Who is Althouse? * View only LAW posts * Contribute * Shop AMAZON*
I am watching it. They are currently speculating that the plane's navigation systems must have gone awry to cause two planes to hit the two towers.It is absolutely devastating.
I'm watching it. It's impressive how the journalists hold onto their professionalism and ask well-framed questions designed to extract information and resist jumping ahead to conclusions, although to some extent it seems like denial, as they cling to the idea that it was a technical failure and an accident.
I watched it then, and don't care to relive it. I'm pretty sure I remember most of it anyway. At some point the talking heads realize it must be an attack and the whole reporting shifts. If they're replaying it chronologically, that's coming up soon, I think.
I too watched it unfold and won't watch it again. I rushed home and double-checked our emergency supplies, reached out to the whole extended family, sent wifey out to stock up on food, got a bunch of cash and a couple extra boxes of shotgun shells, filled water jugs and we hunkered down. I would have slapped on a coonskin cap had one been available. On day two with our airspace secure, I returned to work. We as a nation have survived things more terrible and the bastards that did this will not prevail against us.
The FOXNews coverage... about 5 seconds after the second tower is hit, the words "Osama bin Laden" comes out of John Scott's mouth. 5 seconds earlier they were also speculating about distracted pilot's sunlight, navigational foulups, etc.It's interesting to compare the remembered feelings of 5 years ago -- watching it with the cable guy in my living room (he had come to set up digital cable) -- of "What's happening?" and even "Wow!" (not flippantly, but the footage was spectacular) at the idea of it all. We (my wife -- not the cable guy)even took our son to Toys R Us that afternoon -- we lived in Texas. Viewing it now... a felt tense as I clicked the link and then a rising anger as the time progressed and I knew what was about to happen. Now I'm pissed. I can't believe that George Bush would let Karl Rove talk him into that.
The replay started 15 minutes before the first bulletin. I watched about 90 minutes, until the second tower fell.Weirdly, in the 15 minutes before the attack, CNN broadcast reports on hurricanes ("When the big one hits"), made reference to "bones in the closet" in another segment, ran a gushy segment on fashions the very pregnant, including lingering shots of a late trimester model in an midriff bearing get-up (which made me think about things about to burst). The last segment before the first bulletin concerned fears that Boeing stock might decline for such-and-such reasons.As for the coverage, CNN's anchors interviewed people who had no idea what they'd witnessed, including former FEMA head Witt (sp?), who sounded like a bumpkin. In one sharp exchange with an anchor, he acknowledged that FEMA never planned for a scenario in which a plane would catastrophically strike the WTC. The anchors repeatedly used words like "spectactular" and "incredible" to describe the horror before them, as if they were watching a movie. ("That is spectacular pictures (sic).") There were few, if any, references to people trapped in the buildings until, say, an hour into the coverage. And the first mention of terrorism didn't come until about 10-15 minutes after the second plane hit. In fact, so stunned was CNN that it took it about 3-4 minutes to verbally say that a second aircraft had hit, even though it had showed the footage live. At first CNN reported that somehow the fire in one building had caused a massive blast in the other.CNN probably contributed to the conspiracy theories that persist today. After the first tower fell, a screen label stayed up for many minutes saying "Third Explosion Topples Tower" or something like that. When the second tower fell, the obsequious Aaron Brown said an explosion in the building could have been the cause. (Brown kept apologizing to other reporters for cutting them off and querying them.)In their defense, the anchors clearly could not believe what they were witnessing, and at first kept grasping for rational explanations, such as navigational errors causing pilots to strike buildings. But over and over, the anchors would say things like "Let the pictures tell the story." More insight, poetry, and wisdom should be expected from such supposed authorities, especially when monumental events happen.
The problem with CNN anchors, when they're describing live coverage, is that unless they're intimately familiar with a location, they really can't add much. I vividly recall the Loma Prieta earthquake of 1989 -- was it really that long ago!? -- when they kept showing the pancaked double-decker highway. It took them for*ever* to realize the top half had collapsed onto the bottom.I also recall the report that the fire in the first building caused the explosion in the second, even though you could see the plane banking in.Of course, I doubt I could do any better. In fact, I'd probably be silent, a distinct no-no for TV.
Charles Johnson is reporting that CNN did not actually air ALL of its coverage--it cut the segment showing Palestinians cheering in the streets.Typical for CNN. We know what their agenda is (and it doesn't involve anything good for America or other Western democracies)Pretty amazing how the anchor's first guess was that there was a problem with the navigation equipment. It really was a different time back then. But CNN hasn't changed at all. It's still covering for the same villains and attacking the same American institutions.
Post a Comment