How the media, through their coverage of 9/11, legitimized the future US military attack on Afghanistan, in the United States

Résumé du document

Here we will study the media and more particularly the press. Their role will be crucial since they will be the link between the government and the population. The attacks on New York and Washington triggered an overflow of articles for weeks on end, with the press mainly displaying an inclination towards military action from the United States against Afghanistan. Thus, the goal of this research will be to show how the press managed to legitimize the future U.S. military intervention on Afghanistan. This will be largely exemplified through a close analysis of the coverage of two major American newspapers, the New York Times and the International Herald Tribune starting from September 12 and ending on October 8, the starting day of the U.S. bombings of Afghanistan. This event and how the media will rally the population to the American cause triggers a number of interesting issues such as the influence exerted by the media on the population, the context of war which is an exceptional context and therefore should bring to light many tendencies, in addition to the fact 9/11 became an event known worldwide. This state of affairs then brings about the question related to how the media will cope with such popularity. While it emphasizes the role and influence of the media, this subject also brings about the issue of the role of the public when the nation is on the verge of waging a war and how, the media turn out to be an entire part of the policy process and from that, how important it is to have an objective and broad knowledge of the world at large so as to be able to make one's own opinion free of the official view imposed by the administration and its officials. To paraphrase Susan L. Carruthers, "what influence does television (or other mass media) have on the audience? How far and in what ways, does media shape rather than reflect public opinion, remains the subject of much academic discussion." (Carruthers, 2000, p. 7-8)

Extraits

[...] Indeed, nothing happens at random in history and the attacks on 9/11 surely have reasons and underlying motives. It cannot be denied that huge coverage was devoted to these terrorist acts but “overwhelmingly, the media omitted a critical, accurate discussion of the context in which they occurred” (Chomsky p. xiii). What is the consequence of such a bias coverage? People are submerged by a huge amount of information yet they are unable to make the necessary connection for an explanation. [...]

[...] Its goal is not to negotiate with the West, as was the case for Palestinian extremists in the 1970s and 1980s, but to destroy (International Herald Tribune, 09/17/01). In addition, the director of the office of transnational threats in the Clinton White House, Daniel Benjamin, asserted that “they want change that is so radical as to defy any conception of negotiations” (International Herald Tribune, 09/17/01). Indeed, when reading such statements displaying the terrorists' hatred, their radicalism and extremism, they appear as a very important threat brooding over the United States and the world. [...]

[...] This was the case for Dan Guthrie and Tom Gutting, respectively columnist for the Oregon Daily Courrier and city editor for the Texas City Sun. Both criticized Bush's absence in the first hours of the attacks and flying from bases to bases before finally landing in Washington at 7 p.m. Both journalists were fired after writing very critical articles about President Bush while both newspapers carpeted before the administration, offering apologies for what was, of course, irresponsible and inappropriate acts. [...]

[...] Here again, the press's job is easy since this was the real situation of Afghanistan. Yet, although it focuses on the prevailing predicament Afghan people live in, the press does not deal with the reasons of such a misery, thus indirectly attributing it to the Taliban. How can Americans be insensitive to such despair? As a consequence, the war finds itself justified. It will be war of liberation.” Chapter II Eliminating the emergence of dissent More than the organization of the newspaper itself is the suppression of the emergence of any potential dissenting voice. [...]

[...] As a result, conflict of nations yielded to the conflict of ideologies, first among, communism, fascism, Nazism and liberal democracy, and then between communism and liberal democracy” (Huntington, 1993). And now, the new struggle opposes terrorism and the civilized world. And indeed, 9/11 seems to have triggered the entrance into a new era in which the Western civilized world is forced to encounter the evils of terrorism as depicted in the press. How is this clash of civilizations presented by the media? [...]