1 Victims’ expectations and experiences with support in the aftermath of terrorist attacks
An explorative research on what can be learned from victims’ perspectives shared in the media
Laura E. Achtereekte
S1359282
L.e.achtereekte@umail.leidenuniv.nl
+31 6 31 99 05 42
Master Crisis & Security Management
Supervisor: Dr. W. Jong
2
Abstract
As attention for terrorism increases, the support for those affected becomes more important as well. Terrorist crises ask for public leadership, specifically in terms of support in the aftermath. The media is an important factor in reporting on victims’ expectations of authorities and their experiences and needs. Therefore it is crucial for authorities to understand victims’ perspectives. A media content analysis was conducted to explore the expectations and experiences of the affected in relation to authorities and what can be learned from it. Both an inductive and deductive approach have been used to analyze the dominant themes and framing devices in the press reporting. Findings revealed that transparency, reliability, equality, acknowledgement and recognition, unity and solidarity, and responsibility are important values in the victims’ expectations of governmental support. A significant discrepancy is found between the support victims’ expect from authorities and the experience with the support they receive, which leads to distress. Help and support is expected, and most importantly they want to be heard and understood in their victimization.
3
Index
1 Introduction 5
2 Background and theoretical framework 2.1. Defining victimization
2.2. Needs of victims of terrorism 2.3. Media 2.4. Meaning-making 10 10 11 13 15 3 Methodology 3.1. Cases 3.2. Data collection 3.2.1. News articles 3.2.2. Additional sources 3.3. Data analysis 3.3.1. Inductive analysis 3.3.2. Deductive analysis 17 17 17 18 20 21 21 22 4 Results 4.1. Dominant themes 4.1.1. Transparency 4.1.2. Reliability 4.1.3. Equality
4.1.4. Acknowledgment and recognition 4.1.5. Unity and solidarity
4.1.6. Responsibility 4.2. The use of framing devices
4.2.1. Episodic framing 4.2.2. Human interest
4.2.3. Responsibility and blame 4.2.4. Stereotyping 4.2.5. Anchoring 24 24 24 25 26 27 30 31 34 34 34 34 35 35 5 Discussion
5.1. Victimization and needs 5.2. Media framing
5.3. Implications for practice
37 37 38 40
4 6 Conclusion
6.1. Directions for further research 6.2. Limitations 43 44 45 7 Bibliography 46 Appendix I Appendix II 51 56
5
1. Introduction
Due to worldwide large-scale terrorist acts, there is an increase in attention for, and awareness of the fight against terrorism. Terrorism seeks "to produce large-scale victimization in order to provoke maximum public attention, often referred to as 'catastrophic terrorism’” (Letschert et al., 2010: p. 3) and aims for global transformation (Fischer-Prebler et al., 2019). Terrorism is aimed to not only terrorize the individuals, however is used to shock a broader community or country (Rogers et al., 2007). Terrorist attacks are unpredictable and, therefore a perfect fit to create a climate of fear (Almeida & Moroz, 2017). The ultimate goal of terrorism is of psychological nature (Bux & Coyne, 2009). The sudden occurrence of a threat may create the perception, or possible reality, of an ongoing threat. Besides the affected, it can result in destabilization of the society (Baez, et al., 2017).
Terrorist crises ask for public leadership, specifically in terms of support for victims. People experiencing crises are demanding governmental action (Boin & 't Hart, 2003). Organized victim movements started to appear in the UK, the US, Canada and Australia around the seventies and early eighties because they believed that victims were neglected or mistreated by society and the legal system (Booth & Carrington, 2007). The voices of victims and victim associations have begun to be heard after terrorist crimes have been committed (Schmid, 2012). Research by RAND Centre for Terrorism Risk Management Policy (2007) describes the growing influence of groups formed by victims of terrorism in the United States. Victims groups arose after The Pan Am 103 and 9/11 attacks and showed a progression in influence on government and its policy. A new level of power was created to meet the needs of the affected and to fight for justice and improvements, which eventually have been made in national and aviation security (Hoffman & Kasupski, 2007). To illustrate, "Voices of September 11" contributed to developing support services and educational programs to create community resilience1. Also, Spanish victims' associations put in many efforts to give a voice to victims of terrorism after the Atocha attacks on March 11th 2004, and shared their testimonies to national and international audiences (Argomaniz, 2018). Since foreign perpetrated terrorist attacks became more common (e.g. September 11th 2001, New York; March 11th 2004, Madrid; and July 5th 2005, London), terrorist victims’ associations (TVAs) arose to pressure and influence the support for victims and their families so their needs will be met. Besides that, claims around “anti-terrorist legislation and policy, commemoration, and judicial responses to the
6 perpetrators" have been made (Barberet & Flesher Fominaya, 2018: p. 106). The associations are not solely created to emphasize the needs of the victims but are increasingly involved with politics and policymaking and therefore are of interest to responsive governments. They are needed to develop measures to anticipate the victims' demands, however also because of the political impact they may have (Hoffman & Kasupski, 2007; Barbaret & Flesher Fominaya, 2018). "Future victim' groups may continue to raise the bar in pressuring the government to be held responsible for failing to avert, prevent, or prepare for a terrorist attack" (Hoffman & Kasupski, 2007: p. 38).
The experiences and perspectives of victims have come increasingly into focus in media reporting in the aftermath of crises. The actions of authorities are highlighted after a situation that involved life loss and severe damage (Scott & Enander, 2017). The media sets a stage for victim's evaluation of the activities and actions of governments (Jong et al., 2016). Responses of a disaster are reported at several media platforms, and therefore the mass media plays a vital role in the beliefs and thoughts about governmental disaster behavior (Tierney et al, 2006). In order to satisfy the public's demand for information about a crisis, "the media are required to make choices about what they will share and emphasize" (Littlefield & Quenette, 2007: p. 27). The process in which media makes aspects of a particular event or issue more salient than others is called framing (Kuttschreuter et al. 2011). Framing often encourages certain ways of thinking and reasoning by activating specific ideas, emotions, and values (Scott & Enander, 2017; Price et al., 1997). Therefore, media plays an interesting role in the meaning-making process of crises, "which includes creating a compelling narrative regarding causes, consequences, solutions, and blame" (Boin et al., 2005 in Scott & Enander, 2017: p. 94).
