当有关潜在恐怖袭击的消息传出时，最初的报道往往显得像是在刻意保持政治正确性。《纽约时报》周三因发布这样一条推文而遭到批评：“以色列官员称，一架从迪拜飞往以色列的飞机因机长与副驾驶发生争执而被迫改道。”
When news of a potential terrorist attack breaks, the first draft can sound like an attempt to maintain political correctness. The New York Times came under attack on Wednesday for tweeting, "A plane flying from Dubai to Israel was diverted after an altercation between the pilot and co-pilot, Israeli officials said."
在网友纷纷调侃“争执”这一措辞后，《纽约时报》的公关团队随即反击称：“我们的标题及实时报道均基于目前能够确认的事实。与激进分子及立场偏颇的人士不同，我们不会发布毫无根据的猜测或未经证实的信息。”不过，如果有人觉得《纽约时报》毫无偏激或激进色彩，那恐怕是根本没认真读过它的报道。
After people mocked the "altercation" lingo, the Times PR team counter-attacked: "Our headlines and live coverage contain all the facts we're able to confirm as we confirm them. Unlike activists and partisans, we don't publish speculation or unverified information." Anyone who thinks The Times doesn’t give off partisan activist vibes isn’t reading it.
英国广播公司发布的突发新闻标题同样平淡无奇：“飞往以色列的航班因飞行员争执而改道。”这一表述听起来更像是一场口角而已。不过其下方的简短报道倒是如实写道：“两名以色列官员称，据信副驾驶刺伤了机长并试图使飞机坠毁。”相比之下，美国各大电视网周三早上的报道则更为直白。在《今日秀》节目中，NBC记者马特·布拉德利直言不讳：“那架航班上确实发生了暴力事件，飞机还发出了劫机警报。”机上一名乘客也证实，机长确实遭到了刺伤。
The British Broadcasting Corporation posted a similarly bland breaking-news headline: "Israel-bound flight diverted after fight between pilots." This sounded a little like a verbal spat. At least the brief report underneath relayed, "Two Israeli officials said the co-pilot is believed to have stabbed the captain and tried to crash the plane." The American broadcast networks didn’t perform this way on Wednesday morning. On "Today," NBC reporter Matt Bradley was more straightforward: "There was some sort of violent incident on board that flight. The plane sent out a hijacking alert." A passenger on the plane correctly relayed the pilot had been stabbed.
印度总理称迪拜航空的飞行员展现了“最高级别的勇气”。美国广播公司记者伊恩·潘内尔则直接使用了“恐怖袭击”这一词汇：“目前事态仍在发展中，但越来越像是一起恐怖袭击事件。”不过，精英媒体的一贯作风便是即便动机显而易见，也会刻意放慢节奏、谨慎下结论。一架载满前往特拉维夫的以色列人的飞机遭遇劫机未遂，这一事实本身就足以说明袭击者对以色列怀有敌意。正如各家媒体所报道的那样，以色列方面随即紧急出动战机拦截那架波音737 Max，随后才解除警戒状态。
FLYDUBAI PILOT SHOWED WORLD 'THE HIGHEST FORM OF COURAGE,' INDIA'S PM SAYS ABC’s Ian Pannell used the T-word: "This is a rapidly developing story, but it is looking increasingly like a terrorist incident." But the usual instinct for elitist media is to move very slowly to guess about the motive – even if it might seem obvious. An attempted hijacking of a plane full of Israelis headed for Tel Aviv suggests a hostility to Israel. The Israelis clearly suspected a new version of the 9/11 hijacking, as the networks reported they scrambled jets to intercept the Boeing 737 Max before standing down.
迪拜航空英雄飞行员称：副驾驶遭袭击后飞机急速下坠，自己当时“拼了命在求生”。不过，一些媒体在探寻事件动机时却试图牵扯政治因素。《PBS新闻一小时》的主持人杰夫·贝内特采访了曾任职于克林顿和奥巴马政府时期的朱丽叶·凯姆。他开口问道：“以色列总理称，那名副驾驶接受了所谓的伊斯兰极端主义思想灌输。特朗普总统则把矛头指向伊朗。但双方均未提供任何证据……目前，关于事件动机我们能负责任地说些什么呢？”
HERO FLYDUBAI PILOT SAYS HE WAS 'FIGHTING FOR MY LIFE' AS PLANE PLUNGED AFTER COPILOT ATTACK But some networks had to smell politics in their hunt for a motive. "PBS News Hour" anchor Geoff Bennett talked to former Clinton and Obama official Juliette Kayyem. He began: "Israel's prime minister says the co-pilot underwent what he called Islamist radical indoctrination. President [Donald] Trump has pointed to Iran. Neither has provided evidence. … What can we responsibly say, if anything, about the motive at this point?"
凯姆回应道：“没错。我很高兴你提到了‘负责任地发言’这一点。每次发生危机、恐怖事件或灾难后，往往很快就会出现一些出于政治目的而刻意传播的言论。我认为眼下我们应当把这些因素暂且搁置一边——毕竟眼下正值选举时期。”
Kayyem replied: "Right. So, and I'm glad you say that about responsibly say. After every crisis, terror incident, disaster, there's a narrative that forms very early that is often pushed for political reasons. I think we should just put those to the side aside right now, that that just happens. There are elections."
