Download issue (PDF) - Nieman Foundation - Harvard University

Coverage of Terrorism
hatred. Such is the vague, undefined
“war on terrorism,” a battle unbound
by time or space. As Bush announced
in September, the enemy is some shadowy
“evil” that lurks in more than 60
countries around the world, and its
elimination may take years.
In Oceania, the war contaminates
every aspect of society, excusing pervasive
surveillance, censorship and
authoritarianism—Big Brother—all in
the name of protecting the homeland.
“Any sound that Winston made, above
the level of a very low whisper, would
be picked up by it,” wrote Orwell.
“There was of course no way of knowing
whether you were being watched at
any given moment…. You had to live—
did live, from habit that became instinct—in
the assumption that every
sound you made was overheard and,
except in darkness, every movement
scrutinized.” Of course, Orwell wrote
his book long before the development
of night-vision glasses.
Not since the dark days of Richard
Nixon has there been such potential
for good, penetrating, investigative reporting.
Secret arrests and detentions
of Middle Eastern men are taking place,
and the press is prohibited from tracking
what happens. Military tribunals
are proposed for suspected terrorists,
depriving defendants of American legal
protections. An Office of Homeland
Security is created beyond the reach of
congressional oversight and thus more
difficult for watchdog journalists to
monitor. Surveillance powers of domestic
intelligence have been expanded,
and now the FBI will be gathering
intelligence by dubious means
and without court orders, along with
investigating crimes.
The question is, is the media up to
these investigative tasks? Judging from
past performance, the answer is not
likely. In fact, the self-indulgent television
networks have been much more
of a problem than a solution during the
anthrax coverage.
Terrorism consists of two components—an
act of violence and the generation
of great fear in a large segment
of the public. Although some deranged
terrorist was responsible for the initial
act of sending a few deadly anthrax
letters, it was the networks that generated
enormous, disproportionate fear
throughout the country—which is exactly
what the terrorist was counting
on. Yes, it was a big story, but it was not
Armageddon. In a country of nearly
300 million, five people died and several
others suffered debilitating effects.
Yet as a result of each network tripping
over itself to outshock the other—endless
dire reports on how millions would
die not just from anthrax but smallpox,
hemologic fever, and nearly every other
disease known to man—large segments
of the public became understandably
paranoid. There are nearly 50,000
deaths from colon cancer each year,
yet how many minutes of airtime and
breaking new coverage does that subject
get?
Also during that same period it was
discovered that the Food and Drug
Administration was investigating the
deaths of 53 patients who used defective
dialysis filters manufactured by
Baxter International, one of the
country’s largest manufacturers of
medical supplies. Nowhere on television
was that ever reported even though
more than 10 times as many were killed
as by anthrax, and a brief story on the
topic might have saved some lives. It
just wasn’t as “sexy” or competitive as
anthrax.
Veteran television and radio journalist
Daniel Shorr said the nonstop
coverage was a serious problem. “The
networks have settled into a new familiar
routine of treating every anthrax
scare—most of them hoaxes—as a
major news event, with live reports
from correspondents, law enforcement,
and public health officials,” he
said. “Thus, a small investment in a
powdery substance can bring a big
reward in media attention for antisocial
elements who get their kicks that
way.”
Robert J. Samuelson, writing in The
Washington Post in early November,
agreed. “Our new obsession with terrorism
will make us its unwitting accomplices,”
he said. “We will become
(and have already partly become) merchants
of fear. Case in point: the anthrax
fright. Until now, anthrax has
been a trivial threat to public health
and safety: four people have died of the
17 known to have been infected. So far,
it’s the functional equivalent of a mad
gunman on the loose or a biological
Unabomber. By contrast, there were
42,000 deaths from car accidents and
17,000 from homicides in 1998…. The
coverage has so far been all out of
proportion to the actual threat.”
Another reason that much of the
media is not up to probing what is
probably the most important story in a
generation is that they spent the last
decade in an endless search of the
trivial. With a few exceptions—The New
York Times, The Washington Post, CBS
“60 Minutes,” and ABC “Nightline”—
the closest most reporters and television
producers came to investigative
journalism was taking a handout from
a staffer on the hill. “Before September
11,” wrote Samuelson, “the press was
caught in a prolonged process of selftrivialization.
We seemed to live in an
era dominated by the personal, the
small, and the titillating. The summer’s
big stories were Gary Condit and shark
attacks. Before that, there was Monica
Lewinsky. Great national issues with
heavy moral, political or social significance
were disappearing, consigned to
back pages or ignored altogether.
Among media stars, many were enthusiastically
self-absorbed, gleefully shrill,
and blissfully uninformed on matters
of substance. Attitude was king or
queen.”
Prior to the September 11 attacks,
for example, the network evening
newcasts had devoted a grand total of
58 minutes this year to bin Laden—
with ABC in last place. Yet in the four
months from May to September, the
same newscasts carried two hours and
59 minutes on the Chandra Levy story—
with NBC way out in front. Said Robert
Lichter of the Center for Media and
Public Affairs, “The Chandra/Condit
story showed us how low TV news can
sink.”
Another problem is the growing
xenophobia within the television news
business. According to the Tyndall Report
[a TV news monitor], foreign bureaus
provided only a third as many
minutes of coverage for the evening
newscasts on ABC, CBS and NBC in
Nieman Reports / Winter 2001 21