The acquiescent Media after 9/11

Friday, September 09, 2011


Bob looks back at the media's initial response to 9/11, when journalistic independence took a backseat to patriotism.  He says journalists performed their real patriotic duty when they stopped being compliant and started questioning authority once again.

Comments [10]


"[...] have made me feel alone and like I'm being gaslighted."

You are being gaslighted, but not the way that you think. The liberal press is playing at revisionism.

A simple FOIA request of Iraq war plans from the Pentagon will confirm that in his first year of office, President Clinton ordered the Pentagon to draw up and actively maintain war plans for the invasion of Iraq.

Sep. 18 2011 04:50 PM
Rochelle from Minnesota

Mission Accomplished! Thank you for all your programs, this one was especially helpful because the amnesia some of us have about how we got into invading a country we had no right to invade, which had nothing to do with 9/11, took our eye of the prize of the real enemy, and the celebrations of the Bush "victory" of a war we are still waging, the cost in human life on both sides, and the affect on our economy, in relation to the relative quiet over the current administration's success in getting Bin Laden, have made me feel alone and like I'm being gaslighted. It was a breath of fresh air to know I am not alone, though clearly in the minority, or maybe silent majority, that the US acted as lynch mob toward a county pointed at as "evil", with no real evidence, or subsequent proof, and no apology or acknowledgement we did the WRONG thing. If we don't acknowledge our mistakes we can't possibly avoid future ones, and we shouldn't trust the same people who led us into such a debacle!

Sep. 16 2011 09:17 PM
Lon Zimmerman from St. Louis, MO

The coverage and comments regarding Dan Rather represent the worse piece of radio I've ever experienced. Could not have been more biased. We need another program to examine and comment on how On The Medai comments on the media.

Sep. 14 2011 02:13 PM
David from NJ

Golly, Paul Krugman says that Bush and Giuliani used 9/11 for profit, but I can't hlep but thinking that Garfield is using it to hammer the media on not going after... you guessed it, Bush.

During the Bush year, OTM became On The Bush Administration, but Obama has continued rendition, he's got drones killing people, he's contnued Gitmo, and he's added to our wars. When will Bob favor us with an essay on that, and throw the shoe in his direction?

Sep. 13 2011 10:17 PM
Philip Prindeville from Portland, OR

Steve from Iowa:

"No steel-framed highrise had ever collapsed from fire before -- largely because it's not physically possible (open air fires don't burn hot enough)"

First, it wasn't "open air", it was in a confined space. And second, if fire doesn't melt steel, then how would steel have been forged in the first place?

Sep. 11 2011 03:44 PM

Thank you all very much for today's entire program, as for every week, but especially for this essay. It's difficult in the face of so much emotion and flag-waving to speak truth. Make no mistake, I am deeply moved and grieving for the families and for our nation. But we ALL gave the power brokers carte blanche for longer than we should have, and our nation is the less for it, in my opinion.

Sep. 11 2011 12:03 PM
Steve from Iowa

I've wondered if Dan Rather's career demise didn't have its roots in his telling the truth about how much the collapse of World Trade Center 7 looked like a controlled demolition. That was the third building, the one not hit by a plane, the one not mentioned in the 9/11 Commission Report. The one we're all supposed to forget about. Here's its collapse with Mr. Rather's commentary:

Steel-framed highrises don't fall like that without the services of professional demolition experts. In the minutes before it fell, CNN said the collapse was "imminent" and the BBC reported the collapse about 20 minutes before it actually happened. No steel-framed highrise had ever collapsed from fire before -- largely because it's not physically possible (open air fires don't burn hot enough) -- so how did they happen to have that foreknowledge?

Sep. 11 2011 08:40 AM
Philip Prindeville from Portland, OR

GARFIELD: Though no evidence has ever been produced challenging Rather's premise, the poster boy for liberal bias was caught supporting the allegation with a forged document.

First, as anyone who has ever read Chekov knows, over-zealously responding to a preposterous allegation gives it credence.

Second, why bother responding at all to a charge whose only supporting document is a bad forgery?

Third, when do you plan on proving that you've stopped beating your wife?

Sep. 10 2011 08:46 PM

Speaking of "credulous reporting," if the media took a fleeting "backseat to patriotism" with President Bush in the context of the 9/11 atrocity to only turn on him with avengence, does the news media today take a permanent backseat to political partisanship with President Obama in the context of nothing more than political conceit?

Perhaps the only thing worse than the emotional "suspending of journalistic independence in the name of patriotism" against a ruthless foreign foe is suspending it in the name of cheap political partisanship against conservative fellow Americans engaged in peaceful and lawful opposition. Yikes!

Sep. 10 2011 05:37 PM

I wondered how NPR would celebrate the 11th anniversary of Bob Garfield's "Bush Derangement Syndrome."

Now we know.

Sep. 10 2011 09:14 AM

Leave a Comment

Email addresses are required but never displayed.