Spokane7
42°
Fridays are usually hectic on the opinion pages, mostly because we’re producing three days worth of pages rather than just one. Yesterday had the added challenge of responding to a wave of phone and e-mail messages from readers who were distressed that the Sept. 11 paper contained not a word about the historical significance of the date. There were all the signals of an orchestrated response programmed for launch as soon as the paper hit the porch. People weren’t saying that the coverage was insufficient, or that it was tilted in the wrong direction. They were saying consistently and repeatedly that there was not a word about 9/11 in Friday’s Spokesman-Review.
Yet there on the front page, complete with two photographs, was a story about Coeur d’Alene’s Fallen Heroes memorial, to be dedicated that evening, a tribute to not only the victims of the terrorist attack eight years ago but also to local police and firefighters who have given their lives in the line of duty. The story clearly and movingly pointed out that this lasting memorial was inspired by the tragedy of Sept. 11, 2001.
Somehow, the people I responded to just couldn’t make that connection. What I considered a timely and relevant account of how part of our community has responded — is responding still — to an iconic event, they saw as an evasion of our duty to fan the flames of resentment and hatred. Not that those aren’t appropriate emotions for the outrage perpetrated by the mostly Saudi Arabian terrorists behind the 9/11 attacks, but news is all about reporting what’s happening now in the context of what happened before. The protests we received seemed to be all about freeze-framing a day eight years earlier.
I’m in no position to psychoanalyze the people I communicated with, but I suspect their interest has less to do with honoring the victims than with fueling their hatred of the perpetrators — and maybe others who weren’t perpetrators but happen to have certain traits (religion, ethnicity, ideology) with them.
I wonder if the people of Dresden, Germany, still harbor such feelings toward the Allies’ senseless fire-bombing of their city in World War II.
999 W. Riverside, Spokane, WA 99201
P.O. Box 2160, Spokane, WA 99210
Main switchboard: (509) 459-5000 • (800) 338-8801
Newsroom: (509) 459-5400 • (800) 789-0029
Customer service: (800) 338-8801
© Copyright 2012, The Spokesman-Review
Terms of use • Privacy policy • Copyright policy
Gary D Rhodes on September 12 at 9:39 a.m.
Doug, I think you would do better if you would stop assuming people’s motives. That is very unprofessional.
I would be more interested in a long-form prospective about why bin Laden attacked us on 9/11.
I’ve heard presidents and talking heads talk about what they think, but I don’t know from al Qaeda’s perspective what exactly they want from us.
spokelooneh on September 12 at 11:52 a.m.
“I would be more interested in a long-form prospective about why bin Laden attacked us on 9/11.
I’ve heard presidents and talking heads talk about what they think, but I don’t know from al Qaeda’s perspective what exactly they want from us.”
-Gary Rhodes
Well if you believe the various manifestos from Bin Laden are accurate, his main beef was the stationing of US Military forces in the Muslim “Holy Land”, Saudi Arabia.
Some 60,000 troops, mostly Air Force, were in Saudi in 2001, and all but handful remained by mid-2003. the Prince Sultan Air Base was turned over to the Saudis.
Bin Laden’s other oft-stated goal was to get the US bogged down in a major war in a Muslim country.
Missions accomplished.
Ron_the_Cop on September 12 at 11:00 p.m.
Mr. Floyd,
Apples and oranges. Admit it Mr. Floyd you got caught burying the lede. Your dripping attitude typical of the MSM elitist aristocracy is why the MSM business paradigm is going in the tank. You no longer can determine what the news/thoughts of the day should be. You are no longer relevant.
BTW here’s my email to the S-R:
Just checked your web page and didn’t see any 9/11 related stories yet. We normally get Dec 7th stories - perhaps 9/11 is fading from your memories. Just in case you’re in need of some material here’s some from the Blogosphere.
–––- Forwarded message –––-
From: Bookworm
Date: Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 9:46 PM
Subject: Remembering 9/11 — because the current government won’t
In addition to three separate posts in memory of three who died on 9/11, I’ve also put together a post reminding all of us that, under the current administration, we, not the government, are the repository of national memory. If you would like a link to your 9/11 post included, please send me the link:
Never forget — September 11, 2001
http://www.bookwormroom.com/2009/09/10/never-forget-september-11-2001/
*****
Sorry I didn’t see you buried the lede in,
CdA memorial provides place to offer tribute.
http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2009/sep/11/a-place-to-offer-tribute/
At least Mr. Pitts has a sense of remembering and is linking to this AP feed [S-R web page]:
9/11 marked with mourning and a spirit of service
http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2009/sep/11/911-marked-mourning-and-spirit-service/
Too bad the print side of the shop doesn’t have the same spirit. This is why the traditional MSM business paradigm is going in the tank.
