The Unedited Truth: Why MSNBC Re-Airs 9/11 Coverage

Isn't it ghastly? Will we be accused of capitalizing on the nation's grief? Is it still too soon?

Those were just some of the questions we faced when deciding whether to replay NBC's 9/11 coverage when I was General Manager of MSNBC back in 2006. As I watched MSNBC air that coverage for a fourth year today, many of those same questions remain.

It wasn't an easy call. After retrieving the tapes and watching the first four hours from that morning, beginning with the "reports" of a plane crash, it was clear the coverage from the morning was beyond mesmerizing. Seeing the events unfold in real time on television forces us to relive those emotions and feelings moment by moment. In the initial minutes we retain a glimmer of hope that maybe - just maybe - it isn't quite as bad as it seems. As time passes, however, those shooting pains re-emerge as each terrifying detail of the morning unfolds, ultimately leading to the conclusion that it is that bad, and worse. The NBC anchor and reporting team handled it as well as anyone could have hoped. They were careful, methodical, at times overtly saddened but always calm.

I knew people would watch the replay, but when dealing with 9/11 we all knew the decision could not and would not be one based on ratings. The question had to be, is it the right thing to do?

Some have called it gruesome or ghoulish, even referring to it as "death porn". Maybe so, but it also really happened. New York City is spending well over a half billion dollars to create a memorial to ensure we never forget that day. What better way to assure that happens, than by watching the event, as it happened for most, on television? It's powerful and disturbing because it's so real. Simply put, there is no way to sanitize that day, and to do so would be a disservice.

That does not mean the country was ready for the replay in the first couple of years after 9/11. The difference? In 2003, for example, as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were getting underway, 9/11 was still effectively news, not history. At what point does that definition change? It's tough to say. In 2006, 9/11 was not being covered or discussed nearly as often and it had just started to feel it was fading into the background for many.

No one was forced to watch MSNBC coverage. I watched it for the fourth year in a row. Many others will have chosen to change the channel. But in a world where cable news is often consumed with internecine and sometimes invented squabbles, seeing one of the most important moments in American history as it aired, in real time, seems to be exactly what cable news can and should do best.

Originally posted on Mediaite.

 

 

Follow Dan Abrams on Twitter: www.twitter.com/@danielabrams

Comments

[lapdogs]

So re-airing what it was like on September 11th, 2001 is "Death Porn", according to some.

In that case, what is it called when the History Channel or Military Station (or other stations) show us what it was like in 1941 on December 7th - year after year - as that "date that will live in infamy" gets relived?

[Conk]

They do it to drill the lies deep into our minds, so that we never question the egregious and very questionable tripe that is floated out as the truth.

[jsgaetano]

And always missing from the replay of the footage is how Cheney told NORAD to do nothing for over 45 minutes, and how Bush/Cheney's ignoring of terrorism allowed their Saudi friends to accomplish 9/11.

[giussi]

I think it's a brilliant choice.

I was glad to have the option to watch the footage and listen to the commentary on MSNBC as well as the covereage on other channels of the memorial ceremonies being held around the country.

Thanks, MSNBC.

[BonnieG123]

I'm still mesmerized by footage from WW!! and can't pull myself away from the tv when watching anything covering the holocaust. Sometimes you just have to stop, put yourself in a moment or a few hours for reflection. By replaying that footage MSNBC allowed those of us who wanted to have that opportunity to have it a nd speaking for myself I appreciated it.

[mikebarden]

I know this sounds ghoulish, but...
I just stared in fasination at firsf.

[slybacon]

I understand the need to remember..­.I think.... as far as being "doomed to repeat it" and all that...

And yet sometimes i wonder if perhaps forgetting isn't all that bad. I guess what I mean is sometimes we hold onto pain, which allows us to hold on to our anger, and our sadness, through much of our lives.

Really when it comes down to it, the only time that "never forgetting" is a good thing is if we have searched and found our own accountability in the situation.

It's the difference between, "I will never forget what those go.dd.am mu sl.ims did to my country" versus "I will never forget that, because of my addiction to consumption, i played a part in the the exploitation of other nation's resources which led to war famine and death."

Until we come to understand why we we allowed this to happen, no amount of "not forgetting" will ever mean anything.

[lupinella]

You nailed it.
9/11 should always be remembered for those who were lost on that day, as well as those who died due to the machinations of our government, before and after.
I will never be an apologist for the terrorists. I WILL constantly be vigilant in watching what we do overseas and at home that help to lay the groundwork for these horrors to occur.
Never again should our citizens die at the hands of extremists.
Never again should we arm them.

[miksmaster]

I think we need to see the video of the attacks. "Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it."
Seeing video of 9/11 reminds me that the attacks happened under a republican administration that exploited the attacks to further their s i c k agenda.
It reminds me that I will NEVER, EVER vote republican. If a really worthless democrat comes along, I'll vote INDEPENDENT. I will NEVER consider the republican party legitimate.
Bush/Cheeny - shooting their mouths off every chance they get "we kept you safe for 8 years". Yeah, you kept us safe alright - except for that 9/11 thing where approx. 3,000 people died. The worst attack on US Soil and repubs claim they kept us safe. Nothing but propaganda.
I remember when I saw Bush standing on that pile of rubble that used to be the WTC, with a megaphone in his face and his arm around a NY fire fighter. He had that stupid smirk on his face. To him, it was just a grand photo op. He smiled / that stupid smirk... I knew then our country was in trouble.
That's just one reason we need to see the video / no matter how hard it is to watch. We must never forget the attacks and we must never forget the sick political party that tried to exploit the attacks for their own political gain.

