I dont know what it is like in the rest of the country, but here in NY there are over 60 different documentaries and tv news programs reshowing and looking at the different perspectives of 9-11 this week because of the one year anniversary..
Even all of the memorials they are having on 9-11 in NYC at ground zero I think is too much.
I am not saying this was not a tragic event, and we should still remember. We should still fight the war on terrorism.
But I think the media is going to make it that no one wants to hear about 9-11 anymore, and that is not a good thing.
September 11 is being overkilled by media
-
Ghosthunter
- SG VIP
- Posts: 18183
- Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2001 12:00 pm
-
monkeyhead
- Posts: 2758
- Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2001 1:27 am
- Location: Killeen, TX
i think your right, and as a matter of fact, my mom a very sensitive person was watching one of these and started to cry, and we were not directly affected at all....
now i can only imagine what its like for someone who lost someone and has to see all these 9/11 shows.... the kind of horrible memories it will re-kindle for them....
prayers and condolences to those that are in need.
now i can only imagine what its like for someone who lost someone and has to see all these 9/11 shows.... the kind of horrible memories it will re-kindle for them....
prayers and condolences to those that are in need.
-
tenacious e
- Member
- Posts: 54
- Joined: Wed Jul 24, 2002 7:24 am
- Location: Honolulu, Hawai'i
I will watch none of the media blitz. I refuse to. It's ridiculous and I will not watch it. We'll be going to Church (as usual) and making our remembrances there. I don't need the media's over-feed of over-hyped memorials. I also refuse to buy any of their crap that has been thrown in our stores too. This is absolutely ridiculous.
We Remember...
9|11
40 miles SW of Mt. St. Helens
9|11
40 miles SW of Mt. St. Helens
Originally posted by Dakota
I will watch none of the media blitz. I refuse to. It's ridiculous and I will not watch it. We'll be going to Church (as usual) and making our remembrances there. I don't need the media's over-feed of over-hyped memorials. I also refuse to buy any of their crap that has been thrown in our stores too. This is absolutely ridiculous.
It's interesting to see how the media is (again) going after the ratings with this...I don't think they realize the backlash that they will get from the public...
I mean, look at this article here: http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/09/08/ar911.first.lady/
When the First Lady says turn off your TVs on Wednesday because there will be too much press about 9/11 (especially too much for kids), then that should send some sort of signal to the press...
------
“The most beautiful thing we can experience in life is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer pause to wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead: for his eyes are closed.” - Albert Einstein
“The most beautiful thing we can experience in life is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer pause to wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead: for his eyes are closed.” - Albert Einstein
There have been a couple of shows lately about it I have watched, more clinical type stuff as opposed to pull at your heartstrings. That kind of info I enjoy(sorry, lack of better word). There was a show on yesterday that was talking about the why's of the collapse and other issues such as the Hudson river pushing against the slurry wall threatening to flood site.
Also, Frontline (PBS) has a good two-hour show about the "campaign against terror" I believe. It starts with the attacks -briefly- and then goes on for the rest of the show and talks about are attacks on Afghanistan, the good and the bad parts.
Like I said, at this point, the clinical views are what interest me about the events. I doubt I will intentionally watch anything else about it right now, or on Wed. Even radio stations are replaying their shows from that morning though. gonna be a tough one to avoid. and should we?
Also, Frontline (PBS) has a good two-hour show about the "campaign against terror" I believe. It starts with the attacks -briefly- and then goes on for the rest of the show and talks about are attacks on Afghanistan, the good and the bad parts.
Like I said, at this point, the clinical views are what interest me about the events. I doubt I will intentionally watch anything else about it right now, or on Wed. Even radio stations are replaying their shows from that morning though. gonna be a tough one to avoid. and should we?
Originally posted by Bouncer
There's TV shows about it because there's interest in it. The media is reacting to what you, the viewers, want. You're blaming the messenger for bringing the message you demand to have.