An important concept to understand victims' underlying psychological responses is 'meaning-making'. During and after a crisis, those affected aim to create order out of the occurred chaos, and try to make sense of non-routine incidents (Smith et al., 2012). According to Dückers et al. (2017: p. 96), "making meaning is about providing a convincing narrative, an explanation of a crisis and its causes, its implications, the response, and the envisioned roles of different actors". This meaning-making process in the media is often characterized by a specific focus on citizens and authorities (Scott & Enander, 2017). Park (2016) created a meaning-making model that can be used as a framework to conceptualize "the processes of coping and recovery after stressful events" (p. 1235). Victims, and society as a whole, try to interpret the information they receive from their environment to fill in the cognitive gaps caused by the disruptive event (Maitlis & Christianson, 2014). Two levels of meaning are distinguished in the
7 model of Park (2016): global and situational. It aims to explain how victims cope with disasters that are sudden and catastrophic since survivors are likely to experience symptoms of distress or psychosocial disruption (Norris et al., 2002). Understanding the victim's responses may have some important implications for governmental intervention and prevention efforts (Park, 2016).
As mentioned before, adequate comprehension of what people confronted with disasters expect from government officials and public leaders is crucial and can be very helpful for appropriate victim response, such as psychosocial support (Jong & Dückers, 2019; Dückers et al., 2017; Jong et al., 2016). The discrepancy between the general meaning of a terrorist act and the meaning-making of the crisis by an individual potentially leads to distress (Jong & Dückers, 2018: Park, 2016). According to Schmid (2012), it is essential to take the needs and concerns of the victims in consideration in governmental response and policy, since it can strengthen governmental actions, and also give them "greater moral legitimacy based on the social capital that innocent and deserving victims enjoy in society” (p. 18). Victim's needs and perceptions are evolving and depend on several personal and environmental factors. Individuals can have a profound influence on how organizations or authorities adapt and how certain processes and policies can be changed (Maitlis & Soneshein, 2010). Therefore it is important to have a flexible and comprehensive understanding of a victim and to obtain a proper perception of the circumstances to ensure adequate awareness and knowledge of their needs and experiences with support in the aftermath of a terrorist attack (Ivankovic et al., 2017). Studies have been executed to find out how the help and support for terrorist victims can be improved (Ivankovic et al., 2017; RAN, 2016; Schmid, 2012; Hoffman & Kasupski, 2007). However as well as the needs of victims, also terrorism keeps evolving. Therefore this study will focus on the most significant and most recent European terrorist attacks in 2016 and 2017 in Belgium (Brussels bombings 22-03-2016), Germany (Berlin Christmas Market attack 19-12-2016), and the UK (Manchester Arena bombing 22-05-2017; Westminster Bridge attack 03-06-2017). Analyzing the expectations of terrorism victims and attaining full comprehension will contribute to more efficient support of authorities, and might prevent the victims and society as a whole, from increased levels of distress and reluctance (Jong & Dückers, 2019). It is important to learn from the victim-oriented responses taken, and to ensure proper support for those affected, to achieve resilience (Almeida & Moroz, 2017).
This study will build on the current understanding of experiences of terrorism victims and focus on the meaning-making process of those affected and how this is expressed and framed in the media. Feelings of anger and dissatisfaction with victim responses are often reported on
8 social media and other media platforms such as newspapers (Stretesky et al., 2010). The study of Scott & Enander (2017) explored the framing of victims and authorities in the Swedish press after the narcolepsy crisis and showed the critical implications of authorities and victims' media portrayal in terms of crisis communication. While this study has been conducted in Sweden, the current study will build on this framing analysis for terrorism events in Europe and explore how victims' perspectives are framed in the media in the aftermath of crises. In order to figure out what can be learned from expectations and experiences of terrorism victims with authorities, this study will focus on meaning making of the affected. A recent study of Jong & Dückers (2019) explained what people affected are expecting of government officials and public leaders after eight different Dutch crises. The researchers used an adjusted model of Park's (2016) on meaning-making, and the study revealed that one's global beliefs and situational meaning might be different from the government figures that are providing the support. Jong & Dückers’ (2019) study is solely based on crises in The Netherlands and upon disasters in general; therefore, this thesis will analyze how four European countries relate to previous findings in terrorism crises in terms of victims' experiences with governmental support. The aim is to figure out what can be improved and learned from other countries in terms of victim understanding and support.
Having delineated the scope of this research, the research question to be answered is: “What can authorities learn from expectations and experiences shared by victims of terrorism in the media, in terms of victim-oriented responses in targeted European countries?”. The objective of this study is explorative, the aim is to firstly find out what terrorism victims' perspectives are and how these are framed in the media, and secondly to understand what they expect from the authorities and how meaning is made after a crisis by both authorities and victims. By answering this question, this thesis will provide an overview of a crisis communication perspective on victims' experiences with governmental response and implications for future responses of authorities in order to restore resilience. ‘Authorities’ is interpreted broadly and refers to the government, public leaders, and other related services. To answer this question, it should be analyzed what exactly the narratives and experiences of these specific groups of victims are and in what kind of needs and expectations of authorities this results. Therefore the research question will be answered in two parts using a framing analysis based on the study of Scott & Enander (2017).
In order to develop a comprehensive understanding of victims’ expectations and experiences shared in the media in the aftermath of a terrorist attack, the first sub-question is:
9 “What characterized the press reporting on victims' experiences with authorities with regards to dominant themes?”. Against the background of existing findings on terrorism victims and media framing, the analysis will focus on the dominant themes that characterize the reporting of victims' perspectives and experiences with authorities. By answering this question, it aims to understand how victims are expressing themselves and their concerns in the media, which expectations and experiences come along, and which needs they have regarding governmental response.
To understand how the media use different devices to frame perspectives of victims on authorities, the second sub-question is as follows: “How did media frame victims’ perspectives on authorities in the press reporting?”. Focussing on a certain set of framing devices used in previous research will contribute to a broader understanding of the victims' experiences and expectations and the role of media framing. It deepens into the framing of the press in order to understand possible biases of implications.
The research question and objective have been outlined, and this thesis is structured as follows. An introduction will be given on the relevant concepts of this study, deepening into the victimization of terrorism, the needs of this specific group of victims, the use of media platforms for victim's voices, and meaning-making. Following on, the methodology will be laid out, defining the selected cases, and explaining the process of data collection and analysis. The results section is divided into two parts, dedicated to answering the two sub-questions utilizing the obtained data and analysis. The discussion includes a reflection on the results, and practical implications for authorities will be made. Finally, the last chapter targets the conclusion in which the research question will be answered. Also, recommendations for further research will be made, and the limitations of this study will be addressed.
10
2. Background and theoretical framework
In this section, a conceptualization of the most important concepts will be provided, and the analytical framework for this study will be outlined. First, victimization will be defined, followed by the needs of victims of terrorism, the role of the media and Park's (2016) meaning-making model.
