• Research
  • Politika
  • About
Carnegie Russia Eurasia center logoCarnegie lettermark logo
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [
    "Lina Khatib"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
    "Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "menaTransitions",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center",
  "programAffiliation": "MEP",
  "programs": [
    "Middle East"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "Gulf",
    "Middle East"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Political Reform",
    "Security",
    "Foreign Policy"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

In The Media
Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center

What is the Logic Behind Islamic State’s Media Strategy?

With no mainstream media channel through which to communicate, Islamic State uses extreme acts of violence in order to attract global attention online.

Link Copied
By Lina Khatib
Published on Sep 3, 2014

Source: Hurst Publishers

The Islamic State (IS) has made a name for itself as a purveyor of propaganda that makes al-Qaeda’s appear tame by comparison. In this, IS propaganda is very much a product of its time. According to its own strategy, IS needs to show the world that it surpasses al-Qaeda. Therefore, both its violence and media use must necessarily go beyond what al-Qaeda came to be known for. It is also a product of its time technologically because IS has fully embraced the potential of social media, making Osama bin Laden’s video messages of 2001 look archaic.

But beyond the factors of historical era and strategy, one can see in IS a distinct strand not witnessed in the propaganda of established paramilitary groups like al-Qaeda or Hezbollah. Al-Qaeda is a terrorist group that operates through loose networks. It has used digital media in a significant way, establishing its own media production company, As-Sahab. But because of its loose networks model, the material it produces can often only be accessed through peer-to-peer, proxy-based online communication. Parallel to this, in its early days, al-Qaeda sent video messages directly to global television channels, mainly al-Jazeera, relying on their craving for scoops to get free publicity for itself. Over the years, this strategy began to fail as al-Jazeera and other television channels refrained from letting their broadcasts become vehicles for al-Qaeda propaganda.

Hezbollah, on the other hand, is considered by many to have legitimacy within Lebanon. It has therefore managed to create its own mainstream media institutions for the dissemination of messages. It owns several websites, a radio station, a television station and a newspaper. It is able to use these communication channels openly and freely because it is an above-board participant in Lebanese political life, represented in government and with wide popular support. But Hezbollah’s sensitivity about its operations means that its use of social media is limited as it chooses to communicate with allies and opponents alike in a top-down fashion.

Compared with the above two models, IS faces a number of challenges. Although mainstream channels are covering the activities of Islamic State, including the recent beheadings of western journalists, ultimately no channel is repeating the mistakes made by al-Jazeera during the heyday of al-Qaeda. This robs IS of a reliable mainstream channel through which it can regularly communicate. Unlike Hezbollah, no country considers the Islamic State legitimate, which means that IS can try to establish its own media channels but will be unable to use them on a large scale. With increased cyber security measures following years of al-Qaeda and other terrorist activity online, it has become harder for terrorist groups to use the Deep Web—the part of the internet that is not visible to search engines—for outreach. With IS seeking further recruits and global visibility, these challenges leave it heavily dependent on the use of mainstream social media platforms like Twitter and YouTube.

Recently, both portals have begun to cooperate with western governments to remove accounts associated with IS. A narrower communication space is pushing IS to increase the ferocity of its violence in order to attract the attention of the world. With the United States leading air strikes on IS bases in Iraq, American hostages have in turn become IS targets. The two American journalists beheaded by IS, James Foley and Steven Sotloff, are the Islamic States’ Twin Towers. It’s no wonder then that the United States has declared the act of beheading Foley a ‘terrorist attack against the US’.

Despite this horrendous turn of events, there is no doubt that IS will be hurt significantly if it loses access to mainstream social media. One should not forget that IS uses propaganda to make itself appear larger and stronger than it actually is. Any plan to eradicate IS must include a media strategy in addition to a military and political one.

This article was originally published by Hurst Publishers.

About the Author

Lina Khatib

Former Director, Middle East Center

Khatib was director of the Carnegie Middle East Center in Beirut. Previously, she was the co-founding head of the Program on Arab Reform and Democracy at Stanford University’s Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law.

    Recent Work

  • In The Media
    Syria's Last Best Hope: The Southern Front

      Lina Khatib

  • Paper
    The Islamic State’s Strategy: Lasting and Expanding

      Lina Khatib

Lina Khatib
Former Director, Middle East Center
Political ReformSecurityForeign PolicyGulfMiddle East

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Why Are China and Russia Not Rushing to Help Iran?

    Most of Moscow’s military resources are tied up in Ukraine, while Beijing’s foreign policy prioritizes economic ties and avoids direct conflict.   

      • Alexander Gabuev

      Alexander Gabuev, Temur Umarov

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Georgia’s Fall From U.S. Favor Heralds South Caucasus Realignment

    With the White House only interested in economic dealmaking, Georgia finds itself eclipsed by what Armenia and Azerbaijan can offer.

      Bashir Kitachaev

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    What Does War in the Middle East Mean for Russia–Iran Ties?

    If the regime in Tehran survives, it could be obliged to hand Moscow significant political influence in exchange for supplies of weapons and humanitarian aid.

      Nikita Smagin

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    How Trump’s Wars Are Boosting Russian Oil Exports

    The interventions in Iran and Venezuela are in keeping with Trump’s strategy of containing China, but also strengthen Russia’s position.

      • Mikhail Korostikov

      Mikhail Korostikov

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    How Far Can Russian Arms Help Iran?

    Arms supplies from Russia to Iran will not only continue, but could grow significantly if Russia gets the opportunity.

      Nikita Smagin

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center
Carnegie Russia Eurasia logo, white
  • Research
  • Politika
  • About
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Privacy
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.