No, no, no Bouncer. Don't put us in that crowd. No one here is saying they want it, so we don't fit that so-called mold that the media wants everyone to think we fit. Though I may be in the minority — not sure about that because EVERY person I have spoken to about this say the will NOT watch any of it — the media blitzes our TV's with what they think we want. In this case I think they are wrong, but most people won't say anything anyway so most people's opinions are not ever heard.
Not to leave this post in recrimination, I'll part by saying that you can't really put everyone in that group. Especially here.
I undertsand what you are alluding to Bouncer, but I just don't believe that fits in this particular case. The last thing I want to do is sit around my TV, crying and wringing my hands in angst. I can relive that day like it was yesterday in my head at any time I want. We need to remember and respect, but let us not over-mourn what we cannot fix. It's time to pick up the pieces, learn from the past, and move on.
We Remember...
9|11
40 miles SW of Mt. St. Helens
9|11
40 miles SW of Mt. St. Helens
-
reverse
- Regular Member
- Posts: 496
- Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2001 12:00 am
- Location: In a van, down by the river!
It will be interesting to see the demographics of who is actually watching it. I wouldn't be surprised that the least amount of viewers would be in NY.
If I had lost a loved one, I surely wouldn't want to be reminded of the tragedy on every channel. But until the next tragedy (lets hope there isn't any more), this is the biggest media buzz at the moment.
If I had lost a loved one, I surely wouldn't want to be reminded of the tragedy on every channel. But until the next tragedy (lets hope there isn't any more), this is the biggest media buzz at the moment.
Originally posted by Bouncer
There's TV shows about it because there's interest in it. The media is reacting to what you, the viewers, want. You're blaming the messenger for bringing the message you demand to have.
Regards,
-Bouncer-
I disagree. Why then aren't there more Playboy Channels?
Seriously, the only talk of 9/11 I've heard is on TV, no one I know is bringing it up in personal conversation.
What TV is doing now is the same thing that radio does with a new song - overexposure until our eyes glaze over. Their demand forecasts are exceeding the actual numbers - par for the course for them.
I agree with Dakota.
I, for one, have been watching as many as I can find time to see. I choose to use them to reinforce in my mind the pain it has caused so many thousands of people. Those of us who were not there, have only these images to relate to the terror.
It needs to be shown.
Those who do not care to see it again, can simply change the channel.
It needs to be shown.
Those who do not care to see it again, can simply change the channel.
Observe everything...focus on nothing..
Originally posted by Bouncer
There's TV shows about it because there's interest in it. The media is reacting to what you, the viewers, want. You're blaming the messenger for bringing the message you demand to have.
Regards,
-Bouncer-
silence is acceptance......
I think I may need to voice my thoughts to the local networks.
I will attempt to catch CBS' re-playing of the documentary being made by the two French (?) men, which suddenly took a turn for the worse that morning. I had missed it the first time it aired and had wished to see only that one show.
But beyond that, I'm not going to watch a single piece covering the events of last year. I see no point in doing so, and if anything, I'd spend the time calling any of my friends and family currently living/working in NYC.
But beyond that, I'm not going to watch a single piece covering the events of last year. I see no point in doing so, and if anything, I'd spend the time calling any of my friends and family currently living/working in NYC.
Originally posted by twwabw
I, for one, have been watching as many as I can find time to see. I choose to use them to reinforce in my mind the pain it has caused so many thousands of people. Those of us who were not there, have only these images to relate to the terror.
It needs to be shown.
Those who do not care to see it again, can simply change the channel.
I agree, it needs to be shown. It's the AMOUNT that's currently being discussed.
I also agree about changing the channel.
Originally posted by BIGJIMSLATE
I will attempt to catch CBS' re-playing of the documentary being made by the two French (?) men, which suddenly took a turn for the worse that morning. I had missed it the first time it aired and had wished to see only that one show.
