Did/Is the media cover 9/11 too much?

[Caliburn24]

9/11 was a big deal for me personally. I never would have joined the Army and gone to war had it not happened.

But the media coverage of the event in later years bothers me. It feels exploitative somehow. 9/11 was a horrible event that killed a lot of people and sent us into a couple of wars that killed more people. But it did not change my view of the world.

There are bad people in this world who want to do bad things. the Beirut bombing, the Cole, various others attacks. 9/11 was just their most successful attack, and it happened to be on American soil.

While it is rarely stated directly, it is strongly implied by the reverent and almost fetishistic tone of the coverage of 9/11 that it is some sort of lodestone or defining point in the American psyche. And for me it is not. It was horrible and tragic, but that is it.

And it really annoys me when it is implied(by the countless hours of coverage) that the victims of 9/11 are somehow more worthy of my grief and sympathy than the civilian victims of the suicide bombings I saw in Iraq. Or the soldiers I saw killed. There will be no monument or shrine built for the sixty odd people killed in Balad Ruz in the middle of 2008 in a double suicide attack. There will be no books or films about it. The event will only be remembered by those of us who were there.

So whenever I see a news reporter trying to coax an emotional response from a New Yorker about 9/11 it just makes me mad. Don't try to manipulate our emotions.

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

Hey, BDJ.

Earth to BDJ....

I was just asking a question. I never said it was no big deal. However I was asking if the media was covering it too much or not. I can't change what happened nor should I be made to feel guilty by watching the coverage.

 

[Trekker4747]

But the media coverage of the event in later years bothers me. It feels exploitative somehow. 9/11 was a horrible event that killed a lot of people and sent us into a couple of wars that killed more people. But it did not change my view of the world.

On this part I will, partly, agree. The media and politicians made it into a big thing in the following years. It was certainly an event to remember and reflect on given the tragedy of it but the media made it into a lot.

But more than that the politicians did and in that more so the Right. It became their rallying cry to keep themselves in power and all politicians in general used 9/11 as a way to force a political agenda in a atmosphere of fear. (See: The USA PATRIOT Act.)

The 10th anniversary is a bit of a "milestone" (so to speak) so I can see the reemergence of the media coverage and retrospectives but at the same time it seemed a bit much to me. For me that day is still very strong in my mind and I didn't want to be reminded of it. Didn't watch any of the specials on last night. Didn't want to.

I suspect as time goes on it will blur more into the background and become another historic thing that happened. Right now it's still fresh in everyone's memories.

We've probably no reliable way of knowing, but I can only assume whatever passed for the media after the attack on Pearl Harbor the coverage was pretty heavy (getting us into WWII aside) and the reflection of it in the passing years was too (again, WWII aside). And here we are 60 years later and it's just a day that's remembered. There's some tribute, some remembrances and such, a special or two but hardly a media frenzy.

I'm sure as more time passes 9/11 will be much the same thing. Right now, it's still only a decade in the past, the surviving families are still alive and suffering from their losses, people impacted by the news and visuals on TV still have those memories thriving in their memories. The scars are still showing and even the replacement structure(s) aren't even finished yet.

Even people who were children at the time of that event, today in high-school or college, feel the impact. (The resulting war(s) have been going on all during this time.)

Hell, my niece who was born two years and some change after 9/11 knows the weight and meaning of that day.

Let's give it a generation or so before we decide if the anniverseral coverage of it is too much.

 

[DimesDan]

I can't honestly answer for American viewers and what Americans broadcasters were showing them, but to answer the original question of whether the media coverage was over saturated in the lead up to the tenth anniversary from a English viewpoint: I think they may have went a bit over board by having documentaries a week and a half before the event. I think just having a few things focusing on it over the weekend would have been fine, but it did honestly feel like dodge the 9/11 documentary on all the different terrestrial channels here, I only watched one (because my girlfriend started watching it) and avoided watching anything news related on Sunday.