随后凯姆承认，从常理推断，“最主流的推测”无疑是这名副驾驶企图让载有以色列人的飞机坠毁，这自然指向恐怖主义。不过她指出：“我们目前尚不清楚的是，所谓的极端思想灌输过程究竟是怎样发生的；至于该事件是否与某个恐怖组织甚至伊朗有关联，也尚存疑问。”这种极端化过程可能是个人自发形成的，而“如果确属伊朗这类国家资助的恐怖主义行为——要知道以色列和美国都曾对伊朗宣战——那么后果将截然不同。”
CBC TELLS JOURNALISTS NOT TO CALL 9/11 ‘TERRORIST ATTACKS’ IN INTERNAL GUIDANCE Then Kayyem acknowledged that it seems obvious that the "leading theory" would be a co-pilot trying to crash a plane of Israelis in Israel suggests terrorism. "What we don't know and the suspicion or allegations that this is related to a terrorist organization or even Iran is what that radicalization process was like." It could be self-radicalization, or "If it's state-sponsored terrorism, like Iran, a country that Israel and the United States have started a war against, that is a very different consequence."
不过她也提出，这或许只是单纯的“心理健康问题”。一位CNN专家则认为这很可能属于“职场暴力”。的确，驾驶舱也是工作场所，但从事件情形来看，当事人的绝望情绪显而易见。
But she suggested it could just be "mental-health" issues. An expert on CNN suggested it might just be "workplace violence." Well, the cockpit is a workplace, but the desperation here is obvious.
NPR电台的《晨间新闻》栏目则请来了倾向民主党的前CNN分析员菲利普·马德，询问特朗普与以色列总理本雅明·内塔尼亚胡的政治动机是否会影响此次事件的调查。
NPR’s "Morning Edition" turned to Democrat-leaning former CNN analyst Philip Mudd, asking him if the political motivations of Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin "Bibi" Netanyahu are going to cloud the investigation.
选举期间发生的恐怖袭击事件或许会让美国人想起2012年9月11日——当时一群恐怖分子闯入美国驻利比亚班加西领事馆，导致美国大使及其他三名美国人丧生。
Terrorism incidents during election season might remind Americans of Sept. 11, 2012 – when a pack of terrorists broke into the American consulate in Benghazi, Libya, leading to the death of the U.S. ambassador and three other Americans.
共和党候选人米特·罗姆尼质疑巴拉克·奥巴马总统对利比亚问题的处理方式，此举遭到各大电视网的抨击。媒体研究中心对班加西事件报道首日的内容进行分析后发现：ABC、CBS和NBC三家电视台用了9分28秒来渲染“罗姆尼举止失礼”这一话题，而关于奥巴马中东政策的报道却仅有25秒。
All the networks turned on Republican nominee Mitt Romney for questioning President Barack Obama’s handling of Libya. A Media Research Center analysis of the first night of Benghazi coverage found the Romney-is-rude angle received nine minutes and 28 seconds of coverage on ABC, CBS, and NBC, while only 25 seconds focused on Obama’s Middle East policies.
奥巴马转向CBS记者史蒂夫·克罗夫特——这位他在《60分钟》节目中可以信赖的“捧场搭档”——说道：“罗姆尼州长似乎有先行动后思考的倾向，而领导人必须确保自己的言论有事实依据。”克罗夫特顺势追问：“您认为这种行为是不负责任的吗？”奥巴马答道：“这个问题就留给美国民众来评判吧。”当然，这是在各大电视网连日大肆攻击罗姆尼之后才说的。
Obama turned to CBS reporter Steve Kroft, his reliable "60 Minutes" softball pitcher, and said, "Governor Romney seems to have a tendency to shoot first and aim later" when you have to "make sure that the statements you make are backed up by the facts." Kroft nudged: "Do you think it was irresponsible?" Obama said, "I’ll let the American people judge that." Sure, after the networks pounded home the Romney attacks.
几天后，奥巴马团队莫名其妙地声称：班加西袭击事件应归咎于一段引发民众自发抗议的YouTube视频，因此这并非“有预谋的袭击”。就在大选前夕，CBS播出了克罗夫特在9月份对奥巴马的采访片段，奥巴马在采访中明确称那是对美国人的袭击而非抗议活动；不过这段内容直到大选结束后才在电视上播出。
CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION A few days later, Team Obama bizarrely claimed the Benghazi attack could be blamed on a YouTube video that spurred spontaneous protests, so there was no "pre-planned attack." Right before the election, CBS posted more of Kroft’s Obama interview in September where Obama said it was an attack on Americans, not a protest. But that didn’t air on television until the election was over.
各大电视网实在没资格指责保守派人士会在选举期间出于党派目的歪曲恐怖袭击事件——毕竟它们自己就常这么做。
The broadcast networks are the last people who should suggest you can’t trust conservatives because they might spin terrorism incidents in a partisan way in election season.