But beyond that, I'm not going to watch a single piece covering the events of last year. I see no point in doing so, and if anything, I'd spend the time calling any of my friends and family currently living/working in NYC.
Yeah, missed about the first 20 minutes of that show myself...that show and the one on HBO are really the only two that I want to watch myself...
------
“The most beautiful thing we can experience in life is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer pause to wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead: for his eyes are closed.” - Albert Einstein
“The most beautiful thing we can experience in life is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer pause to wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead: for his eyes are closed.” - Albert Einstein
Originally posted by Bouncer
There's TV shows about it because there's interest in it. The media is reacting to what you, the viewers, want. You're blaming the messenger for bringing the message you demand to have.
Regards,
-Bouncer-
Hi davy19
I totally agree with you on this situation davy19. Bouncer i must absolutely disagree with your assessment on it though.
The difference with Todays Media & that which i grew up with is... In my time the Media Reported the News and Events of the Day.
Todays Media Creates it. Walter Cronkite i'm sure is Not pleased.
With the Advent of CNN 24/7 they must have News, so they drag events on and on to fill airtime.
Many events as sad as they may be would be reported the day of the event and that would be it. Today however they milk it for days at a time.
They bring in Lawyers, Doctors Etc. to further define the situation again adding to airtime that they desperately need to fill.
It is Total overkill in most cases imho.
We in Canada are subject to almost as much, though our News is not quite up to the level of inundation as that of the US, but we are going that way as well it seems.
There are, or have been a handful of programs about the Shocking Tragedy of 9/11 that helped us all, the majority of them however has been unnecessary imho and serve only to dilute the magnitude of 9/11 & to deaden peoples view of it through such overkill.
It seems the Media for the most part have become Ambulance Chasers to support the need for airtime.
Many people become depressed listening to so much tragedy from day to day and would be well served by gaining their News via the Local Paper & tuning out the CNNs of the world imho.
I know i watch much less of it now preferring the BBC & other sources of input.
Just my thoughts on the matter for what their worth.
regards
minir
The fact that you wrote, "It needs to be shown," implied that we're saying it does NOT need to be shown, which is not the case.Originally posted by twwabw
Um... OK. What part of that did it seem like I didn't grasp?
I'm glad that you're getting use of all the airtime they're putting forth, you're obviously their target audience, which is not a slam by any means.
It does nothing for me however, which is why I agreed with you about changing the channel as well.
Originally posted by minir
Hi davy19
I totally agree with you on this situation davy19. Bouncer i must absolutely disagree with your assessment on it though.
The difference with Todays Media & that which i grew up with is... In my time the Media Reported the News and Events of the Day.
Todays Media Creates it. Walter Cronkite i'm sure is Not pleased.
With the Advent of CNN 24/7 they must have News, so they drag events on and on to fill airtime.
Many events as sad as they may be would be reported the day of the event and that would be it. Today however they milk it for days at a time.
They bring in Lawyers, Doctors Etc. to further define the situation again adding to airtime that they desperately need to fill.
It is Total overkill in most cases imho.
We in Canada are subject to almost as much, though our News is not quite up to the level of inundation as that of the US, but we are going that way as well it seems.
There are, or have been a handful of programs about the Shocking Tragedy of 9/11 that helped us all, the majority of them however has been unnecessary imho and serve only to dilute the magnitude of 9/11 & to deaden peoples view of it through such overkill.
It seems the Media for the most part have become Ambulance Chasers to support the need for airtime.
Many people become depressed listening to so much tragedy from day to day and would be well served by gaining their News via the Local Paper & tuning out the CNNs of the world imho.
I know i watch much less of it now preferring the BBC & other sources of input.
Just my thoughts on the matter for what their worth.
regards
minir
A cogent post, in typical minir fashion.
Well done.