2.1. Defining victimization
When creating a comprehensive and overarching policy, a broad understanding of victims of terrorism is needed. Schmid (2006), adopting a victims' perspective, distinguishes focused and indiscriminate terrorism: focused terrorism is characterized by discriminately choosing victims who are part of a specific target group that is the principal addressee of the terrorist's message, coercion or intimidation. Indiscriminate terrorism targets victims more randomly, hitting people who happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time and not specifically selected for their role in the conflict (Schmid, 2006: p. 9 in Letschert et al., 2010). Article 1 of the United Nations (UN) General Assembly Declaration of Basic Principles for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power (hereafter the 1985 UN Declaration) defines victimization as followed: “Victims’ means persons who, individually or collectively, have suffered harm, including physical or mental injury, emotional suffering, economic loss or substantial impairment of their fundamental rights, through acts or omissions that are in violation of criminal laws operative within Member States, including those laws proscribing criminal abuse of power”. It also recognises family members, direct dependents of the victims, and ones suffering harm in intervening to assist victims or to prevent victimization (1985 UN Declaration). This study will include all these kinds of victims that are affected by terrorist acts. "Victims", "survivors", and "affected" will be used intertwined, but all refer to the aforementioned definition.
Victimization most certainly starts with recognizing the harm and the impact terrorism has on the involved individuals or groups, and society as a whole. Four different forms of victimization have been recognized: (1) individuals present during the attack, (2) family and loved ones, (3) first responders and eyewitnesses, and (4) the local community and broader community (Ivankovic e.a., 2017). All these different kind of victims faced a terrorist incident and have to cope with pain and loss one way or another, which is often referred to as (psychological) resilience: "the ability to bounce back and to find a new balance in life after a dramatic incident has occurred" (RAN, 2018: p. 5). Resilience is the key factor in getting back
11 on track after facing a traumatic event. The resilience process can take place on three different levels: individual, community, and society (Dückers et al., 2017). Resilience on an individual level is most often used by psychologists to describe one's reaction to a potentially traumatic event (Bonnano, 2004; Dückers, 2017). Community resilience focusses on areas such as neighborhoods and cities, and has been referred to as the community's ability to deal with external shocks and disturbance in their infrastructure and the process of how they recover from such disorders (Adger, 2000). As communities are part of a society, resilience on society level depends on “the presence of socio-economic, political, and institutional conditions, together with operational structures and resources” and the more these conditions are met, the more a society is likely to achieve resilience (Dückers, 2017, p. 185). Victims need to be supported and encouraged on individual, community, and societal level to rebuild their strength again, and this can be stimulated by being aware of and meeting their needs in the aftermath of victimization of a terrorist act (RAN, 2018). This poses unique challenges for governments and other organizations that are held with the task to provide services for terrorism victims (Perliger & Pedahzur, 2006; Waldman et al., 2011; Boin & ‘t Hart, 2003).
2.2. Needs of victims of terrorism
Terrorism pushes for extra governmental efforts in leadership concerning support, security, law enforcement, and counter-radicalization (Ivankovic e.a., 2017; Boin & 't Hart, 2003). Therefore creating resilience among the victims is important, one should be able to take control back over their life, and assistance should be provided wherever possible (RAN, 2018). Different layers can be distinguished to understand the needs of this specific group of victims. A report published by the European Parliament (2017) shows a pyramid of victim's needs, containing three different sorts of needs: "(1) Individual needs, seeing upon personal characteristics e.g. coping skills, stressful life events and health condition, (2) needs of victims of terrorism, e.g. recognition as victim of terrorism, remembrance, participation, support in dealing with the media, specialised trauma care, truth, peer support and compensation, and (3) needs of all victims, which includes respect and recognition, protection, support, access to justice, compensation and restoration" (Ivankovic e.a., 2017: p. 26). The second layer of needs is specifically interesting for this study focussing on terrorism victims; however, it must be noted that these are quite similar to those of other victims of crime. All victims of crime will want to be treated with respect and provided with information about their case, including possible participation. Also, they will need to be reassured of their safety, and find a way to
12 deal with feelings of anxiety or anger, most likely experienced after the event (Ivankovic e.a., 2017; Letschert et al., 2008).
A difference can be found in the degree of impact in terms of economic, psychological, and physical effects, and therefore a specialized response to support victims of terrorism is necessary. A few key characteristics of terrorism can be distinguished that influence the needs of the affected. Firstly, as mentioned before, terrorist acts are meant to harm, besides the individuals, the greater of a society, a state, or certain values (Almeida & Moroz, 2017; Letschert, 2010). The attacked victims are perceived as symbols of the state, which may result in more heavily social and psychological experience of, and damage to the affected individuals. Secondly, in the case of terrorism, not only the victim itself and the immediate family members are affected, but professionals such as first responders or police are impacted as well. A mark is left on the broader community, and it is important to note that sometimes it is not possible to provide the support to victims of terrorism, as it would those affected by other crimes (Ivankovic et al., 2017). The third characteristic connects to the former since terrorist acts as no other are able to create chaos, resulting in complete disturbance of daily life and thus leaves extraordinary challenges to first responders and authorities (Rogers et al., 2007). To illustrate, after the Brussels attacks, the city went in lockdown for a couple of days, which hindered the return upon normal life in the city. Such measures are very uncommon for most other crimes, and accordingly influences the experience and coping of victims of terrorism. Lastly, terrorism leads to a lot of media attention, in which the victims become a news story that puts them unwillingly in the spotlight. Incidents related to terrorism are most certainly broadly reported, more than other kinds of crimes (Ivankovic et al., 2017).
According to previous research, the support for those affected by terrorism should be comprehensive and see upon the following needs “(1) emotional and psychological; (2) practical; (3) advice on compensation; (4) vocational or educational; (5) access to justice and (6) medical” (Ivankovic et al., 2017: p. 123). Specifically, the perception and experience of the victim is an important factor; therefore recognition of grief, comforting (Dückers et al., 2017; Dückers & Thormar, 2015) and social acknowledgment are key terms to make a difference in realizing resilience among victims of terrorism (RAN, 2018; Ivankovic et al., 2017; Maercker & Müller, 2004).
Many factors are essential in order to contribute to resilience, which can be seen at three different levels: individual, community, and characteristics of the incident (Hoijtink et al., 2011; RAN, 2018). Resilience at an individual level is related to personality, direct surroundings, and
13 the person's socio-economic situational factors. At a community level, the feelings of inclusion, belonging, and safety are important. Stronger ties to the community may result in a prosperous process to resilience. In terms of characteristics of terrorist incidents, the nature and the extent of the act have great impact on the resilience of victims (RAN, 2018). Research shows how natural disasters are 'easier' to be dealt with than incidents caused by humans (Norris et al., 2002). Exposure to catastrophic violent incidents, such as terrorist acts, can have severe consequences for psychological health and may result in post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) or other psychological complaints. Finally, terrorist incidents ask for legislative measures and implications, which is likely to create distrust within a society, among the victims and the authorities. Mutual trust is key; therefore, the relationship between the two parties is of great importance to not cause any more disruption in society than what has already been done by the terrorist act itself. Important elements of this trust can be found in clear, relevant, and trustworthy communication from authorities and other professionals, in order to be able to restore one's life and achieve resilience (RAN, 2018).