I just hope that a bunch of documentaries have been commissioned for 12th October 2012, 11th March 2014 and 7th July 2015 and that American broadcasters give more than a footnote in their broadcast of the tenth anniversaries for those events.

As for the original news coverage of the day, due to it occurring just after lunch and my being in college and although, ironically being on a Media Production Course and the first assignment we did was the consumption of a major news event, I missed all news that day between just after 14:00 and 19:00 so can't really comment apart from I know BBC went rolling news and I saw the collapse of the towers three times with in ten minutes of getting in.

 

[iguana_tonante]

Iguana, you're out of line on both Hati and the Christmas tsunami. BOTH received tremendous media coverage.

More recently, the earthquake in Japan received several weeks worth of media coverage.

During the event. But the coverage shrinks to a few mentions during newscasts and maybe one 1-hour special the following years. Hardly the media circus that annually surrounds 9/11.

 

[stj]

The media coverage of an anniversary was enormously excessive. Most of the ceremonies went out of their way to emphasize the supposed contributions of the military, specifically citing the invastions of Iraq and Afghanistan.

Despite all the endless hours the curious fact that some of the hijackers boarded in the home of a FBI informant isn't widely publicized. Even recent news of high ranking officials accusing others of not sharing this kind of information before the event isn't covered, even on the anniversary of the attack.

And posts about the unprecedentedness are just more crap. The anthrax attacks were even more unprecedented and even more significant in a political sense, but they get flushed down the memory hole. Which phrase is supposed to applied to the evil Commies, but you don't have to have an actual pneumatic tube for the bosses to propagandize you. Don't let that worthless piece of shit Orwell confuse you.

The problem with the coverage, in other words, is that it isn't about 9/11 at all. All the posts whining about the victims and how horrible it all was don't give a rat's ass about the victims. It's all about justifying endless mass murders in an insanely bigoted war against all Muslims every where for all time. It's no

 

[the G-man]

Iguana, you're out of line on both Hati and the Christmas tsunami. BOTH received tremendous media coverage.

More recently, the earthquake in Japan received several weeks worth of media coverage.

During the event. But the coverage shrinks to a few mentions during newscasts and maybe one 1-hour special the following years. Hardly the media circus that annually surrounds 9/11.

The tenth anniversary and the first anniversary had extensive coverage here but the other years had relatively little. On what do you base your opinion that every year is a media circus?

 

[Davros]

I'm still trying to figure out why comparing 9/11 to Pearl Harbor is "insulting". Insulting to whom?

To the participants in the attack for one.

If anything it's about the single most apt comparison a person can make. Both were surprise attacks that resulted in roughly the same amount of deaths and launched the country into war.

One was an attack on a military target by an actual country, the other one was an attack on a civilian target by a handful of criminals.

 

[clint g]

Iguana, you're out of line on both Hati and the Christmas tsunami. BOTH received tremendous media coverage.

More recently, the earthquake in Japan received several weeks worth of media coverage.

During the event. But the coverage shrinks to a few mentions during newscasts and maybe one 1-hour special the following years. Hardly the media circus that annually surrounds 9/11.

Go figure, they hold anniversary celebrations for 9/11 in the country where the attack occurred Until this day they STILL dedicate a day to Pearl Harbor coverage and that happened 70 years ago.

 

[clint g]

I'm still trying to figure out why comparing 9/11 to Pearl Harbor is "insulting". Insulting to whom?

To the participants in the attack for one.

Really? I haven't heard them complaining about it

If anything it's about the single most apt comparison a person can make. Both were surprise attacks that resulted in roughly the same amount of deaths and launched the country into war.

One was an attack on a military target by an actual country, the other one was an attack on a civilian target by a handful of criminals.

And that changes the fact that it's the closest comparison one can make....how?

Iguana, you're out of line on both Hati and the Christmas tsunami. BOTH received tremendous media coverage.

