old Firm rivalry between the Rangers and the Celtic fans in that the governmental authorities and Scottish football did not intervene (Bell, Somerville and Hargie, 2020). In this case, the intervention of HUMZA Yousaf was therefore perceived as merely aimed at providing an interpretation that could favour Catholics at the expense of the Protestants and the relations of these standpoints to the ideal of Celtics and Rangers sports clubs.
Part 2 CDA of ‘Johnson And Patel Accused Of Hypocrisy Over Racist Abuse Of England Footballers’ Article
The role of information in the society we live in remains significant. Language significantly influences beliefs, views, and lives as it is designed to meet the different requirements within society (Back & Mills, 2021). Following a period where football in the UK was characterized by whiteness, a series of campaigns have been designed to change the narrative and tackle the problem of racism in top-flight football. A large number of racism incidents have occurred in English football as more and more black players have come out and stood against racism (Lalani & Zafar, 2022). Racism in the English football culture has permeated the political arena, with the UK government stepping its efforts to aid in overcoming the problem of racism. It is, therefore, important to understand how the ideologies and power relations are replicated and strengthened in sports media concerning the incidences of racism.
One of the most high-profile incidents of racism occurred during the 2020 UEFA Euro Football Championship, where the Black England players received racial abuse. After the heightened online racial abuse targeting the Black players in the English national team, some prominent figures pledged their solidarity with the abused players were political figures, including London’s Metropolitan Police. This discourse analysis focuses on the comments of Home Secretary Priti Patel, Prime Minister Boris Johnson and Tory MP Natalie Elphicke following the racial abuse directed at the Black English players during the 2020 UEFA Euro (Mason, 2021). The rhetorical devices employed in this case highlight instances where the comments made by these two political figures reinforced or challenged racism in football within the UK.
In analyzing the ideological messaging related to racism, this essay focused on the article ‘Johnson and Patel accused of hypocrisy over racist abuse of England footballers’ published by the Guardian (Mason, 2021).
Figure 2 Media Text 2: Source ((Mason, 2021))
The article presents the backlash of the people in the UK after the comments made by Johnson and Patel standing in solidarity with the black players that received online racial abuse following the tournament. After the racial abuse directed at the Black England players, Rashford, Sancho and Saka, who missed penalties, Patel tweeted that ”
“Disgusted that England players who have given so much for our country this summer have been subject to vile racist abuse on social media. It has no place in our country and I back the police to hold those responsible accountable” (Mason, 2021).
The tweet indicated that Patel directly got behind the team in rebuking the racial chants. This was not the case, as a hint of hypocrisy was evident in the statement as she had rebuked the previous campaigns by the players to promote racial diversity in football, such as taking a knee. Patel had initially labelled taking the knee as a “gesture of politics” and labeled booing of black players as a “choice” of the fans and nothing serious. These initial sentiments made by Patel propagated the racism incidences against black players in football, indicating that before the 2020 UEFA Euro Football Championship, she did not support anti-racism in football (Mason, 2021). The discussion above confirms the suggestions of Dixon, Lowes, and Gibbons (2016) that the hypocrisy of high-profile political figures was a stumbling block in anti-racism campaigns. When the political figures misinterpreted these anti-racism campaigns, they strongly influenced how the masses perceived their actions and involvement in online racism. These outcomes pave the way for the propagation and continuance of the racist culture in the UK football, where the whites perceive that prejudice is no longer a factor in that the difference between participation and equality becomes blurred (Spencer, 2004). By discrediting the earlier advances in supporting equality in football as “gesture politics,” her comments after the 2020 UEFA Euro Football Championship were interpreted to provide little resolve on the issue of racism. The incident above and the comments and language used by Patel sum up the inability of the UK government to condemn racism, especially for the players who took a knee to support racial equality in football.
Moving to the second political figure Boris Johnson, he tweeted the following after the online racism incidents targeting the Black English players in the 2020 UEFA Euro Football Championship:
“This England team deserve to be lauded as heroes, not racially abused on social media. Those responsible for this appalling abuse should be ashamed of themselves.”