2.3. Media
Terrorist acts are primarily aimed to shock society and hit public opinion seeking to effect fundamental political change, and not foremost focussed on the victims themselves (Almeida & Moroz, 2017; Letschert et al., 2010; Ivankovic et al., 2017: Hoffman & Kasupski, 2007). Since terrorism often attracts much more media attention than other forms of violence, the media may sometimes forget the impact on victim’s when chasing a story. Filming and reporting of the dead and injured may cause secondary victimization, such as PTSD among the general population (Ivankovic et al., 2017). The media is an important factor in drawing attention towards these terrorist events, and therefore the media is needed by the terrorists. However, odd as it sounds, the media needs terrorism as well, they need one another, which is a so-called symbiotic relationship (Bizinni, 2010; RAN, 2016). It can be explained as follows: terrorism searches for a spotlight to tell their story, and the media provides a platform to spread their narrative through a spectator's gaze. Which means that terrorists want to spread feelings of fear and disruption, but also show propaganda to recruit. However, it is not very fruitful and beneficial for terrorist organizations if their story and news are spread through a victims' gaze because their narrative is overturned (RAN, 2016).
Former research shows how survivors of terrorist attacks, family members, friends, or other closely related to the affected, organized themselves and have become a powerful voice in the U.S. after the 9/11 attacks by using the press. The media has been, among others,
14 beneficial for delivering counter-communication and victim experiences. Using the big audience of the media, these groups have been able to pressure U.S. counterterrorism policy and legislation by providing recommendations (Hoffman & Kasupski, 2007). The evolution of victim groups and victims using their voices resulted in political influence and reforms in policy, but also the approach towards terrorism victimization has been adjusted. An advantage of the media is that it can reach a vast audience, nonetheless on the contrary, a message cannot be controlled in press reporting, and therefore the narrative is exposed to external influences, such as framing (RAN, 2016; Scott & Enander, 2016).
As aforementioned, media is a key factor in the meaning-making process of crises, creating a narrative regarding the causes, consequences, solutions, and blame (Boin et al., 2005). Media pressure is a factor that makes it harder for crisis leaders to do what is believed to be right and make sound decisions (Boin & ‘t Hart, 2003). As news outlets are commonly used to express and show victims’ experiences, it is important to understand how reporting is influenced by framing. Entman (1993) defines framing as follows: “to frame is to select some aspects of a perceived reality and make them more salient in communicating text, in such a way as to promote a particular problem definition, causal interpretation, moral evaluation, and/or treatment recommendation for the item described” (p. 52). It indicates that the press contributes to establishing a problem definition (Scott & Enander, 2016). Different framing devices can be distinguished and are highlighted in previous crisis communication research (De Vreese, 2005; Ivenygar, 1991; Scott & Enander, 2016; Semetko & Valkenburg, 2000). The framing analysis in this research will be focussing on the following set of framing devices: (1) episodic framing, (2) human interest, (3) responsibility and blame frames, (4) stereotyping, and (5) anchoring. The selection of these devices is based upon the fact that these have been used to frame both general news and more complex problems related to crisis events.
Episodic framing includes the simplifying and limiting of complex issues, rather than a general understanding of the events (De Vreese, 2005; Iyengar, 1991). Episodic frames tend to present a specific example of the issue since it is believed that this is more compelling and, therefore likely to grab the reader's attention (Gross, 2008). The human interest frame is used to bring a human face or an emotional angle to the reporting of the issue. The frame refers to personalizing, dramatizing, or "emotionalizing" the news, as a way to capture or retain the interest of the greater audience (Semetko & Valkenburg, 2000). Responsibility and blame frames are presenting an issue in such a way as “to attribute responsibility for its cause or solution to either the government or to an individual or group” (Semetko & Valkenburg, 2000:
15 p. 96). Identifying faults or blaming negligent actors such as the government are found to be important factors in the framing process (De Vries, 2004; Kuttschreuter et al., 2011). Framing in terms of stereotyping sees upon the tendency to portray victims with stereotypical so-called 'standard' reactions and emotions, such as helplessness or violence. It includes the habit of collecting all victims by assigning a typical reaction to a large group of individuals (Scott & Enander, 2016). Lastly, a way to create meaning is ‘anchoring’, in which “a new unknown phenomenon is understood through the lens of a previously known phenomenon” (Scott & Enander, 2016: p. 92).
2.4. Meaning-making
In general, people tend to interpret situations to fill in their cognitive gaps, and so do victims in uncertain situations. A threat such as a terrorist attack results in the victim's demanding action from authorities, and their needs pose complex challenges for service providers and the government (Waldman et al., 2011). The government has to respond to the pain of the victims of terrorist attacks, and therefore the expectations and the reality of the affected need to be explored. Making meaning out of traumatic events is a coping mechanism for victims and helps them restore the congruency that arose between their global meaning and the evaluation of the event (Park et al., 2012). Giving meaning to the crisis can have a positive effect on one's resilience and recovery from a stressful event (Park, 2016; Dückers et al., 2017). However, meaning-making is also often intertwined with responsibility and accountability attributions (Jong, 2019; Boin & 't Hart, 2003). People wonder how a crisis, such as a terrorist attack, is possible to happen which results in the blaming of authorities and their responsibilities, in which especially the media plays an important role by providing specific roles and characteristics to the involved actors (Boin, Kuipers & Overdijk, 2013).
The meaning-making model of Park (2016) offers a useful framework to conceptualize the coping and recovery processes after disasters, such as terrorist attacks. The model focusses on two levels of meaning: global and situational. The framework is created for the specific role of the government in the meaning-making process of people affected by a disaster. Jong & Dückers (2019) used an adjusted model of Park's in their study and created three categories that are important in the process of one's meaning-making in terms of governmental response: (1) global meaning; (2) situational meaning based on governmental support on a collective level; and (3) situational meaning based on governmental support on an individual level. Global meaning refers to "people's global beliefs of the world, fundamental beliefs about themselves, and their place in the world" (Jong & Dückers, 2019: p.16). According to Park (2016),
16 situational meaning refers to “how global meaning, along with the context of a particular situation, influences one’s interpretation and subsequent reactions to that situation” (p. 1235). Situational meaning can be understood in both a public, as well as a more private way. The public manner refers to authorities or public leaders attending public ceremonies or gatherings and recognizing collective mourning (Jong & Dückers, 2019; Griffin-Padgett & Allison, 2010). The private route however, is more personal and includes visiting affected families and providing victims with material and practical support directly (Jong & Dückers, 2019). In this study, Park's adjusted meaning-making model by Jong & Dückers (2019) will be taken into consideration when interpreting the results and will function as a starting point for practical implications.
