So apparently part of the reason the terrorist is being described as a "suspect" in the media rather than terrorist (even though he's obviously a terrorist) and it's being described as a "potential" terrorism incident rather than just terrorism is to do with the fact that he's still alive and therefore journos are being careful not to prejudice any court case where he's put up on charges of terrorism. Because that's what it'll be, right? As he's a terrorist.
With all that said, there's no excuse for all the dog whistle stuff being thrown around by the gutter press. Some apalling stuff being written and I struggle to believe that some outlets would be throwing the word 'terrorism' around as freely as they did in the last three attacks even if he had died.