In the tweet referenced above, it could be thought that Boris Johnson solely stood by the players who received racial abuse. But his condemnation of racism after the racial incident was considered hypocritical, as he was considered to provide a modest response to “feel ashamed of themselves” to those who racially abused the black players. The soft stance on racism by the Prime minister indicates that the issue stumbling blocks to overcoming racism in football start from the top. These outcomes typify the findings of Penfold and Cleland (2022) that the government did not support zero tolerance for racism in sports. Another political figure, Natalie Elphicke, was more blatant in her response to the racial abuse directed at the Black English players who participated in the tournament. She tweeted:
“They lost – would it be ungenerous to suggest Rashford should have spent more time perfecting his game and less time playing politics?”
Her comments, as referenced above, provided a clear displeasure in supporting anti-racism by sneering at the inspirational player, which is perceived as a rash reaction. Through her words, she validated the racism targeted at the black English players indicating that they had not put in enough effort to improve their performance, hence warranted the abuse they received (Knight, 202In this case, the language used by Elphase normalized the online racial abuse directed towards the Black English players. The outcomes above highlight inadequate support from the political figures hence the UK government in preventing racism in football. These outcomes contradict the comments by some political figures standing by the black English players to condemn the online racism they received. Some of these political figures (Natalie Elphicke) directly implied tolerance for the racism towards the Black English players from the white majority in the UK.
Conclusion
Critical discourse analysis provides an important avenue for critiquing mainstream media articles relating to sports. This essay assesses media reports through critical discourse analysis while focusing on sectarianism and racism as some of the ideological messaging covered. In the critical analysis of the first article, “No Regrets,” sectarianism framing was captured in how the Scottish press framed the comments of Humza Yousaf. The analysis presented indicated that the sports media failed to provide the required level of sensitivity to addressing the sectarianism issue, which resonated from the Rangers fans signing anti-Catholic chants. This analysis indicated that the sectarianism of this form was tolerated in Scotland and had a long-standing bearing on the Old Firm rivalry between the Rangers and Celtic fans. Therefore, the intervention of Humza Yousaf sought to interpret the events in a non-tolerated context where these chants could be perceived to undermine religious diversity in Scotland. The police investigation and findings of no wrongdoing indicate that this form of anti-Catholic chants was accepted in Scottish football.
The second analysis focused on the incidences of racism in football in the UK and the comments of political figures on the racial abuse received by Black Players. The abovementioned cases present the politics of belonging nation and race in sports. The critical assessment provides a basis for understanding the position of black footballers in the English team with what is regarded as Englishness. The first national belongings of the black players are reinforced in how the political figures speak about the incidences of racism and their actions to condemn racism to provide an environment of zero tolerance. Even though the comments made by Johnson and Patel seemed to stand in solidarity with the black players who were abused for missing penalties, their stances did not strongly reject racism.
References
Back, L. and Mills, K., 2021. ‘When you score you’re English, when you miss you’re Black’: Euro 2020 and the racial politics of a penalty shoot-out. Soundings, 79(79), pp.110-121.
Bell, J., Somerville, I. & Hargie, O. (2020). The structuration of a sporting, social system? Northern Ireland fans, Football for All, and the creation of the Green and White Army. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 55(7), pp.975–990.
Bradley, J.M., (2015). Sectarianism, anti-sectarianism and Scottish football. Sport in Society, 18(5), pp.588–603.
Dabir-Moghadam, M. and Raeesi, H., 2019. A critical discourse analysis of Iranian sports media: A case study. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 8(3), pp.84-92.
Dixon, K., Lowes, J. and Gibbons, T., (2016). Show Racism The Red Card: Potential barriers to effectively implementing the anti-racist message. Soccer & Society, 17(1), pp.140–154.
Fairclough, N., (2002). Language in the new capitalism. Discourse & Society, 13(2), 163–166.
Idham, S.Y., Subramaniam, I. and Aljangawi, R.S.M., 2022. Critical Discourse Analysis of Sectarianism in Congregational Speeches: A Literature Review. Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences Studies, 4(1), pp.172-177.
