Cyber-warfare, cyber-terrorism and the choice of words

Last night I went to an excellent discussion at the Frontline Club titled, “Will the internet be the battleground of the 21st century?”

One of the questions addressed was whether or not such military-style rhetoric is appropriate, particularly because it can imply a great level of danger than is really the case. “We’re under cyber-attack!” sounds much worse than “a teenager has download a script and stuck our IP address in it”. It also is a choice of vocabulary which implies that resources should go to the military or the police rather than elsewhere, a particularly important point given the priority the government is giving to the issue.

Vocabulary certainly is important (as I’ve commented on elsewhere), though I do wonder whether in this case, the choice of military vocabulary is simply a reflection of such vocabulary having spread right across our use of language. It is certainly common in politics with its air war, ground war and more. It is also common even when it is misleading, as with a recent BBC report that talked of “running battles” in Cairo – when in fact a key point was that the military was not getting involved.