Terrorism is essentially violence for effect and is directed not only at the instant victims of it but also at a wider audience, which makes it dependent upon the media as a vehicle for impacting this wider audience. Because of its limited power to have a direct impact upon the systems it challenges, terrorists seek to expand the power of their actions through the influence of the media, and since the media enterprise is based on competition and profit, it is inevitable that the media should be become involved in the terrorist act, which is, in its embryonic stages essentially theater. Also, by providing extensive coverage of terrorist incidents, the media may give the impression that they sympathize with the terrorist cause, thereby creating a climate congenial to more violence. The media have often hindered the work of law enforcement agencies to deal with terrorist incidents, thus jeopardizing the successful resolution of such incidents. The media have also been helpful to the authorities in managing terrorist incidents without abandoning the responsibility to inform the public. The media can ensure that the public does not panic at the terrorist threat. Since a terrorist goal may be to expand repressive actions of government, any attempt to limit the freedom of the media would play into the hands of the terrorists. Further, it could lead to ever more violent and expansive terrorist incidents to gain the public's attention. No one institution should determine or advise how the media should treat terrorist incidents. The government and private agencies involved in reacting to terrorist incidents should converse about the pros and cons of media policy in the coverage of terrorist incidents. Such policy development should be based upon research that examines the interaction of terrorist incidents, official responses to them, and media actions. Forty notes are listed.