Kelly, J., (2011). ‘Sectarianism’and Scottish football: Critical reflections on dominant discourse and press commentary. International Review for the Sociology of Sport, 46(4), pp.418–435.
Knight, B. (2021). Boris Johnson’s condemnation of racism in football is hypocrisy, Football | Al Jazeera. Al Jazeera. Available at: https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2021/7/13/boris-johnsons-condemnation-of-racism-in-football-is-hypocrisy (Accessed: April 29, 2023).
Lalani, F. and Zafar, H. (2022). Racial abuse of England players exposes deep societal fractures and the need for change, World Economic Forum. Available at: https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2021/07/racial-abuse-of-england-players-exposes-deep-societal-fractures-and-the-need-for-change/ (Accessed: April 29, 2023).
Mason, R. (2021). Johnson and Patel accused of hypocrisy over racist abuse of England footballers, The Guardian. Guardian News and Media. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/jul/12/tory-mp-sorry-jibe-marcus-rashford-euros-penalty-miss (Accessed: April 29, 2023).
McGeechan, G.J. (2020). Scotland’s continued ‘shame’: Sectarianism in the 21st century and the role of computer-mediated communication. BPS North of England Bulletin, pp.36–40.
O’Regan, J.P. and Betzel, A., 2015. Critical discourse analysis: A sample study of extremism. Research methods in intercultural communication: A practical guide, pp.281-296.
Penfold, C. and Cleland, J., (2022). Kicking It Out? Football Fans’ Views of Anti-Racism Initiatives in English Football. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 46(2), pp.176–198.
Spencer, N.E., (2004). Sister Act VI: Venus and Serena Williams at Indian Wells: “Sincere fictions” and white racism. Journal of Sport and Social Issues, 28(2), pp.115–135.
Watson, R. (2023). Humza Yousaf says he ‘doesn’t regret’ controversial tweet about Rangers, The Scottish Sun. The Scottish Sun. Available at: https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/10350987/humza-yousaf-doesnt-regret-controversial-rangers-tweet/ (Accessed: April 29, 2023).
Willis, P., (2014). Women in sport in ideology. In Sport, Culture, and Ideology (RLE Sports Studies) (pp. 117–135). Routledge.
Wilson, J. and Stapleton, K., (2016). Identity Categories in Use: Britishness, Devolution, and the Ulster-Scots Identity in Northern Ireland. In Devolution and Identity (pp. 21–42). Routledge.
Disney’s Diversification Strategy Essay Example For College
A crucial component of the decision-making process is critical thinking. It uses several strategies to identify the best solution to a given issue. Identifying the problem is the initial stage, after which several fixes are suggested. The proposed remedy is then implemented in a series of plans to see if it works. To choose the optimal option, analysis, and assessment are required. Additionally, it ensures that steps are followed to make correct inferences (Cottrel, 2017). This paper will demonstrate that it is crucial in any firm’s decision-making process when entrusted with resolving any corporate challenges.
Disney’s diversification approach required critical thinking since it allowed for meticulous planning following brainstorming to find the best diversification techniques. For example, students questioned and looked into their sources while applying critical thinking strategies to examine the issue. They realized that the entertainment business was changing quickly, and they needed to keep up to surpass their rivals as the top players in their field.
Moreover, in this case, the context was built utilizing data from public reporting in several different methods. Public reports, for instance, have been used to evaluate the effects of the continually evolving media environment. According to Petersen (2018), they chose to include streaming in their diversification plan after learning that most consumers preferred it to satisfy customer wants and foster business expansion. Moreover, to comprehend the areas they needed to strengthen to achieve their organizational goals, they also used the opinions of the public.
Disney also decided to diversify for several reasons. To increase company revenues, they first chose to introduce new items. In order to sustain their market, they also sought to meet customer demand. Finally, they aimed to expand their firm and sharpen its competitive edge (Walt Disney Firm, 2018). Therefore, the techniques they adopted focused on achieving these three objectives to guarantee that no product struck the bottom low or overall high too hard and to maintain stability even during trying periods like the current epidemic.