17
3. Methodology
Against the background and theoretical framework of the main concepts of this study, in this section a clear methodological justification will be given for the used procedure to answer the research question. For this study, an exploratory qualitative method was used: a (media) content analysis. Data has been collected from news articles. By reviewing and analyzing the required data, an attempt was made to find out what can be learned from expectations and experiences shared by victims of terrorist acts in terms of governmental response in targeted countries as Belgium, Germany, and the UK.
3.1. Cases
Four cases were selected for this study based on the recent time and scale of the terror events. The criterion for inclusion was the experience of nationals with governmental support after a terrorist act. In table 1, an overview of the cases can be found with a short description of the event.
Table 1. Overview of the included cases with a short description
Date Description of event Dead Injured
22-03-2016 Brussels bombings – Three coordinated suicide bombings: two at Brussels Airport in Zaventem and one at Maalbeek metro station.
32 civilians 3 perpetrators
300>
19-12-2016 Berlin truck attack – A truck was deliberately driven into the Christmas market at
Breitscheidplatz in Berlin.
12 civilians 56
22-05-2017 Manchester Arena bombing – An Islamist extremist suicide bomber detonated a bomb as people were leaving the Arena following a concert of Ariana Grande.
22 civilians 1 perpetrator
139
03-06-2017 Westminster Bridge attack – The perpetrator drove car into pedestrians on the pavement along the south side of Westminster Bridge.
4 civilians 50>
3.2. Data collection
This research used qualitative analysis of news articles in order to gain an adequate understanding of the experience of the affected with victim-oriented responses from authorities. Qualitative research is a suitable way to focus on the ‘how’ and ‘why’ questions of a particular matter (Bijleveld, 2015). This research had an explorative nature. It focused on providing an accurate overview of the experiences and expectations of terrorism victims in the context of
18 governmental support, and what can be learned from it. There is very little published material available on victims and their experience with support after terrorist attacks in terms of literature. Therefore, online news articles and journals were used as resources. Potential biases arise, however the usefulness of the internet is outweighed. It seeks to understand how individuals felt about how the government and other organizations responded to their needs and expectations (Feldman et al., 2004; Waldman et al., 2011). Secondary sources were therefore included. For the first part of the data collection, the database NexisUni was consulted to find useful news articles. The second part of the data collection consisted of additional sources, including interviews with victims and evaluation reports from victim support organizations or other involved institutions. Data triangulation was used to improve the internal validity of this study since multiple data sources have been examined in this qualitative research (Decorte & Zaitch, 2010).
3.2.1. News articles
For this study, data was collected using a media content analysis to explore the expectations and experiences of terrorist victims. The collected data were analyzed to distinguish central themes in victims' perspectives and explore which framing devices were used by the press. Building on these findings, this research strived to describe the global meaning of fundamental values and the situational meaning on a collective and individual level by victims based upon governmental support. The qualitative media content analysis was based on data retrieved from NexisUni, an online news database. A systematic search was conducted to find relevant news articles to include in this study, using several central themes.
Preliminary research has been done to figure out which search terms best to use in order to find useful news articles. The timeframe of the search for each case started on the day of the attack until May 2020. It has been chosen not to apply a specific timeframe since the preliminary search showed how two or even three years after the attacks, victims still are sharing their experiences and perspectives on the attack, and also on the developments in governmental action. Overall the news articles included cover the period March 2016 till May 2020. A specific peak in press reporting can be found around annual commemorations and the end of the year when news outlets are reflecting on important issues, which can be described as key events (Jong et al., 2016). For this research, it was found relevant also to include this information. Besides national newspapers, regional newspapers were included because it is likely that victims shared their stories in local media. All the searches were conducted in English, except for the Brussels case for which after a preliminary English search, it turned out to be useful to
19 also conduct a Dutch search because of the national language in the country and therefore, availability of information.
A total of (N=81) newspaper articles were selected from NexisUni and included in this research. An overview of the newspapers can be found in table 2, and a complete overview of all the included articles can be found in Appendix I. In the included news articles, different victims shared their thoughts on their experience with governmental victim support after a traumatic event. The data collection was based on statements made by direct victims, family members, direct dependents of the victim, and the ones suffering harm from immediate assistance to prevent victimization of victims. Only news articles that included statements of the aforementioned types of victims were included for the data analysis.
Table 2. Overview of the included newspapers
Newspaper N N Algemeen Dagblad Belfast Telegraph CTV News Deutsche Welle DPA International EuroNews Express.co.uk France24 HLN
London Evening Standard Manchester Evening News MailOnline Mirror 1 3 1 3 1 1 6 1 1 2 9 10 5 NRC* Spiegel International Standaard
The Berlin Spectator The Bulletin
The Daily Telegraph The Guardian The Independent The Irish Times The Local
The New York Times The Telegraph Time 3 1 1 1 1 1 8 8 1 1 1 5 1
Nederlands Dagblad 1 Total 84
* Additional sources (not from database)
The search results included all information available about the experiences and expectations of victims of terrorist attacks in Brussels, Berlin, London (Westminster Bridge) and Manchester. In order to collect these articles, search terms were used. Through the Boolean operators ‘AND’ and ‘OR’, these searches were specified. The specified search terms were based on the central themes in this research and deducted from the first exploratory search that
20 was executed in the database. An overview of the search terms can be found in table 3. For every terrorist attack the name of the case has been used in combination with the search terms in Italics as shown for the Brussels case.
Table 3. Overview search results
Search terms Results After
correction high similarity rate (1)* (2)** (3)*** Included articles 1a "Brussels bombings" OR "Brussels attack" AND "victim*" OR "survivor*" OR "affected" AND "victim support" OR “support” OR "failure*" OR "fail" OR "mistake*" OR “criticism” OR “critic*” 151 82 4 4 0 7 1b “aanslag* Brussel” OR “terroristische aanslag Brussel” AND “slachtoffer*” OR “nabestaande*” OR “overlevende*” AND “slachtofferhulp” OR “hulp” OR “fout*” 20 17 3 1 1 5 2 "Berlin attack" OR
"Christmas market attack"
123 62 7 7 1 15 3 "Manchester Arena bombing" OR "Manchester Arena attack" 542 490 22 8 5 32 4 "Westminster attack" OR "Westminster Bridge attack" 292 256 13 6 5 23 Total 81
* Article included statements of direct victims
** Article included statements of next of kin (family members and direct dependents) *** Article included statements of ones suffering harm from immediate assistance
3.2.2. Additional sources
In order to create a comprehensive overview, additional sources were consulted as well. For the Brussels case two interviews reported in Dutch newspaper NRC, with a survivor (Nic Reynaert) and a husband (Mohamed El Bachiri) of a woman who died during the attack, were
21 used for the analysis to gain more thorough insights in the victims' experiences (NRC 22-3-2017; NRC 16-3-2017). For both the Manchester Arena bombing and the Westminster Bridge attack a report by Victim Support UK (2017) was examined. It included many stories of victims of the attacks on their experience with institutional and non-institutional support in the aftermath of the events. Additionally, The Kerslake report (2018) was consulted due to its review on the response to the Manchester Arena attack, including victims’ experiences.
