In a secular society, the media - broadcast, print, digital, are all enforced with the responsibility of being an objective, unbiased platform that connects the common people with the leadership. But what happens when the link between the people and the authority is attacked? In Bangalore, India, on 5 September 2017 Gauri Lankesh was shot. Gauri Lankesh was a credible, objective senior journalist who openly voiced her opinion. An attack on a journalist is still an attack on the common man's belief in the social truth, and thus an act of violence and terror. While there were rallies all across the major Indian cities, like Mumbai and Bangalore, police reports are claiming the murder to be a professional person's job. Lankesh was an outspoken journalist and also criticized certain Hindutva right-wing extremist policies, and thus leaders are even doubting her murderer to be committed by someone politically involved.
In a democracy, can crimes against the media be accounted as acts of terror?
Terrorism can be defined as violence against civilians with political aims and motives.
It will be bit extreme to call it terrorism instead of murder. Moreover, every section of society (including right wing parties) have openly condemned the attack in this particular case.
Even for countries like China and North Korea, where media is handed extreme punishments for reporting against the state, it will be an act of infringement of rights and freedom but can't be called terrorism per se.