"Does anyone, apart from BBC, object to the word being used about IS?"
Can't see how anybody can object to the word being used correctly about genuine terrorists like Isis
The problem arises when the word becomes a convenient catch-all to describe anybody whose politics they don't approve of (or who threaten their oil supplies.)
Some of the worst offenders are powers that are no strangers to acts of terrorism in their own National, political or economic interests
It is worth remembering the part some of these states have played in assisting the rise of Isis, et al
Jim Carroll