Are you sure
you want to see this?

The media decides what and how to communicate through a specific agenda-setting that changes according to different editorial positions, events and topics. Terrorism is one of the most controversial topic and, despite each source could define some editorial rules to respect, each terrorist event could open the debate again. For what concerns the original information about terrorism, and in particular the video-news produced by terrorist groups, the media receives an already-made news and they can choose how to share it with the audience, considering the massive consequences on the people, and on the web. Could choosing which content to spread modify the perception of the phenomenon? Could the total transparency of the information indirectly increase the terror diffusion or the “hate narration”; while on the other side, how could the censorship affect the audience?
The web reflects all these dynamics, it is the place where the controversy takes place and that gathers all of the people's reactions. So, the controversy could be considered as an axis between the transparency and the censorship, stretched by the audience that chooses their own information and reacts to the information given. The controversy is particularly burning in the United States, a sensitive country to the topic of terrorism, and particularly reactive both to the physical than the online side. The U.S.A lies in a paradoxical situation, since on one side it applies a strong control on the information of terrorism, and a massive repression online; but on the other side it is also the place where the most known uncensored video platform come from and where people's attention in mostly focused on uncensored terrorist contents.