3.3. Data analysis
In qualitative data analysis, it is important to organize and structure the large amount of data. For this study, a media content analysis was conducted. "Content analysis is an unobtrusive technique that allows researchers to analyze relatively unstructured data in view of the meanings, symbolic qualities, and expressive contents" (Krippendorff, 2004: p. 44). The data collection resulted in a vast amount of data and therefore, a coding method was used. The process of coding allowed the researcher to summarize and synthesize the structure of the data (Sapsford & Jupp, 2006). A full explanation of the codes and indicators can be found in the codebook, Appendix II. The codebook is an important tool and has been used as a guide to systematically document the codes that are used in a coding sheet (Neuendorf, 2016).
The data analysis can best be explained in two parts. First, an inductive approach was used to identify themes strongly linked to the victims' experiences and expectations. Second, a deductive analysis was conducted to explore the framing devices used in press reporting. Both processes will be explicated hereafter.
3.3.1. Inductive analysis
The first sub-question approached in this analysis is: “What characterized the press reporting on victims' experiences with authorities with regards to dominant themes?”. At first, inductive thematic analysis was conducted, which included the process of naming meaningful phrases with codes, which were later connected through categories (Patton, 1990; Scott & Enander, 2016). During this process, a separate file for notes was created for conceptual development for the researcher, guided by the overall research question. Themes were noted based upon their strength and persistence in the data. Herewith, dominant themes that characterize the press reporting were determined and eventually linked with Park's meaning-making model (2016) for the practical implications. Table 4 shows the operationalizations of the categories, which were found as the dominant themes.
22 Table 4. Operationalizations coding scheme for dominant themes
Code Category Operationalization
Dominant themes (inductive approach)
A Transparency The transparency in governmental response, holding authorities accountable for sharing necessary intelligence, open communication and accessible sources of information. B Reliability Reliability of authorities meaning the trustworthiness to keep
promises in terms of their obligation to protect citizens and support victims of terrorism. It includes the insurance and realization of providing adequate (financial) support for one to rebuild their life after a tragedy.
C Equality Equality in governmental support meaning victims are treated fairly in terms of equal rights, according to clear protocols and rules to prevent injustice.
D Acknowledgment and recognition
Acknowledgment and recognition of victims meaning positive and helpful governmental support, showing appreciation for the victim's unique state and difficult situation.
E Unity and solidarity The demonstration of solidarity with the victims and showing unity against the terrorist forces of hatred and destruction behind the attack.
F Responsibility Responsibility in terms of governmental response includes the preparedness for societal disruption and taking
accountability of the overall coordination of support in the aftermath. Also sees upon taking responsibility in changing policy or implementing new measures when demanded or required.
3.3.2. Deductive analysis
Secondly, a deductive approach has been used to answer the second sub-question: “How did media frame victims’ perspectives on authorities in the press reporting?”. The analysis distinguished the frames that were used in the reporting of victims and authorities in the news articles. Five different sets of framing devices were chosen for this analysis, based upon their relevance in previous research (De Vreese, 2005; Ivenygar, 1991; Scott & Enander, 2016; Semetko & Valkenburg, 2000). The framing devices included: (1) episodic framing, (2) human interest, (3) responsibility and blame frames, (4) stereotyping, and (5) anchoring. By analyzing the different devices used, a broader understanding of the inductive themes was created. Also, analyzing the used framing devices created the possibility, in a later stage of this research, to reflect critically upon the results and how possible biases arise in the reporting on victims and
23 authorities and what this may mean for practical implications. Table 5 shows the operationalizations of the used categories for the data analysis. All these categories were predetermined, in order to increase the systematicity of the qualitative content analysis.
Table 5. Operationalizations coding scheme for framing devices
Code Category Operationalization
Framing devices (deductive approach)
G Episodic The simplifying and limiting of complex issues.
H Human interest The use of a human face or an emotional angle, thus referring to personalizing, dramatizing or “emotionalizing” the issue. I Responsibility and
blame
The attribution of responsibility for the cause of the issue to the government or authorities.
J Stereotyping The tendency to collect all victims together and assigning a typical reaction to a group of individuals.
K Anchoring The use of previously known phenomena in order to understand the current issue.
24
4. Results
This chapter consists of two parts. In the first part, the dominant themes concerning victims' experiences and expectations from authorities that were recognized in the news articles will be addressed. Also, the Kerslake report (2018) and Victim Support report (2017) were analyzed to provide a more thorough understanding and comprehensive overview. In the second part, the analysis of how media reporting framed these experiences and expectations of victims is explored and explicated.
4.1. Dominant themes
Firstly, inductive analysis was done in order to find an answer to the first sub-question: "What characterized the press reporting on victims' experiences with authorities with regards to dominant themes?". Six overarching themes were identified in the news articles and the used reports: transparency, reliability, equality, acknowledgment and recognition, unity and solidarity, and responsibility. Victims have shared their experiences and expectations of several authorities, from which particular needs can be derived. An overview of these needs is provided at the end of this section in table 6.
4.1.1. Transparency
Transparency of information from the authorities has been found an essential value in the cases of the Berlin Christmas Market attack and the Westminster Bridge attack. It sees upon expectation management of victims, whereas they want to know where they stand. In terms of needs, access to authorities to provide the affected with useful and concrete information is important. Many complaints of Berlin victims were portrayed in the media on how relatives were unable to receive any information on the victims for 72 hours after the attack from insensitive police authorities and ignorant politicians. They claimed that nobody was answering hotlines; and spent days wandering whether their children, parents of siblings were alive (Deutsche Welle, 2-12-2017; Spiegel International 12-12-2017; The Local, 13-12-2017; The Irish Times, 19-12-2017). According to one of the victims: "Everything just kept getting pushed back and forth, and nobody knew what the other was doing, and in many places, there was simply a lack of humanness" (Spiegel International 12-12-2017). Also, survivors of the Westminster terror attack claimed to be left in the dark from the inquest into its five victims. No politician was able to meet with them, and no correspondence was received from the London mayor. According to one of the affected, victims of the Manchester attack jokingly said, "they've got Burnham's (mayor) mobile number on speed dial" (The Guardian, 15-9-2019).
25 4.1.2. Reliability
The reliability and trustworthiness of authorities were expressed as a core value in terms of their obligation to protect and support victims. The need for protection can be deducted from this, however, also the need for trustworthy authorities in terms of promises about support. Promises were specifically broken when it comes to financial support, compensation, and protection.