Hi Minir,
'The difference with Todays Media & that which i grew up with is... In my time the Media Reported the News and Events of the Day. "
It did a bit more than that and we both know it. It was also far more state controlled. Do you remember the Fireside chats? In any case, the media when you grew up, and when I grew up, was quite a bit smaller in scope and resources. They had few ways of bringing you instant news, the paper was the primary source of information and it had time and need to condense everything down to column length.
If I had to choose between state controlled minimal media and uncontrolled multiple sources of information. I choose the latter. Because if I am ignorant of the news, then it is my choice to be so. And not ignorance imposed by the gov't.
The point I'm making, is that you're comparing todays media (in all it's forms) to a gov't controlled, much smaller media in the past. There's also an assumption on your part that the media used to "not make news".
Baloney. No offense but bal-on-ey.
It used to be common practice for a newspaper to report not the news, but the editors take on the news. This gave rise to yellow journalism. Even worse, if the information reported was inaccurate or biased, the public had no real way to verify it. If Cronkite got it wrong.. how did you know?
That's what's changed. There are now so many sources of information that we get inundated with differing views. Everything from Rush Limbaugh to Alan Dershowitz, and all points in between. It is at times an information overload. I appreciate that, but the trick to stop that then is the same as it is now. Turn off the TV. Put down the paper, go outside, and play with the dog. Or read a book. Or watch a movie, or do any one of the million things you can do besides watch the carnage again and again and again.
The cold truth is that media is a money making device. It makes money if it brings the public things they want to see. it does not make money if it doesn't. The public wants to see death and devastation, so it brings us that. The public doesn't care about opera, which is why PBS has to be gov't sponsored. Do not blame the private media for catering to our morbid tastes. It is we who drive that. It is our morbid fascination. And it always has been. This is not a new phenomenon at all.
They've been doing stories and plays, and books, and movies, and TV shows on Jack the Ripper for over 100 years now. They were doing them when you grew up, and when I grew up.
Because we're still interested in prostitutes being murdered and mutilated.
I'm reminded of lyrics from a 10000 maniacs song called "Candy Everybody Wants'
If lust and hate is the candy,
if blood and love tastes so sweet,
then we give 'em what they want.
So their eyes are growing hazy 'cos they wanna turn it on,
so their minds are soft and lazy.
Well... who do you wanna blame?
Regards,
-Bouncer-
ps: You can find the complete lyrics here:
http://www.alwaysontherun.net/10K.htm#aaai
'The difference with Todays Media & that which i grew up with is... In my time the Media Reported the News and Events of the Day. "
It did a bit more than that and we both know it. It was also far more state controlled. Do you remember the Fireside chats? In any case, the media when you grew up, and when I grew up, was quite a bit smaller in scope and resources. They had few ways of bringing you instant news, the paper was the primary source of information and it had time and need to condense everything down to column length.
If I had to choose between state controlled minimal media and uncontrolled multiple sources of information. I choose the latter. Because if I am ignorant of the news, then it is my choice to be so. And not ignorance imposed by the gov't.
The point I'm making, is that you're comparing todays media (in all it's forms) to a gov't controlled, much smaller media in the past. There's also an assumption on your part that the media used to "not make news".
Baloney. No offense but bal-on-ey.
It used to be common practice for a newspaper to report not the news, but the editors take on the news. This gave rise to yellow journalism. Even worse, if the information reported was inaccurate or biased, the public had no real way to verify it. If Cronkite got it wrong.. how did you know?
That's what's changed. There are now so many sources of information that we get inundated with differing views. Everything from Rush Limbaugh to Alan Dershowitz, and all points in between. It is at times an information overload. I appreciate that, but the trick to stop that then is the same as it is now. Turn off the TV. Put down the paper, go outside, and play with the dog. Or read a book. Or watch a movie, or do any one of the million things you can do besides watch the carnage again and again and again.
The cold truth is that media is a money making device. It makes money if it brings the public things they want to see. it does not make money if it doesn't. The public wants to see death and devastation, so it brings us that. The public doesn't care about opera, which is why PBS has to be gov't sponsored. Do not blame the private media for catering to our morbid tastes. It is we who drive that. It is our morbid fascination. And it always has been. This is not a new phenomenon at all.
