Four different kinds of data are analyzed: (1) most relevant literature, (2) the media reports themselves, (3) interviews with journalists and policymakers using a written questionnaire, and (4) informal correspondence with journalists, scholars, and friends. The study concludes that terrorists use the media not only for conveying information to a mass audience but also for making converts and attracting new members. The news media themselves are in the uncomfortable position of having to choose between infringing on the public's right to know through censorship and becoming allies to the terrorists. The most serious effect of media reporting is an increase in terrorist acts resulting from publicity, imitative terrorism, and reduced inhibitions against violence. The Moluccan study explores media coverage of six acts of terrorism between 1970 and 1978 including train hijackings and the occupation of a school. The study concludes that the Dutch government had no major criticism of media activities during these incidents. However, conflict between government and media was inherent in the situation since the government wanted to release as little information as possible while the media desired to relate as much information as possible. The study argues that government-imposed censorship and self-censorship by the media are both negative aproaches to the problem. Instead the public should elect representatives to a media council, analogous to the political parties in parliament, which could issue guidance on the quantity and quality of media coverage. The study includes extensive bibliographical information and detailed answers to interview questions and questionnaires.