Brussels. In 2017, many Belgian victim organizations have been complaining about the very slow pay-out of reimbursements, and in response, premier Charles Michel acknowledged these problems and promised progress (Nederlands Dagblad, 22-3-2017). Sebastien Bellin, a victim of the Brussels attack, claimed that he believed in the authorities and its system, however promises were broken, and still after three years, 64 percent of the victims are waiting for medical restitutions. Philippe Vandenberghe of the victim organization V-Europe confirmed the denial and delay of the governments and insurance companies (HLN, 17-3-2019; Nederlands Dagblad, 22-3-2017). The injured and the grieving victims were very frustrated with the complicated and slow process of claiming compensation from both insurance companies and the government. Karen Northshield, who ended up in the hospital after the attack, said: "my biggest fear is that the day I get out of the hospital, there is no guarantee that I will get funding" (Time, 21-3-2017).
Berlin. Victims of the Berlin terror attack, besides the struggle to receive information in the bureaucratic minefield, complained about receiving compensation payments. Some of the victims claimed to have taken bank loans "to cover the rents and mortgages of those who died" or for those who've been injured and are not able to work anymore (The Guardian, 18-12-2017). There was no clarity, or a central point where affected could turn to, nor was there anyone available to help the victims apply for compensation or hardship assistance. Many victims felt a bit like beggars due to the degrading process they had to go through to get reimbursements (Spiegel International, 15-12-2017). Chancellor Angela Merkel has also been accused of political inaction by the victims of the attack in Berlin, saying: "you have failed to push ahead with expanding resources and reforming the confused official structures of fighting these dangers" (Deutsche Welle, 18-12-2017; The Local, 13-12-2017; The Irish Times, 19-12-2017). Also, two lawyers of victims mentioned how the authorities were not prepared for the attack and did not have a plan (CTV News, 18-12-2017; DPA International, 15-12-2017).
Manchester and London. In England the organization "Survivors against Terror" also claimed that the governments promised survivors to be looked after; however, a survey done
26 among the victims of the Manchester Arena bombing and the Westminster Bridge attack showed that they have been routinely let down (The Guardian, 21-11-2018; London Evening Standard, 21-11-2018). A letter made up by the victims of the attacks in England, stated: "We are sick of the promises [made by politicians] that never materialize. We all ask of the parties to agree to consult on and implement a new "Survivors Charter" that would guarantee basic rights and services for survivors" (BBC, 2-12-2019). The government has, for a long period, been refusing to confirm any extra funding to help those affected in Manchester, due to the fact that ministers could not agree on covering administrative costs for helping those injured and in need of intensive healthcare (Manchester Evening News, 22-9-2017). The parents of four injured kids said the following: "We waited months to receive money from the emergency fund for the kids, and we had to beg for it" (Victim Support report, 2017: p.7).
As documented in the Kerslake report, terror survivors called for the creation of a new fund to provide financial support for victims and bereaved families due to the lack of support from the current system. Such a fund could cover costs such as "funerals, the loss of the main earner in a household, the need to pay for counseling or physiotherapy, the inability to work, the need to make changes to your own home to adapt to your injuries" (The Telegraph, 24-6-2018; Mirror, 25-6-2018). Additionally, criticism arose on the amount of reimbursement. The parents of Saffie, the youngest person to die in the Manchester attack, gave an emotional interview explaining that they felt "stuck" and "insulted" by the amount of the compensation they received. They launched a charity, named MCR22, to help support families affected by terror attacks (The Independent, 17-5-2019).
After the Manchester attack, Vodafone was under fire as well, due to the failure of the phone system set up to assist in the event of terror attacks (MailOnline, 27-3-2018). The National Mutual Aid Telephony system hampered the Casualty Bureau's setup, which severely affected the communication with family members that were caught up in the attack (Kerslake Report, 2018).
4.1.3. Equality
Equality as a value was mentioned by victims in news articles about the Westminster Bridge attack, and therewith the need for legal support in order to achieve it. It has been claimed by victims' advocates, among whom Damian Horan, that survivors of different styles of acts of terror were treated unequally and were entitled to inequitable compensation payments. This outcome, for example, hinges around the fact whether or not a car was used in such incidents, which led to differences in the support victims may expect to receive. The lawyer stated there
27 is complete injustice in the UK's compensation scheme for victims of terrorism when it comes to aftercare. There is significantly more assistance given to the affected during the immediate aftermath, while the long-term aftercare for those with serious life-changing injuries still lacks the support they deserve (Mirror, 22-3-2018). The Kerslake report (2018) stated that there is a need among affected families for continuing access to mental health for the long-term. Also, Daren Buckley, severely injured during the Arena bombing, recognized inequality: "Different services are available in different areas, so some people don't have access to the support they need, based on where they live" (Victim Support report, 2017: p. 49).
The Duke of Cambridge, Prince William, also confirmed the fact that donations and support after the Westminster Bridge attack "seemed like it wasn't well targeted", after he had spoken with the victims (MailOnline, 2-11-2019). References to the equal and appropriate French compensation regime for terrorist attacks have been made, and compared to this system; the UK runs behind in creating a universal privately funded insurance mechanism (The Independent, 22-3-2018).
4.1.4. Acknowledgment and recognition
Acknowledgment and recognition of the victim position can be perceived as the primary value mentioned by the victims of terrorist attacks in the four cases, from which the need for respectful treatment, including personal contact and home visits, and psychological support can be derived. The media is found to be an important factor in the need for respectful treatment, according to the letter published in The Telegraph (2-12-2019), written by victims of several terrorist attacks in Europe, which included affected from attacks in Brussels, Manchester, and London (Westminster Bridge). They requested the media to let victims grieve and recover in private and to refrain from constant sharing of the attackers' pictures since it compounds the survivor's suffering (The Telegraph, 2-12-2019; MailOnline, 3-12-2019). Especially after the Manchester Arena attack, affected felt "hounded" and "bombarded" by news crews from all across the UK, and a lack of respect when reporters attempted to take photos while families were receiving bad news (Kerslake Report, 2018; MailOnline, 2019; The Guardian, 27-3-2017).
Brussels. In The Guardian (6-7-2018), survivors of terrorism from around the world felt "an overwhelming sense of abandonment" and are calling for an international support network. Among those was Travis Frain, injured in the Westminster Bridge attack, and he explained how once he was out of the hospital, he had to fight every scrap of support (The Guardian, 6-7-2018). In Belgium, the UN Special Reporter has, on behalf of the victims, urged the
28 government to make survivors of terrorism a legitimate priority. For her evaluation, the Reporter met with survivors and victims, and she was particularly concerned about "the lack of insurance compensation for PTSD and the psychological harm, which was a direct consequence of terrorism" (The Bulletin, 7-6-2018). Even after three years, Belgium is falling short when it comes to victim support, according to Philippe Vansteenkiste of victim organization V-Europe. The government does still not take into account fundamental basic problems such as PTSD or centralization for guarantee funds (Standaard, 22-3-2019). V-Europe has been established after the terrorist attacks in Brussels and is currently representing about 250 members that were victimized by terrorism. Their mission is to guarantee the rights of the victims in order to provide optimal support, protection, and assistance. Vansteenkiste, who lost his sister during the attack, mentioned how first responders should not be forgotten either, since they have to deal with a lot of mental problems as well, and it can be said that posttraumatic stress is an actual problem for a lot of them (De Morgen, 22-3-2018).