They've been doing stories and plays, and books, and movies, and TV shows on Jack the Ripper for over 100 years now. They were doing them when you grew up, and when I grew up.
Because we're still interested in prostitutes being murdered and mutilated.
I'm reminded of lyrics from a 10000 maniacs song called "Candy Everybody Wants'
If lust and hate is the candy,
if blood and love tastes so sweet,
then we give 'em what they want.
So their eyes are growing hazy 'cos they wanna turn it on,
so their minds are soft and lazy.
Well... who do you wanna blame?
Regards,
-Bouncer-
ps: You can find the complete lyrics here:
http://www.alwaysontherun.net/10K.htm#aaai
Hi Bouncer
The News of the past was not about making money for a Network. I was Commercial Free & was there for the express purpose of reporting the News of the Day.
The people who reported it in general where hardened Reporters with much experience in their chosen fields. To look attractive was nice, but unimportant, the main thing was to be respected in what you did and believed and trusted by their audience.
It has only been in the past few years here in Canada that it was expected to produce revenue, much to the detriment of the Quality of the News now presented.
Yes we have much more in the way of resources at our disposal which is a good thing in many instances, but because they are there does not mean they must be used for meaningless reporting, which in many cases they are.
Newsprint not having unlimited space condenses what is normally of concern and interest to their local communities & the most significant news of the World.
The Newsflashes of " Herds of Rampaging Elephants destroying crop fields in Zimbabwe " are thankfully left up to the CNN's of TV land.
As to the State controlling the Media, in the overall not so here in Canada, with some exceptions.
I grew up in Wartime and some News of course was slanted to build moral, or censored if it helped protect the Men & Women fighting to save us from collapse of the Free World.
Most News however was accurate & much sought after by the citizens of our Country. The Daily Paper was read with relish and the Radio was constantly tuned to the BBC. The Foreign Correspondents from many Countries stationed throughout the World voiced their comments with the best information at hand.
If unsure, then report it as such, or do not report it at all, was more the watchword than not as i recall.
There was simply too much at stake to risk falsehoods being allowed to go over the airwaves and flourishing much to the detriment of all who accepted these reports as true.
On Saturday when we took in the local Movies we saw the News of the World, which depicted a much starker image of the fighting etc. TV was not available to the masses at this time.
When TV did arrive it patterned itself after Newsprint and was staffed by the leading Newsmen of the day. All was well for many years.
People sat behinds desks and read the news in a controlled & distinct manner. They wore shirt & tie.
Today we are inundated with people not so business like in look or demeanor, who love to interject their own points of view, or spin on the News at hand.
This imho has no place in a Newsroom. It should be totally unbiased reporting at it's highest level.
All reports naturally contain the body of those who have written them, but not to sway the News in one way or another.
As to them catering to our morbid tastes, i would disagree in that they are in a position to uphold the value of the presentation and do not have to lower their standards to a Jerry Springer level imho.
They can draw a significant viewership without such pandering imho and if not, should not be on the air in the first place.
Yes we all have the option of turning it off, but do we really. CNN the biggest culprit of all imho has forced others to follow the meaningless drivel they quite frequently produce in order for others to compete.
As the Predominant News Channel one would hope that those in a position of power would be less concerned with the bottom line and more in tune with Good Taste & the feelings of many who are victims of some of these horrible tragedies, that are constantly harangued with the details of events they'd so much like to put in the past.
Myself i have long ago decided to vary my News sources and rely on those who present it in a manner best befitting my values and tastes as i know most others have as well
Have a Good one
regards
larry
The News of the past was not about making money for a Network. I was Commercial Free & was there for the express purpose of reporting the News of the Day.
The people who reported it in general where hardened Reporters with much experience in their chosen fields. To look attractive was nice, but unimportant, the main thing was to be respected in what you did and believed and trusted by their audience.
