|You are in: Talking Point|
Thursday, 12 September, 2002, 16:47 GMT 17:47 UK
Television stations across the world broadcast Wednesday's ceremonies at Ground Zero to mark the 11 September attacks on the US.
Newspapers gave heavy coverage to the anniversary and the BBC screened a documentary filmed inside the twin towers as the disaster unfolded, which had drawn an audience of nearly 39 million when shown on America's CBS network.
The documentary brought back distressing memories for some families who fiercely objected to the US broadcast on grounds of insensitivity.
But Richard Wajda, a survivor of the Trade Center attacks told BBC News Online the media was helping "because it shows the world is coming together; it shows that everyone is united and we are going to get through this".
He described the coverage as "proper" and said it helped survivors who had moved away from New York to be part of the memorial.
Were the commemorations appropriate? Did the coverage hit the right note? Did the world media get it right?
Being humans we tend to have very short memories in terms of emotions and promises made.
Some of the portrayal of the consequences of 11 September brought sharply home the fact that we are already making the mistake of abandoning a country where war is a way of life.
The media should use its power to push for work creation projects in Afghanistan and create an environment where people are too busy earning a living to fight.
I thought it was a pity the BBC coverage of the service in St Paul's Cathedral cut away to New York before the first silence, missing a hymn, the TS Eliot reading, the lighting of the first candle and an anthem. For those who wanted it, the New York coverage was on two other channels and shown many more times during the day.
I can understand why the anniversary received so much coverage in America, but the British media went unnecessarily over the top.
Simon Doderer, England
"Lest we forget". After the war I'm sure images of various battles, and the destruction of cities was painful to those who had lost loved ones, as this will be for many years to come. But I believe it is right to show them, to remind us all how dreadful this actually was. It is all too easy to sit at home in a comfy chair and push such atrocities to the back of the mind after the event. It was a proper thing to do, and shows the terrorists that this will never be forgotten or forgiven.
I am a Muslim, my religion and I do not advocate violence. So do not think that the minority are representative of the majority. So I urge you not to stereotype, I urge you not to chastise a people because of the few.
9/11 was surreal, it still feels surreal that anyone could advocate such evil and then justify it in the name of God.
From what I saw of the coverage, it was generally well-presented and attempted to keep to an appropriate tone. However, the blanket coverage on TV, especially the spin-off documentaries shown about the events of a year ago, worried me. I got the distinct impression that the news agencies were attempting to milk the disaster for free headlines, replacing the reporting of news with the attempt to sell us the victims' grief as entertainment. Some of the documentaries bordered on being voyeuristic.
This documentary had to be shown. The attacks resulted in the biggest death toll on US soil and no one could argue that they were not a defining moment in history. This was the only film of what actually happened that day, and to prevent that from being shown would be indefensible.
The media hyped up the event way too much and I was really quite sick of all the coverage. Worse things have happened but I don't see anyone making such a big deal out of them - all this was just because it happened to Americans.
Alex Banks, UK
With regard to 11 September 2001, where nearly 3,000 died, I think the media behaved decently. With regard to the events 11 September 1973, which led to over 30,000 deaths in Chile, I think that the media was appallingly negligent.
Jon E from France is spot on. The news has an obligation to be objective and all we got was sentimental froth with no substance. Instead of trying to be constructive the BBC again showed that it is not willing to do its public duty.
When will the media leave New York and the USA to come to terms with the dreadful disaster of 11 September? Why did the Six O'Clock News have to be read live from New York? Just how many reporters did the BBC need out there, what has it cost us the licence payers and what good did it do the grieving relatives?
For God's sake leave them to grieve in peace and let the rest of the world get on with living while we can.
The media, especially in the US, seem to have concentrated on the remembrance ceremonies and did not discuss why theses events happened in the first place.
Top Talking Point stories now:
Links to more Talking Point stories are at the foot of the page.
|E-mail this story to a friend|
Links to more Talking Point stories
To BBC Sport>> | To BBC Weather>> | To BBC World Service>>
© MMIII | News Sources | Privacy