Phil Taylor's papers
|
BACK TO : PROPAGANDA AND THE GWOT Year 3 - 2004 (mainly Iraq)
Americans Unprepared for Psychological Terror by Todd Zwillich 
Americans Unprepared for Psychological Terror More Psychological Counterterrorism Needed, Say Experts By Todd Zwillich WebMD Medical News Reviewed By Michael Smith, MD on Tuesday, June 29, 2004 June 29, 2004 -- In their zeal for physical security, U.S. policy makers may be ignoring terrorists' most potent weapon: fear. Several experts say that the government has not done enough to teach Americans how to reduce or manage their fear of an attack, making it more likely that the next strike will cause the mayhem and disarray that terrorists crave. They call it "psychological counterterrorism," which is really a fancy term for using education to immunize the public against debilitating fear. And some say the U.S. is way behind in figuring out how to use it effectively in the 21st century. "Terrorists magnify fear by trying to instill in every individual the feeling that the next terror attack may have their name on it," says Michael Barnett, MD, a psychiatrist in private practice and aide to Rep. Patrick Kennedy (D-R.I.). Threats in Proportion While fearing terror is quite normal, Barnett points out that spectacular and horrific attacks, such as those on Sept. 11, can make people quickly lose a sense of proportionality. Some 2,760 Americans lost their lives at the hands of foreign terrorists between 1998 and 2002, and 97.5% of those were on 9/11. Meanwhile, heart disease and cancer together killed more than 1.25 million Americans in 2001 alone. More than 44,000 died in car accidents in 2002, "yet I've never met anyone who says, 'I'm terrified to get in my car,'" says Barnett. He helped author a congressional bill proposing to make psychological preparedness part of the nation's antiterror program by teaching average citizens about "terrorist manipulations" of the media and the public. "The way to counter psychological warfare is with psychological warfare," says Jerrold Post, MD, director of the political psychology program at George Washington University, and who has also spent 21 years working with the CIA. The bill has so far failed to get any serious consideration on Capitol Hill. Even if it does, others warn that little is known how to craft effective messages for the highly diverse, media-saturated U.S. population. Color Codes Criticized Mass-psychology efforts are nothing new in America. The Cold War's "Duck-and-Cover" campaign and World War II's neighborhood air-raid drills were much more about national cohesion and empowerment than avoiding German bombers or Soviet nuclear strikes, many historians suggest. Yet the war on terror's closest analogy, the Bush administration's color-coded Threat Advisory system, has done little to empower Americans and may serve only to confuse them, Post says. Fire and police departments all use the rising and falling color-coded system to gauge alert levels. "But there is not yet any corresponding clear guidelines for the man in the street as to what to do about the level," Post tells WebMD. Still the national threat level, now at "yellow" for "elevated," is highlighted on every news program whenever it changes. "I think that's totally confounding for most of the general public," says Post. Daniel Dodgen, PhD, emergency management coordinator for the U.S. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, warns that the Threat Advisory system has become ineffective. "I don't even pay attention to the alert levels any more until they change radically," he admits. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security did not respond to an interview request for this article. Many experts remain perplexed about what can be done to arm the public against fear should another attack hit U.S. soil in the near future. Finding a single message that resonates with people speaking different languages as well as those living in cities, suburbs, or farming communities may be impossible. "All Americans are not going to respond to any [one] thing. Frankly we don't have the answer to any of these things," says Dodgen. Experts say they need more research on what kinds of messages could be most effective for public preparedness. "The fact is you have to decide how frightened you're going to be," says Barnett. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SOURCES: Michael Barnett, MD, psychiatrist; and aide to Rep. Patrick Kennedy (D-R.I.). Jerrold Post, MD, director, political psychology program, George Washington University. Rep. Jim McDermott (D-Wash.). Daniel Dodgen, PhD, emergency management coordinator, U.S. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. |