There is a natural temptation among journalists, one we should be careful not to overindulge, to see in the violent deaths of, or threats to, our number events of special significance that require particular attention.
Or that require special condemnation or a form of special pleading on the victim’s’ behalf. The romantic “journalist as hero” is something of a fun, self-indulgent vanity that may serve to sell newspapers but can in reality be a sideshow to the real story.
Yes, the brutal execution by Isis of a reporter, like the reprehensible threats to two INM journalists in recent days, are notable for their perpetrators' willingness to target civilians, non-combatants or anyone who gets in their way.
They are also easy, often risk-free targets, because of the willingness of journalists – and, yes, their courage – in placing themselves in harm’s way. And, yes, such attacks represent attacks on a key element of our democracy, a free press, their intention to inspire fear and create a reporting chill around their perpetrators’ criminal activities. They win – and they will not do so – if they succeed in silencing us or our colleagues.
But, in a proper perspective, this is a story of feuding, ruthless drug gangs who prey on the communities that many of them are drawn from. A story of an under-resourced war against drugs here and internationally and against a gun culture that had embedded itself in our inner-cities long before the recent deaths.
It is a story of how gangland bosses have long evaded being held to account and have squirrelled away ill-gotten assets out of reach of the taxman and the Criminal Assets Bureau.
That they should add threats to journalists to their modus operandi is hardly surprising.