It is also important to remember that one step in the diversification process was distinguishing their products to broaden their market base. In order to broaden the range of items accessible to their customers, Disney acquired Lucasfilm and Marvel Studios. Therefore, the company’s primary goal was to cater to clients of all ages, not simply kids and little women (Petersen, 2018). Thus, acquiring the two companies created family-friendly and adult entertainment, contributing to their content diversification.
In every decision-making process, logic, facts, and arguments are essential. Disney made precise forecasts of the impacts of the prospective remedy using logic. Evidence was offered to show how rapidly media was evolving compared to how the world was changing and what needed to be done to keep up. The firm looked at the available possibilities and used arguments to select the one that would work best for their business. Facts, logic, and reasoning all significantly influenced the company’s comprehension of the problem and decision. Therefore, their decision to reorganize when they moved to a new industry was critical.
Finally, despite the pandemic, Disney’s decision to extend its value chain has paid off, as its global sales are still rising. Petersen (2018) states that the company has over 74 million consumers, contributing to its success. Furthermore, it has developed into the most significant media powerhouse in the world, demonstrating that its diversification strategy was crucial to its growth.
References
Cottrell, S. (2017). Critical thinking skills: Effective analysis, argument, and reflection. London: Macmillan International Higher Education.
Petersen, P. (2018). The business model of the Walt Disney Company: Evaluating the potential of the business model in terms of its competitiveness. Munich: GRIN Verlag.
Waltdisneycompany. (2018, March 18). The Walt Disney Company Announces Strategic Reorganization. Thewaltdisneycompany. Retrieved from https://thewaltdisneycompany.com/walt-disney-company-announces-strategic-reorganization/
Domestic Terrorism And The Constitution Sample Essay
Domestic terrorism refers to illegal violence, threat, or harmful operations that negatively affect human life or possibly destroy key resources or critical infrastructure. The primary objective of domestic terrorism is to effect political, social, or other change primarily by individuals or groups of people living and operating within the U.S. and its territories. According to the Constitution’s rules, domestic terrorism offenses are justly punishable (Cornell, 2017). A person who threatens the lives of citizens in a nation is considered a terrorist in a social context. The U.S. Patriot Act of 2001 defined terrorism as threatening or planning to use force against any individual legally protected within a country (Cornell, 2017). Many individuals and groups identified as domestic terrorists are increasingly becoming transnational in activities and outlooks. Recently, there has been an alarming increase in attacks by persons inspired by a wide range of domestic terrorist ideas, including ethnically and racially-motivated inspired extremism, such as anti-authority and anti-government violent extremism, white supremacist extremism, and other conceptual strains that prompt terrorist violence. This paper provides a detailed discussion regarding methods of radicalization of individuals and appropriate and constitutional steps to combat this radicalization of U.S. persons and domestic terrorist activities.
Methods of Radicalization of Persons
Terrorism in the United States has significantly escalated since the 1950s. Despite several federal government initiatives to stop radicalization, there have been more terrorist incidents every decade. The Boston Marathon bombing, for example, provides a compelling argument to support the assertions that domestic terrorism is on the rise (Ray, 2022). Individuals can get radicalized via several different techniques. Research indicates that unemployment is a significant factor in the radicalization and emergence of most violent extremists. According to Jensen et al. (2020), there is a higher chance of radicalization and terrorism among most unemployed people. In the study’s evaluation of the social and economic backgrounds of the violent extremists, it was discovered that more than 60% were unemployed, which led them to get radicalized to despise the populace and the government for their circumstances (Jensen et al., 2020). Motivating people to become radicalized is another method. These groups may influence people’s behavior through their religious convictions. For example, someone may change to a more conservative interpretation of Islam and develop a different perspective on those who do not come within their tent. According to FBI studies, mosques, gatherings, and places of employment serve as the entry points for radicalization (Ranstorp, 1996). Due to the impact of religion, people become identified as believers, along with all the associated doctrines. The role of religion in radicalizing jihadist militants has been the subject of discussion. Most research concludes that it has a significant impact on the procedure. Most nations where Islam is the predominant religion have counter-radicalization policies in place. The jihadist is thought of as a crazy individual who misinterprets the Koran. For instance, Judge Hamoud Hitar of Yemen ruled that violent jihadists should be jailed because they misled people (Jensen et al., 2020).
