Compare these two article snippets about the same event. One, from the New York Times, is much like most you will find all over the Internet:
“A suicide bomber wearing an explosive vest struck deep inside the heavily fortified International Zone on Thursday, killing eight people when he detonated inside the Parliament building just a few feet from the main chamber.”
Now read the same incident, as reported by Fox News:
“A homicide bomber detonated himself inside the Iraqi parliament cafeteria Thursday, killing at least eight people â€” including three lawmakers â€” in a stunning assault in the heart of the heavily fortified, U.S.-protected Green Zone, an American military spokesman said.”
Note that only Fox News insists on calling bombers who kill themselves in order to gain the access needed to kill others “homicide bombers” instead of “suicide bombers”.
They do this because it fits into some weird, crypto-conservative philosophy at Fox that I don’t quite understand, where they don’t want to acknowledge that the terrorist is committing suicide in performing the act, or something like that.
But it is a weird phrasing. Homicide is understood in a terrorist bombing. So calling them “homicide bombers” doesn’t provide any added, useful information. However the phrase “suicide bomber” does provide very useful information; it explains the tactic used and goes towards explaining how an otherwise impossible terrorist attack became more possible to accomplish (since it is always harder to stop someone who is intending to die themselves).
Fox News’ use of language does a disservice to its readers and listeners by inadequately informing them, and twisting the English language around to fit some strange political agenda of their own.