[Pearlswan]

This argument for showing the "unedited truth" in full is so weak it would be laughable if it weren't so horrific. MSNBC--psy­chotherapi­st in chief for America? How ridiculous! Get a video and watch it with your therapist if its so therapeutic. Its America's most embarrassing moment broadcast yearly for all the world to see how vulnerable we are as a free nation! Even more ridiculous. Why not rebuild and show the world how mighty we are instead of groveling in death and destruction as if that's gonna do something of great significance for anyone anywhere? And, its disrespects the victims, no doubt about it.

[blindjester]

"Its America's most embarrassing moment"

Embarrassing? What a strange reaction.

A crime was committed. The shame and embarrassment is on the perpetrators.

[CGI]

I see your point, but I don't agree that it's an embarrassing moment - not anything seen in the video, at least. The real defeat and embarrassment was losing chunks of that freedom and that open society, based on that kind of vulnerability argument. Things like the patriot act and warrant-less wiretapping and torture... In any case, I watched some of it, and there was, in the newscasters' struggle to be dispassionate and keep control of the facts and just do reporting, a sort of nobility. Also, I agree 100% on the rebuild part...

[trevjr]

yes, it really happened, it is part of our history. I noticed that the History channel played alot of videos that day also. No one is forced to watch it. I watched only a part of it but the memories of 8 years ago came flooding back to me. The video is a powerful reminder of what happened that day and how much we have changed since then. I am amazed that we now accept that our phone calls are listened to and our email is read. Just amazing.

[dcg4mn]

I've lived 10 blocks from WTC for 25 years, my son born and raised here; it's our neighborhood. I was 3 blocks away on 9/11.
The first 4 or 5 years after may not have been to soon for some, but it was for me; it took that long before I could think of that day for more than a minute without becoming upset, sometimes weeping.
Last night I watched your real-time coverage for the first time. As you know, our televisions lost signal in the first moments, and I spent most of the day waiting to give blood. I never saw any live TV coverage - only clips at a friend's in Harlem a couple days later.
I wasn't sure whether re-airing this coverage was a good idea or whether I'd be able to watch: I was, and I did.
Of course there were a few inane comments from the Couric and Lauer, which we expect from TV news, especially live. But overall they were appropriately restrained and somber.
It was a big and tragic day in history, re-airing your coverage disrespects no one. Many were too young that day to understand what it was like - especially for NYers - and perhaps why it changed the world.
In contrast, I also watched a 9/11 show on NatGeo yesterday. While some of its imagery, interviews, and analysis were worthwhile, that they chose to "pump it up" with clichéd fear-mongering voiceover was completely idiotic, disrespectful, and wrong.

[MichiganDem]

The re-airing only shows how weak NBC's coverage was that day. I was in a TV newsroom that morning where several channels were on. CNN was far superior.

[trueconserv]

I watched MSNBC yesterday morning and they didn't show one minute of 9/11.
They are so enamored by Obama that they didn't consider terrorists to be a threat.

[Poboy]

The way I see the cable news and /or broadcast news "coverage" of the events of 911 is this. The American public was convinced to be frighten and malleable. They were taught by "news" organizations to respond emotionally from a tragedy, to leave aside their clear thinking logic.
By showing those planes repeatedly flying into the World Trade Towers and the Pentagon, these news merchants and charlatans created a false reality, where emotions caused the public and the government to react against the best interests of the country.

In my view, what was needed was careful reflection and investigation, which the "press" made nearly impossible with its incitement of hysteria, and clear accountability for lapses in the country's intelligence and defense systems. All made nearly impossible from the "coverage" by these incompetent miscreants.

[aramos]

The attacks of 9/11 should be aired in their entirety, every year. Some too quickly have forgotten not only what transpired, but what the war on terror is all about. (the 21st century idealogical war, that we will be fighting for decades.)

[dvoconnor]

Would you be willing to watch video of people dying and suffering in Iraq and Afghanistan?

[HeimeBach]

Sure, if you're willing to condemn the insurgents in Iraq and the Taliban if Afghanistan? My guess?, probably not..

[blindjester]

Does your TV only get MSNBC?

Are you forced to watch it?

What people might be **willing** to do and what they should be **allowed to choose** to do are quite different ideas.

[seawolf77]

Yeah those same people that call it "death pron" are the same people that watched The Passion Of The Christ 11 freakin times, arguably the most violent movie ever made. Of the 96 mintues like 88 of them show an infliction of pain or outright torture. No other movie is even close. Congrats Mel Gibson. You are the King. For some reason the truth has gotten so hot to handle only the top minions of the Republican Party should be privy to it. This is that whole "smartest man in the room stchick". Why can't they just go away?