It has only been in the past few years here in Canada that it was expected to produce revenue, much to the detriment of the Quality of the News now presented.
Yes we have much more in the way of resources at our disposal which is a good thing in many instances, but because they are there does not mean they must be used for meaningless reporting, which in many cases they are.
Newsprint not having unlimited space condenses what is normally of concern and interest to their local communities & the most significant news of the World.
The Newsflashes of " Herds of Rampaging Elephants destroying crop fields in Zimbabwe " are thankfully left up to the CNN's of TV land.
As to the State controlling the Media, in the overall not so here in Canada, with some exceptions.
I grew up in Wartime and some News of course was slanted to build moral, or censored if it helped protect the Men & Women fighting to save us from collapse of the Free World.
Most News however was accurate & much sought after by the citizens of our Country. The Daily Paper was read with relish and the Radio was constantly tuned to the BBC. The Foreign Correspondents from many Countries stationed throughout the World voiced their comments with the best information at hand.
If unsure, then report it as such, or do not report it at all, was more the watchword than not as i recall.
There was simply too much at stake to risk falsehoods being allowed to go over the airwaves and flourishing much to the detriment of all who accepted these reports as true.
On Saturday when we took in the local Movies we saw the News of the World, which depicted a much starker image of the fighting etc. TV was not available to the masses at this time.
When TV did arrive it patterned itself after Newsprint and was staffed by the leading Newsmen of the day. All was well for many years.
People sat behinds desks and read the news in a controlled & distinct manner. They wore shirt & tie.
Today we are inundated with people not so business like in look or demeanor, who love to interject their own points of view, or spin on the News at hand.
This imho has no place in a Newsroom. It should be totally unbiased reporting at it's highest level.
All reports naturally contain the body of those who have written them, but not to sway the News in one way or another.
As to them catering to our morbid tastes, i would disagree in that they are in a position to uphold the value of the presentation and do not have to lower their standards to a Jerry Springer level imho.
They can draw a significant viewership without such pandering imho and if not, should not be on the air in the first place.
Yes we all have the option of turning it off, but do we really. CNN the biggest culprit of all imho has forced others to follow the meaningless drivel they quite frequently produce in order for others to compete.
As the Predominant News Channel one would hope that those in a position of power would be less concerned with the bottom line and more in tune with Good Taste & the feelings of many who are victims of some of these horrible tragedies, that are constantly harangued with the details of events they'd so much like to put in the past.
Myself i have long ago decided to vary my News sources and rely on those who present it in a manner best befitting my values and tastes as i know most others have as well
Have a Good one
regards
larry
Minir has a point. So does Bouncer. We do now have all the news at our fingertips. Whereas in the past the news outlets were a bit more pressed to find and report every little nuiance. Its just today ya gotta put on some BS filters and wade yer way thru. Imagine a poor soul that only got his/her info from Limbaugh. One sided and totally blind to some important truths. The "old" news broadcasts were held to a different light. Since they were few and far between, the golden rule was honest reporting and keeping it straighforward and correct. People woulda had tantrums if the press had interjected thier views on the broadcast. Now we have multiple outlets, and can truly tailor our viewing habits. So, if Fox ain't yer bag, then zip over to MSNBC...and so on. I have given up for the most part, and filter my own news with the 'net.
-
Ghosthunter
- SG VIP
- Posts: 18183
- Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2001 12:00 pm
A few other points I would like to make.
It is not just the media. Here is an example, everyday I go through Grand Central to get to and from work, everyday since last 9-11 they have had this wall up, with photos of missing people, hunderds of photos. Now today I noticed they even moved this wall to the center of Grand central and there are plenty of people hovering around it.
Well to be honest, I dont want to see it anymore. I will never forget 9-11, but I want to move on with my life already, and you cannot when you are reminded every single day. I am now getting to a point where I am starting to say I dont care anymore, and that is not very good at all.
