From Onion News Network | Sept. 5, 2011
NEW YORK — Promising to cover the event responsibly and with the kind of delicate restraint it deserves, the nation’s cable news outlets announced Monday that while they would be devoting some airtime to the 10th anniversary of 9/11, they “certainly wouldn’t be going overboard with it.”
According to the news providers, they only intend to devote 15 minutes of coverage to the anniversary, tops, saying it is their obligation as professional journalists to do justice to the victims’ memories as opposed to using the occasion for their own ratings gain.
In addition, network representatives admitted it would be lazy news reporting to use the 10th anniversary of the terrorist attacks as an excuse to fill up hundreds of hours of programming with repetitive video packages and anchors repeatedly asking their guests, “How did 9/11 change America?”
“We’re planning to send one reporter to Ground Zero, have him tape a couple of two-minute segments, nothing too crazy, and that should pretty much do it,” said CNN’s senior vice president of programming Katherine Green, adding that the 24-hour news channel would not be making 9/11 the focus of every single program on the network because, according to Green, “What more is there to say, really?” “We’ll also briefly check in with Anderson Cooper at the Pentagon, and that will be the only time we hear from him during the entirety of our coverage.”
Thank you, PW, for continuing to be a voice of reason and clarity. I look forward to whatever you have to offer on the subject.
I’ve been kind of dreading this anniversary — the picking at the wound, the revolting profiteering. It’s as if this *thing* of 9/11 (I don’t even know what to call it — myth?) is encapsulated, fiercely tended and protected like a sacred flame. And not just by those who seek to capitalize on it.
Anyone who dares question anything about it becomes “unpatriotic” or unfeeling or “not one of us” or something. It’s a very weird dynamic, if you ask me. I find it very telling that such a myth has grown around it and that it’s not open to question 10 years on.
The longer this goes, I fear, the less likely the truth(s) will come out and be accepted. There will be too much at stake to change the story. But then again, a weak foundation cannot forever support what’s built upon it.
Amanda,
You are absolutely right. And the conscientious decency of trepidation is being cynically exploited.
Needless to say, you and Eric have my support as you take this one uphill against the wind.
len —
the funny thing is that i just helped eric research tomorrow’s Daily feature, which also ties in with this topic. i almost didn’t post this onion story for fear of undercutting our own post, but it seemed too good to hold until later.
i have a feeling we’re not the only ones thinking along this wavelength. but as your comment points out, there is a strong, if largely unspoken fear of backlash when it comes to criticizing *anything* to do with 9/11, including commemorations and shows of ‘memorializing’. it’s a tricky line to walk; it may not be as strong as it was in the first couple years after the disaster, but it’s still there.
it seems to go beyond “what will people think of me” to (perhaps) fears of actual, tangible retribution — even if criticisms are valid and aimed at clear exploitation. hell, i had second thoughts myself about posting this bit: “what if this is seen as the same kind of exploitation, just in different clothes? what if it *is* the same thing, but i just can’t see it?”
man, it gets complicated if you let it.
Amanda,
Wow. Thank you for posting this. Been thinking about just this issue for a couple weeks but did not know how to express it in a way most people would get it without being triggered out of reason. Leave it to the creativity of the folks at The Onion to find the middle way.
In addition to lazy reporting and caving in to group-think there is another, discomforting motivation that seems obvious – keeping the cover story going. The fact that none of major media’s big money sponsors (cars, petroleum, pharmaceuticals, banks, insurance companies, etc) have resisted paying for all of this air time indicates that they have an investment to nurture (at great expense).
It’s very possible that the dominant paradigm will go broke just because of the expense of hiding the truth. Then again, that’s not certain. If (like the Titanic, WW I, WWII, American westward expansion, prisons) the dominant paradigm is able to twist 911 so that it has entertainment value, the cover-up could actually become profitable. It’s up to us to do the same thing that got Glenn Beck dumped – don’t buy the show or products of the sponsors.
LOL
Only PW editors can say it better than The Onion.
Don’t we wish?