How does media decide when to use term "gunman" vs "terrorist"?

[enhanced_deficit]

By definition, alleged shooter who killed civilians in Synagogue had a political motive (to attack group that he perceived to be supporting influx of refugees in US) but literally all US media headlines are using the label "gunman" or "shooter" and not a single MSM headline has used the label "terrorist". Only some foreign media headlines are using "terrorist" label for him.
What is media owners/editors' criterion to pick labels for such actors?

Robert Bowers, alleged Pittsburgh synagogue gunman, left trail of chilling, anti-Semitic social media posts

Dylan Stableford Senior Editor
Yahoo News October 27, 2018

The man who authorities say opened fire at the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh, Pa., on Saturday morning, killing 11 people and injuring six others, had a long history of anti-Semitic social media posts.
The alleged gunman, Robert Bowers, 46, of Pittsburgh, was taken into custody after surrendering to police. He was transported to a local hospital with unspecified injuries. FBI Special Agent Bob Jones said that Bowers was armed with an “AR-15 style” rifle in addition to three handguns. Bowers was not known to law enforcement before Saturday, Jones added.
According to KDKA, Pittsburgh’s CBS affiliate, Bowers walked into the building and yelled “All Jews must die” before opening fire. Federal officials are investigating the shooting as a hate crime.

Robert Bowers (Photo: Pennsylvania Department of Transportation)

Bowers was an active user of Gab, a Twitter alternative that promotes itself as supporting free speech.
An account appearing to belong to Bowers — now deactivated — was littered with anti-Semitic messages. His bio on the site read “jews are the children of satan.”
The most recent post, published shortly before the shooting, criticized the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society (HIAS) for its resettlement of refugees.


Law enforcement officers at the scene of a shooting at the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh, Pa., on Saturday. (Photo: Alexandra Wimley/Pittsburgh Post-Gazette via AP)

“HIAS likes to bring in invaders that kill our people,” he wrote. “I can’t sit by and watch my people get slaughters.”
The post concluded with a chilling message: “Screw your optics, I’m going in.”
In a post from two days ago, Bowers wrote that President Trump is “a globalist, not a nationalist.” It also referred to the so-called “QAnon” conspiracy.
“There is no #MAGA as long as there is a kike infestation,” he added.

In another online post, Bowers showed off his collection of handguns, calling them “my glock family.”
In a statement, Gab administrators said they suspended Bowers’s profile once they’d been alerted to a verified account matching the name of the suspected shooter.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/robert-bo...183646761.html


Same is case in other high profile cases of alleged violence with political motivations.


Related

Synagoge-terrorist Robert Bowers was vaste klant op 'alternatief ...
De Dagelijkse Standaard (Blog)-11 hours ago
Gezien mijn ervaringen op dat 'platform' verbaast het me totaal niet dat synagoge-terrorist Robert Bowers er een veel geziene 'gast' was.

[osan]

By definition, alleged shooter who killed civilians in Synagogue had a political motive (to attack group that he perceived to be supporting influx of refugees in US) but literally all US media headlines are using the label "gunman" or "shooter" and not a single MSM headline has used the label "terrorist". Only some foreign media headlines are using "terrorist" label for him.
What is media owners/editors' criterion to pick labels for such actors?

"Terrorist" tends to place focus on the act. "Gunman" places focus on the instrumentality.

[Pauls' Revere]

Whichever provides the highest clickbait rate.

[nikcers]

They usually define terrorists as not believing in values or religions that westernized countries do. The real thing is not to pay attention to the mass migration policies of the last decade but the cause and the true motive. The humanitarians want you to believe that their cause is altruistic. This is so far removed from reality though the true reason why they do this is to stop terrorist cells from being created after intervention and regime change in the middle east by taking in some of the people especially the more smarty and crafty ones. Those are the ones you don't want as your enemies.

[Swordsmyth]

They usually define terrorists as not believing in values or religions that westernized countries do. The real thing is not to pay attention to the mass migration policies of the last decade but the cause and the true motive. The humanitarians want you to believe that their cause is altruistic. This is so far removed from reality though the true reason why they do this is to stop terrorist cells from being created after intervention and regime change in the middle east by taking in some of the people especially the more smarty and crafty ones. Those are the ones you don't want as your enemies.

If you are right then they are stupid, letting the "refugees" in doesn't pacify them, it just lets them past your first line of defense.

[Schifference]

Terminology is dependent upon what the handlers are paying for.

[CaptainAmerica]

this is what an American hero looks like ,especially the politically famous ones who accuse their opposition.


this is what an american terrorist looks like.

[acptulsa]

"They" don't decide anything. They just print the AP story verbatim; they don't dare change a word.

As to how the AP decides, I believe their current MO is to save the word terrorist for people who can build bombs that actually go off.

[Weston White]

It namely just depends if we talking about "fake" or 'real' news?

[Schifference]

If a law enforcement officer is the killer, they simply discharged their weapon.

[acptulsa]

If a law enforcement officer is the killer, they simply discharged their weapon.

Never. A LEO never, ever discharges a weapon. Their weapons do discharge. To hear the MSM tell it, however, those weapons discharge all on their own.

[nikcers]

If you are right then they are stupid, letting the "refugees" in doesn't pacify them, it just lets them past your first line of defense.

If you want to destroy a culture than lowering the IQ of the population and taking in the best people and keeping a closer eye on them by installing government surveillance on your own citizens might make it easier. It even goes with the MAGA immigration policy.