The religion of Islam has also been cited as the primary factor in the radicalization of Americans. For instance, the 9/11 tragedy sparked intense discussion about Muslims in the United States because it was alleged that they were responsible. The majority of Americans contended that it should be permissible to search for terrorists in Muslim communities since it is the goal of Islam to support terrorism (Ranstorp, 1996). As seen by recent demonstrations in Manhattan against mosque buildings, the idea that Islam serves as a prelude to terrorism seems to have taken root in the American mentality. The First Amendment argued that it was unreliable to attribute a terrorist attack to a particular religion (Cordesman, 2002). However, most persons who engage in this activity do not consistently practice their religion, according to British M15 surveys. According to Cornell (2017), a terrorist is a gang of criminals who disguise themselves as followers of a religion. As a result, it is incorrect to assume that a particular faith is more likely to support terrorism.
The internet is a different radicalization resulting in internal and international terrorism. About twenty years ago, terrorist organizations were radicalized and recruited online. Internet radicalization is defined as the process through which people are exposed to ideologies, belief systems, and communications that induce a shift from conventional beliefs to extremist views of a particular country’s government (Grover & Mark, 2019). Online radicalization uses Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube, among other social networks. The opposite perspectives justify, encourage, and incite violence and have the most incredible variety of adherents due to radical interpretations of traditional religious or political ideas. Individuals become radicalized gradually due to their continued commitment to terrorist ideologies; it does not start after viewing only one article or video. Online, radical recruiters with a reputation for persuasion can be found. The recruiting team focuses on a specific group with unique issues. The recruiters may make derogatory statements about their adversaries to demonstrate how they oppose them, stir up trouble, and incite violence (Grover & Mark, 2019). Individuals who have reservations about the intended audience may join the radical group.
Extremists disseminate videos with construction instructions for explosives and weapons, asserting that everyone has a right to know and that they must discover why such material is kept secret from the general public. People like to express their approval when terrorists use social media sites like Facebook to discuss in code how they will carry out assaults. Additionally, they might communicate with their supporters and disseminate their radical ideals through dating and chat sites. According to the U.S. Department of Justice (2022), Chesser, an 18-year-old teenager, reportedly radicalized himself online in 2008 after converting to Islam. A change in the boy’s behavior led to him posting terrorism-related views, being recruited, and joining the extremists. After discovering his missing passport, Chesser tried to move to Somalia but was unsuccessful. Chesser attempted to give financial assistance to a foreign terrorist organization before being apprehended in 2010 and entering a guilty plea to express threats (U.S. Department of Justice, 2022). Chesser received a 25-year sentence. Another factor that fuels radicalization is the existence of active gangs in the United States. Young people want to gain a sense of belonging, and due to peer pressure, most of them are influenced to join active gang groups. The formation of such groups serves as an excellent environment or setting to inspire radicalization and engagement in illegal operations and activities for the attainment of certain political or social goals.
Appropriate and Constitutional Steps to Combat This Radicalization of U.S. Persons and Domestic Terrorist Activities
Following the advice of the First and Fourth Amendments, the American government has worked nonstop to combat radicalization and domestic terrorism. According to the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution, a judge must approve the issuance of a search warrant before a domestic terrorist is arrested (Hellman, 2020). The Amendment also punishes offenders with severe fines and excessively high bond amounts. The Constitution forbids using bail and other money to secure the release of suspects in domestic terrorism before trial. Every court that pursues defendants in criminal cases follows the law. In this instance, the ban on cruel and unusual punishment applies explicitly to domestic terrorism. Civil rights and liberty organizations claim that radicals and domestic terrorists are exposed to harsh and unreasonable court standards. Nonetheless, the First and Fourth Amendments forbid using thumbscrews and gibbets (Hellman, 2020). The amendments, which restrict how severely criminal justice courts can punish offenders, were incorporated into the Bill of Rights. The court’s ability to prosecute and convict people who commit offenses that fall under specific categories is constrained by three clauses: bail, fines, and punishments. The revisions likewise cover sentences for domestic terrorism.
