When the Word “Terrorist” Is Not Used | Foreign Policy Watch
R Kassick's profile photoDaniel Cordeiro's profile photo
Not surprisingly, here in Brazil he's not being called terrorist either (despite him repeatedly calling us "dysfunctional country that can never work because of miscegenation"). He's a "right-wing extremist" accused of terrorist acts -- and even "terrorist acts" is sparsely used. The only mention to him as a terrorist I found was in one article from g1 (http://glo.bo/qodGPk) -- and still the term does not make into the headlines.
Nonsense (sorry Kassick ;-)).

The Brazilian media (press and television) are calling this a terrorist act. I don't see the difference in calling it a "terrorist act" or calling the men "terrorist"? :-P It is completely different from the situation reported in the link shared by Chris, where it is stated that "the term ``terrorist act'' is also absent from the headlines".
I've been away from TV for quite a while and I don't read the printed versions of the local pasquims, so I may be biased ;)

Internet-news-wise, the term is absent from headlines and in the text he is hardly called "terrorist": his acts are referred as "acts of violence", "crimes agains the humanity", "shootings", ...
I don't even agree that much with the story, but it reminded me that ZeroHora, the main consumer of hyperbolic terms in brazilian media, doesn't have any headline like "Hecatomb in Norway: Terrorist kills 20" or "Moral Decadence: Norwegian terrorist wanted whores in a public park before shootings"
ZeroHora?! Now we are talking about local pasquims. ;)