You are part of the problem. Apparently some news sources don't get it. When covering horrific acts of extremist fringe groups most if not all news outlets will not discuss or publish the goals of those groups, and for a good reason, to help them get their message out, or lend credence to their movement, would be a crime by assisting those who perpetrated the horrible acts. However US news outlets don't seem to understand that is exactly what the do when covering stories like the recent bombing in Hyderabad, India.

First a little background of the city:

Hyderabad is a unique cosmopolitan city and home to people practicing Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, Jainism, and Zoroastrianism. Hyderabadis have developed their own distinctive culture, which is a mixture of ancient Hindu traditions of Telugu people and the centuries old Islamic Culture.

...

The cities population is estimated at 3.6 million or more in 2006 while the population of the greater metropolitan area is estimated at over 6.1 million. Religiously and culturally, the city is united with Christians, Hindus and Muslims. The main languages spoken are Telugu, Hindi,Tamil,Urdu and Deccani.

[ Wikipedia ]

Basically Hyderabad is a true success story of a people of different cultures and religions working together for the common good, just the sort of thing that extremists who pretend to have an Islamic bent, just can't stand. How to deal with this "blemish" in their rhetoric of the "two worlds"? Simple, drive a wedge between the Muslims and their neighbors with a terror act. If people die, and it's determined that the "Muslims" did it, the other communities will trust them less and withdrawal from cross-cultural and cross-religious engagements where they can.

So then, what are the voices of reason to do to fight this? Don't highlight the cause of these extremists by labeling this a "Muslim" or "Islamic" act. If we treat these vile extremists as just that, and make sure to use labels that aren't divisive, we hopefully act against their desires and help to invalidate their actions, and at least we don't assist them with their evil intentions. So who can we rely on to just not "get it"?

But, you may say, some of these sources are just quoting Indian officials who are saying that themselves. It's a tricky game these militant extremists play and just because the Indian government has fallen for their trap, doesn't mean news organizations should follow. Does this act make any more sense to anyone by using the self proclaimed label of the organization responsible? And certainly does this act represent, in anyone's mind, what any self-respecting, honest, Muslim from the majority of Muslims ever consider acceptable behavior? This linkage of the words "Muslim" and "Islam" to acts like this is the goal of these organizations. They want you to believe that this is what Islam stands for so that you will distance yourself from the Muslims of the world. Then they will have a much easier time to recruit additional followers and create a larger and larger rift between the decent people of the world, and we're helping them.

And before you jump all over me for this rant, ask yourself why a story like this one on CNN.com doesn't refer to these bombers as "Christian Terrorists".

Note: my survey was very unscientific I simply picked the first story about the bombings in India that I found on each site. Oh, and I was very surprised by the Washington Post and Reuters.