The government has made significant steps to counteract internet-related radicalization and domestic terrorism, but more must be done. Community policing should be used by law enforcement authorities to combat online radicalization. There is no way to measure the incidences of radicalization that result in online radicals. Law enforcement must understand that publishing extremist content online and becoming radicalized does not automatically make someone a criminal. According to the First Amendment, individuals enjoy the right to freedom of expression, of the press, and of religion (Spencer, 2017). However, the Amendment also specifies several circumstances where the privileges mentioned may be revoked. For instance, if someone uses the internet to plan, enable, or participate in violent acts or criminal activity. In addition, law enforcement organizations can open social media profiles to engage with the public in many ways. Media defendants are protected from punishment for publishing illegal communications under the First Amendment if there is a public discussion about the issue and the respondent did not obtain the information illegally (Spencer, 2017). Thus, it is essential for law enforcement. According to the Fourth Amendment, probable cause must exist before an individual can be arrested.
The use of the First and Second Amendments in dealing with convicts is demonstrated by examining domestic terror attack cases, such as the Boston Marathon bombing (Ray, 2022). Initially, the Patriot Act’s analysis of domestic terrorism would have been used. The Patriotic Act’s Section 802 defines domestic terrorism as crimes that endanger human life, are conducted on American soil, and impact governmental policies. Section 810 of the same Act states that those committing such violations should be subject to the most severe penalties (Ray, 2022). The Department of Justice states that domestic terrorists may receive a life sentence. In addition, a domestic terror conviction might result in a fine of up to $250,000 imposed by the court. However, the penalties vary depending on the offense. The maximum and lowest acceptable amounts for each offense are established by the statute governing that particular crime. Second, Section 810 allows the criminal court to decide how much time in jail and other sanctions to impose. Prison time for life-threatening arson, 10–20 years for having a weapon and explosives, destroying gas infrastructure, and aiding terrorists are among the punishments (U.S. Department of Justice, 2022). For destroying property worth more than $100,000 or sabotaging a nuclear facility, one may receive a 10–20-year sentence in prison. When death comes from the offenses above, death punishment and life imprisonment are applicable.
The Patriot Act provides direction about fines and penalties for domestic terrorism violations. Secondly, a maximum 60-month prison sentence can be imposed on someone who conspires to commit domestic terrorism. However, few punishments, fees, and bonds are on par with what convicted criminals would face for violating federal law. Section 811 also contains the same laws for conspirators. Other laws that affect the Fourth Amendment are those that track terrorists after their release and classify it as racketeering. Domestic terrorists who have served over a year in prison are subject to a maximum of 60 months of supervised release (Maldonado, 2020). In the event of predictable radicalization and terrorist acts, a released prisoner may be under lifetime supervision. The Boston Marathon bombing raises awareness of domestic terrorism penalties (Ray, 2022). The Federal Department imposed a death sentence on Tsarnaev. Before the principal criminal received the death penalty, a survey of Boston residents indicated that 61% preferred life in prison to the death penalty. The court upheld its position in the case, notwithstanding the resident’s and the witnesses’ vehement objections to the death penalty. The first debate on using the death penalty for domestic terrorists arose during Tsarnaev’s trial (Ray, 2022). Since the attacks of September 11, only one criminal has faced the guillotine. These data demonstrate that domestic terrorists are treated fairly.
The bombing at the Boston Marathon draws attention to the state of domestic terrorism prosecution methods. The Department of Justice imposed the death penalty on Tsarnaev. Before the principal criminal received the death penalty, a survey of Boston residents indicated that 61% preferred life in prison to the death penalty (Maldonado, 2020). The court maintained its stance on the issue despite the resident and witnesses’ passionate arguments regarding the death punishment. The first debate concerning the death sentence for domestic terrorists arose during Tsarnaev’s trial. Since the September 11 attacks, only one perpetrator has been executed. These figures demonstrate the equitable treatment of homegrown terrorists. Unusually, Timothy Mc Veigh is the only person to have been executed after being found responsible for crimes related to terrorism (Maldonado, 2020). Fourteen domestic terrorists have been sentenced to death by judges and prosecutors during the past 17 years. Compared to the number of instances involving death sentences, not many criminals have been charged with terrorism. After examining various cases, it appears that terrorist defendants resolved their cases through a plea agreement.
