Anniversary Journalism

So at what point is it OK to leave it off a front page? If you can't leave it off after 11, it has to be at least 20, right? So 20? 25? 30? Hell, I've been at a paper where we got annoyed readers when we didn't put Pearl Harbor on the cover.

I guess I just don't see why a 9/11 museum story is somehow more newsworthy today than it was two days ago or two days from now. And I do wonder whether had it happened on Sept. 10 or Sept. 12, it would be quite the same. "Nine ten" doesn't have the same ring as "nine eleven" for whatever reason.

And I'd rather have no story in the paper at all than to make a few bucks off it, like the WSJ did. Nothing says class like mawkish sentimentality from a bank that got billions in taxpayer funds, four years before the first responders on 9/11 got the treatment for their cancer covered.

 

Military town, right?

Oh my god, your ears will receive a verbal guilt trip beyond belief if you don't display proper reverence in the newspaper on 12/7 AND 12/8. Every year.

(And as a history buff who has a much stronger personal/family connection to Pearl Harbor than to 9/11, I completely understand their sentiments. But I don't think I was prepared for that level of backlash.)

 

One person died in Dealey Plaza.

Thousands lost loved ones on 9/11.

So, yeah, other than that, totally similar.

But if you want to be one of those people from some insignificant burg (Hellooo, Kansas!) who thinks they have a 9/11 story to tell that compares to those told by those involved, you just go right ahead.

 

It wasn't, actually. I don't honestly remember which stop it was, or if it was more than one. In either case, it would have been somewhere with a high proportion of seniors.

 

I think you're missing Pilot's point.

 

I always get the major news of my lifetime second-hand. Reagan shooting, Oklahoma City bombing, Olympics bombing, OJ Simpson verdict, 9/11, whatever.

I can sit and watch CNN all day and the best they can do is some cat stuck in a tree. But the second I turn off the TV and go do something else, all hell breaks loose. Guess I'll be glued to the set on Dec. 21, 2012 just in case.

 

I think there is a place for it - but too often the only news angle is the calendar. As we've seen, there is new "stuff" coming out about 9/11 between Eichenwald's book and the cost of the memorial and museum.
I think editors like anniversary stories because it is one of the few stories they can plan in meetings. Eventually 9/11 will become like Pearl Harbor and JFK, a picture with a caption of the wreath laying in Hawaii; a few Kennedys kneeling in front of the eternal flame.

 

There are probably only a few moments of our life where you remember exactly where you were when you found out...

For me it was Reagan getting shot, the Challenger, Oklahoma City, Columbine and 9/11.

 

The mall closed early and I was going to buy new pants.

 

You're not an astronaut so Challenger didn't mean anything to you. You didn't know them, so you weren't sad.

That's what you're telling us about 9/11, anyway. I've seen plenty of people recount today on Facebook what they were doing that morning. None of them were anywhere close to NYC that day, and I haven't seen any of them claim it meant the same to them as it did for someone living in lower Manhattan, someone who was in the towers or someone who lost a loved one.

So, what, the day didn't mean anything to us? Because we were in some "insignificant burg", we weren't scared? Maybe you knew the exact scope of what was going on that morning, but I sure didn't. I wasn't scared like "I may die any minute" scared, but I was scared like "holy shit, what is going on?" scared. Two planes, four planes or 50? One morning of attacks, a day of attacks or a month of attacks? Is my nation at war? Will my friends in the military be shipping overseas immediately? Those are ALL things that were perfectly reasonable to worried about that day, no matter where you were in proximity to the buildings.

My mom didn't almost get shot in 1963, but the president was dead. Who else? What did that mean? Was there a plot? Was it war?

You didn't know anyone on Challenger, but it obviously meant something to you. If not, why else would you remember? Who the hell are you to tell anyone what they can and can't remember and when they should and should not be scared?

 

Love anniversary stories. I always enjoy reading them, and certainly like writing them. It's always interesting to see how time changes perspectives, and how events (triumphs as well as tragedies) alter lives in ways you would never imagine. There are so many great stories connected to major events that aren't or can't be told in the immediate aftermath. Some don't exist yet because they haven't happened. Others weren't covered. Anniversaries stories allow us to discover and tell those stories.

 

I think the argument here, and Norrin can correct me if I'm wrong, is not that people shouldn't remember an event or feeling an emotion, but that simply doing so doesn't make something relevant or newsworthy.

Especially for people of my generation, the stories are virtually the same. Really the only variable is whether or not their teacher continued on with class or tuned in to coverage. That's all fine and good that we all remember what it was like hearing the horrible (and, yes, somewhat frightening) news, but is it particularly exciting to anyone outside of our circle of friends? That seems doubtful to me.