Also, Myriam Gueuning, injured at the airport attack, campaigned for recognition of the victim position, since feelings of abandonment do not support processes of recovery and resilience (EuroNews, 21-3-2018). In an interview in the Dutch newspaper NRC, Nic Reynaert, a survivor of the Brussels attack, expressed much anger and frustration towards politicians and judges. He mentioned how the Belgian mentality ignored and neglected the interests of its civilians, especially victims (NRC, 22-3-2017). An example of the lack of respectful treatment was mentioned by the founder of a French victim support organization, Guillaume Denoix de Saint Marc, saying that the Belgian Prime Minister did not even greet the families of the victims when he saw them at the day of the commemoration at the hotel (AD, 22-3-2018). However, this a spokesman of the government invalidated this statement since there has been contact with the next of kin, only within a sober and intimate environment without camera's (De Morgen, 22-3-2018).
Berlin. Specifically, after the Berlin Christmas market attack, victims were very critical and disappointed about the attitude and behavior of authorities. Survivors and family members of victims explained how there were no visits or recognition, however they were quick to receive bills for forensic examinations, which had to be paid within 30 days (Spiegel International, 15-12-2017; Deutsche Welle, 18-12-2017; The Irish Times, 19-12-2017). It took the then-president Joachim Gauck about 60 days to finally give a meaningful sign of recognition and sympathy for the affected during a special gathering, and Chancellor Angela Merkel was meeting the bereaved relatives and survivors almost one year later for the first time (Deutsche
29 Welle, 2-12-2017; The Guardian, 18-12-2017; France24, 19-12-2017). The affected wrote a letter, published in German newspaper Der Spiegel, accusing the leaders of the country to have failed in acknowledging their suffering and in offering personal condolences (MailOnline, 19-12-2017). The affected complained that they had received cold-hearted letters from government workers instead, in response to their struggles with their life altered by the attack (The New York Times, 19-12-2017). Additionally, the victims thought it was an embarrassment that the invitation for the commemoration included the note "taxi costs will not be reimbursed", urging the relatives to use public transport (MailOnline, 19-12-2017). As a response to the accusations and critics, the German government, including president Frank-Walter Steinmeier and Chancellor Angela Merkel, admitted that the country had failed to provide them with adequate support and comfort, and they also acknowledged the security gaps and the feelings of abandonment (MailOnline, 19-12017; The Daily Telegraph, 20-12017; Deutsche Welle, 2-12-2017). During a closed-door meeting with the relatives, Merkel acknowledged that many wanted to have such a meeting sooner, and she emphasized how much her feelings were with the relatives and the injured (Deutsche Welle, 18-12-2017). Also, she mentioned that she would like to welcome the next of kin again in a couple of months (NRC, 19-12-2017).
Manchester. After the terrorist attack in the Manchester Arena, many victims said to have been left without support for psychological trauma due to the 'profound crises' in services. Survivors of the attack called for dramatic improvements in mental health care (The Guardian, 21-22-2018). As one of the victims, Ms. Murell, explained that the physical injuries were bad, however the mental side was much more challenging to deal with, and it took at least nine months to receive professional help. She stated that she had to find her own specialist and go private to get the support she desperately needed (The Independent, 20-11-2018). Also, the Kerslake report mentioned how services for children and young people were particularly hard to access, within waiting list up till eight months for posttraumatic stress disorder counseling (Manchester Evening News, 23-3-2018; Mirror, 24-3-2018). Nonetheless, some examples were found of victims that had managed to deal with the aftermath of the attack due to their family and strong network of friends (Belfast Telegraph, 16-5-2018).
London. On a more positive note, in the UK, special awareness has been raised for veterans, police, and others who have come to their aid during the attacks, to recognize the sacrifice that individuals have given. A former soldier, himself dealing with vivid memories of the Westminster Bridge attack, raised awareness among other veterans to not "bottle up" their emotions (The Telegraph, 6-8-2017). Within the Police Federation, a step in the right direction
30 has been made, since a national meeting took place on wellbeing within the service. Police officers are under much strain after attacks and facing the impact of those on their mental health and wellbeing (The Independent, 21-5-2018). Also, family liaison officers, the key point of contact for families in the aftermath of the attack, have been praised. Victims described it as "a vital source of support and comfort" in helping the shocked and bereaved (Manchester Evening News, 22-3-2018; Kerslake Report, 2018).
4.1.5. Unity and solidarity
During times of crises such as the terrorist attacks, victims expressed how they value the feelings of unity and solidarity coming from the general public, politicians, and the media. Among the affected, there is a need for public gatherings and collective mourning. The before mentioned letter of victims of terror attacks in The Telegraph (2-12-2019) stated how affected requested the public and media not to give terrorists what they want by sharing videos or giving in to feelings of hate. "Many of us felt supported by public solidarity and kindness, and it helps more than you can know", they said (The Telegraph, 2-12-2019; MailOnline, 3-12-2019). Belgian Prime Minister Michel was aware of how crucial it was not to exacerbate feelings of exclusion and to not create panic in order to maintain the unity of the citizens (Time, 21-3-2017). Mohamed El Bachiri, who lost his wife during the Brussels attacks, even calls for a countermovement: "a jihad of love" in an interview with NRC (16-2-2017). To express solidarity with the affected and to commemorate the victims, ceremonies were held at the airport, at Maalbeek metro station, and in the heart of the EU district, where the Belgian King and Queen unveiled a memorial (Time, 21-3-2017).
Berlin. In line with the words of Prime Minister Michel, still three years after the attack in Germany, Berlin's Mayor Michael Muller mentioned how it is important to not let terror crimes drive a wedge into society (Berlin Spectator, 31-12-2019). Also, former premier of England, Theresa May, emphasized during the commemoration of the Manchester Arena bombing that the country, no matter backgrounds, and faiths, has to join in solidarity to remember the victims that tragically lost their lives (Mail Online, 22-5-2018). One of the victims' parents shared how the vigil and the benefit concert after the Manchester attack showed a lot of support and community spirit and gave a sign that people cared about what had happened (Manchester Evening News, 22-3-2018). Also, Sue Murphy, chair of the "We Love Manchester Emergency Fund", and Ilona Burton, who lost a friend in the attack, both acknowledged the generosity and solidarity shown by the public, how they stood together in solidarity, love, and resilience and called it truly inspiring (Manchester Evening News, 17-8-2018; The Independent,