The USA Patriotic Act, passed by Congress in October 2001, provided the government the authority to broaden the definition of “homegrown terrorism” in terrorist legislation (Cordesman, 2002). The verdict appeared to follow the particular punishment clause in this instance. The Supreme Court determined in Furman v. Georgia in 1972 that the death penalty was unconstitutional before it was implemented (Ranstorp, 1996). The death penalty was reinstated by the court, nonetheless, in 1977. In the case of Gregg v. Georgia, the court decided on the grounds of retaliation and deterrence (Cornell, 2017). The two arguments are explored about the decision’s fairness. According to the retribution strategy, the impact of terrorism on humanity mandates that the death sentence is a suitable punishment and an accurate representation of societal opinion. Comparatively, the deterrence strategy claims that the severity of the penalties associated with the death penalty deters terrorist attacks.
Conclusion
Terrorism in the U.S. has significantly rocketed since the 1950s. Despite several federal government initiatives to stop radicalization, there have been more terrorist incidents every decade. Key factors influencing radicalization include unemployment, religion, the internet, and the desire for belonging and approval. The First and Fourth Amendments provide a firm foundation for the American government to combat radicalization and domestic terrorism. Also, the government has made significant steps to counteract internet-related radicalization and domestic terrorism, such as community policing and the justice department. Other laws like the USA Patriotic Act provide the government the authority to broaden the definition of “homegrown terrorism” in terrorist legislation. The effective implementation of anti-domestic terrorism laws and measures can be a key approach to increasing the country’s security, hence guaranteeing all citizens’ safety.
References
Cordesman, A. H. (2002). Terrorism, asymmetric warfare, and weapons of mass destruction: Defending the U.S. homeland. Greenwood Publishing Group. https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/lasting-challenge-strategy-counterterrorism-and-asymmetric-warfare
Cornell, J. (2017). Fighting Domestic Terrorism! (Doctoral dissertation, Washington University). https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1081&context=samfox_art_etds
Grover, T., & Mark, G. (2019, July). Detecting potential warning behaviors of ideological radicalization in an alt-right subreddit. In Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media (Vol. 13, pp. 193-204). https://ojs.aaai.org/index.php/ICWSM/article/view/3221
Hellman, A. D. (2020). The Supreme Court’s Two Constitutions: A First Look at the” Reverse Polarity” Cases. U. Pitt. L. Rev., 82, 273. https://scholarship.law.pitt.edu/fac_articles/320/
Jensen, M. A., Atwell Seate, A., & James, P. A. (2020). Radicalization to violence: A pathway approach to studying extremism. Terrorism and Political Violence, 32(5), 1067-1090. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2020-55135-009
U.S. Department of Justice. (2022, March 28). Virginia man pleads guilty to providing material support to a foreign terrorist organization and encouraging violent jihadists to kill U.s. Citizens. Department of Justice | United States Department of Justice. https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/virginia-man-pleads-guilty-providing-material-support-foreign-terrorist-organization-and
Maldonado, L. (2020). Why There Should Be a Law Against U.S. Domestic Terrorism. https://digitalcommons.csumb.edu/caps_thes_all/810/
Ranstorp, M. (1996). Terrorism in the Name of Religion. Journal of international affairs, 41-62. https://risweb.st-andrews.ac.uk/portal/en/researchoutput/terrorism-in-the-name-of-religion(5e7db3b1-5614-45e8-949b-e0556f084c7b)/export.html
Spencer, S. B. (2017). Predictive surveillance and the threat to fourth amendment jurisprudence. ISJLP, 14, 109. https://scholarship.law.umassd.edu/fac_pubs/227/
Ray, M. (2022, March 4). Boston Marathon bombing of 2013. Encyclopedia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/event/Boston-Marathon-bombing-of-2013