Truth is people dont want to see this, not people in NYC that I know of. Most people who lost loved ones will not even be at the memorial, they will not turn on tv.
Yes 9-11 was a tragic day, but so was Pearl harbor, so was Hiroshima, so was the times of Hitler. Where are all the memorials for those?
It is not just the media. Here is an example, everyday I go through Grand Central to get to and from work, everyday since last 9-11 they have had this wall up, with photos of missing people, hunderds of photos. Now today I noticed they even moved this wall to the center of Grand central and there are plenty of people hovering around it.
Well to be honest, I dont want to see it anymore. I will never forget 9-11, but I want to move on with my life already, and you cannot when you are reminded every single day. I am now getting to a point where I am starting to say I dont care anymore, and that is not very good at all.
Truth is people dont want to see this, not people in NYC that I know of. Most people who lost loved ones will not even be at the memorial, they will not turn on tv.
Yes 9-11 was a tragic day, but so was Pearl harbor, so was Hiroshima, so was the times of Hitler. Where are all the memorials for those?
I haven't read all the responses to this thread but I can say that you are not alone with the Media saturation of 9/11.
We have 5 free to air national channels and all are giving prime time slots to cover their own "exclusive and never before screened footage".
There are Australian TV Anchors and journalists in New York sending reports back daily and the advertising for the exclusive and never before screened footage is on almost all advertising breaks. They will all be broadcasting live on the day.
Are they feeding us a diet we want? Guess they are otherwise it wouldn't be pushed the way it is.
To speak personally, the events of 9/11 saddened and horrified me. Having said that, I feel it will be tough going to see this happen all over again, every night of this week. But what's different about this week? We have seen the towers collapse at least once a week since that tragic day.
I just hope that one day we will all be able to move on from this.
Croc.
We have 5 free to air national channels and all are giving prime time slots to cover their own "exclusive and never before screened footage".
There are Australian TV Anchors and journalists in New York sending reports back daily and the advertising for the exclusive and never before screened footage is on almost all advertising breaks. They will all be broadcasting live on the day.
Are they feeding us a diet we want? Guess they are otherwise it wouldn't be pushed the way it is.
To speak personally, the events of 9/11 saddened and horrified me. Having said that, I feel it will be tough going to see this happen all over again, every night of this week. But what's different about this week? We have seen the towers collapse at least once a week since that tragic day.
I just hope that one day we will all be able to move on from this.
Croc.
-
ColdFusion
- Posts: 3542
- Joined: Mon Oct 30, 2000 12:00 am
- Location: Vancouver, BC
Originally posted by BMED
did you loose the remote?
The off/power, it is a big and red/orange button!
Right on BMED! That's the key to the whole thing: JUST SAY NO! Don't watch it. Let your TV's go black on 9|11. Write ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX, PBS, Discovery, HBO, TLC, History, ET, ummm wait a sec. That's a lot of emails there!
We Remember...
9|11
40 miles SW of Mt. St. Helens
9|11
40 miles SW of Mt. St. Helens
-
tomsykes
- Regular Member
- Posts: 436
- Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2000 12:00 am
- Location: Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
I just finished watching a two-hour documentary about 9/11 here in Australia. There is still huge media attention to it here, especially now that Australia's involved in the activities toward Iraq as well as the existing ones in Afghanistan.
I still find it sad, but interesting at the same time. I used to live in New York, and know a number of people who were in the WTC at the time. It certainly puts things into perspective.
The way I see it - if you aren't interested, or are going to complain, then just turn it off. I'm sure most people don't care for your whinging.
I still find it sad, but interesting at the same time. I used to live in New York, and know a number of people who were in the WTC at the time. It certainly puts things into perspective.
The way I see it - if you aren't interested, or are going to complain, then just turn it off. I'm sure most people don't care for your whinging.
-
Ghosthunter
- SG VIP
- Posts: 18183
- Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2001 12:00 pm