More recently, the earthquake in Japan received several weeks worth of media coverage.

During the event. But the coverage shrinks to a few mentions during newscasts and maybe one 1-hour special the following years. Hardly the media circus that annually surrounds 9/11.

The tenth anniversary and the first anniversary had extensive coverage here but the other years had relatively little. On what do you base your opinion that every year is a media circus?

I'm trying to figure that one out myself. I fucking LIVE in NY and I can hardly say every year has been a media circus. There are annual memorial services but I would hardly call that a circus.

Iguana, you're out of line on both Hati and the Christmas tsunami. BOTH received tremendous media coverage.

More recently, the earthquake in Japan received several weeks worth of media coverage.

During the event. But the coverage shrinks to a few mentions during newscasts and maybe one 1-hour special the following years. Hardly the media circus that annually surrounds 9/11.

Go figure, they hold anniversary celebrations for 9/11 in the country where the attack occurred Until this day they STILL dedicate a day to Pearl Harbor coverage and that happened 70 years ago.

 

[ALF]

Does anyone think they didn't cover it enough?

 

[Sean Aaron]

I left the states within a couple of weeks of the attacks and by then I recall hitting my interest threshold. Coming to the UK I probably have seen less coverage, but nevertheless it's been an annual fixture with some kind of BBC "9/11 X Years On" special and repeats of old interviews and documentaries.

I think a small news bite about it being the etc., etc. anniversary would suffice. Of course I haven't watched tv in nearly a year so I don't really have anything to complain about - just my 2p.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Yep, way too much.

Playing the footage of the crashes has nothing to do with memorializing the dead. It's like a family repeatedly watching cell phone video of a family member being murdered in order to "honor their memory." In the case of 9/11 people are just transfixed by the spectacle, awful as it is, and should simply admit it.

 

[Davros]

I'm still trying to figure out why comparing 9/11 to Pearl Harbor is "insulting". Insulting to whom?

To the participants in the attack for one.

Really? I haven't heard them complaining about it

Irrelevant.

And that changes the fact that it's the closest comparison one can make....how?

Criminal acts and military actions really shouldn't be compared, just like we shouldn't compare this idiocy called the "war on terror" with the war that resulted from the Pearl Harbor attack.

 

[BDJ]

Hey there Spaghetti Monster,

I do apologize for not citing the proper reference for the "no big deal" comment. My mistake and I should've known better.

But, you shouldn't see coverage as something to make you feel guilty. The coverage I've seen has been properly reverent and informative.

I personally think that as humans we've become so insular and narcisisstic that anything the media does to upset our "me" vibe can be seen as something other than what it's meant to be. We take it personally and get a bit angry because they just won't let us forget it and go on about our business.

I don't think the coverage is manipulative nor disrespectful. I think it should be taken for what it's meant to be. A time to remember, honor and respect those sacrificed in one of the largest mass murders of civilians in the history of this planet.

I think we don't give enough time to remember and reflect and honor those whose lives were taken for no other reason than they were chosen to die by someone who held them in no regard whatsoever.

This goes for everything from 9\11 to the Holocaust and beyond.

I hear teenagers shocked to learn that the Nazi's and the Holocaust were real and not just something made up for movies. 6 million died there. In another few years, if we keep complaining about a little media time dedicated to those lost on 9\11, will we be hearing teenagers remarking how those events were made up for a movie as well??

We must never forget. It's our duty and responsibility to remember.

We have Memorial Day, Veterans Day, Flag Day and the Fourth of July to remember those sacrificed for our freedoms. BUT...I talk to young folks all the time who think these are just "holidays" and are more worried about their parties and grilling and drinking.

If we don't use the media to help us all remember, in a few years, 9\11 could also just become another day to scarf down a hot dog and not go to work.

Don't feel guilty. Feel reverent. Feel respect. It's our duty to honor the victims and their families.

If you had a loved one murdered in such a fashion, wouldn't you want them to be remembered and honored too?