Ron_the_Cop on September 12 at 11:09 p.m.
Mr. Floyd,
Your paternalistic attitude is probably related to why some 2M people turned out in DC today. See my comment in the article thread:
*****
Ron_the_Cop on September 12 at 7:41 p.m.
Good for you! You’re finally carrying an AP feed nf this breaking news story. Folks interested in reading more can go to these sites I sent earlier to the S-R. . .
http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2009/sep/12/protesters-converge-us-capitol/?comments#c68416
Arch_Druid on September 13 at 8:07 a.m.
While bashing Floyd for covering current events, Rhodes and Ron the Cop, I’d consider taking a step back and thinking for a couple of minutes or making it 3. 9/11 was one of the greatest tragedies that this nation ever faced. No one of us should be milking such a tragedy for political gain. The Spokesman-Review DID cover 9/11 reporting. And I also see where 9/11 got covered here in the blogs. If President Obama does want to see 9/11 as also a national call to service, isn’t that only a natural continuation of the national call to service on the day that the tragic event occurred? Seems to me that it was.
I put out my flag that morning and took it down after I got home from work. I put out my new “We Remember” garden flag with the bouquet of flowers and flag wrapped in a ribbon onto my garden flag post to commemorate the day. I don’t expect the news media to drive up and ask for pics and a comment just because I did so. I do so because my family also suffered from the hands of terrorists even as families on 9/11 did the same.
Yes, Rhodes; I too would like to know where bin Laden is. But his goals just like the prior post informed us were made public from the beginning. Either we a non-Muslim nation “convert” to his brand of thinking or perish. Never mind the Muslims who perished just because of his brand of thinking.
Gary D Rhodes on September 13 at 10:02 a.m.
Druid, I think a day of remembrance can be combined with a moment to contemplate why this happened, so it will never happen again. I think honest appraisals of disasters such as Pearl Harbor, should be thoroughly examined by those in and out of government.
< Either we a non-Muslim nation “convert” to his brand of thinking or perish. Never mind the Muslims who perished just because of his brand of thinking.>
Frankly, that sounds like “Bush speak”. Bin Laden said he came here, because WE were there.
Again, quite frankly, we can not afford to swim the stormy seas with our military, fighting wars of choice.
WE CAN’T AFFORD IT!
Arch_Druid on September 13 at 10:23 a.m.
Well, now Rhodes; I guess we couldn’t afford to respond to the 9/11 attack some two months AFTER it occurred. With GW bleating all the while WHAT he planned to do in Afghanistan GIVING one very smart extremist an opportunity to vamoose and begin rebuilding his network somewhere else in comparative safety.
Bushspeak huh? Couldn’t have come from bin Laden himself, huh?
We couldn’t have afforded Iraq, that’s for sure, yet we went there anyway.
richard on September 13 at 11:08 a.m.
<<there were=”” all=”” the=”” signals=”” of=”” an=”” orchestrated=”” response=”” programmed=”” for=”” launch=”” as=”” soon=”” as=”” the=”” paper=”” hit=”” the=”“ porch.=”“>>
A bit paranoid? You must not have been invited to any of the secretive “cell” meetings held throughout the greater Spokane region … to flood your mailbox.
It is quite amusing how anti-war and anti-Bush protests were typically spontaneous eruptions of “patriotic” Americans, while this summer’s townhall meetings and even 9/11 email responses were “orchastrated” events planned by special interest groups.
How is it that most in media - educated, intelligent professionals - remain so unaware of how their thoughts and musings are riddled with personal bias
JeanieSpokane on September 13 at 11:29 a.m.
<<they saw=”” as=”” an=”” evasion=”” of=”” our=”” duty=”” to=”” fan=”” the=”” flames=”” of=”” resentment=”” and=”” hatred.=”” |=”” doug=”“ floyd=”“>>
When I think of 9/11, I do not waste my soul on who did it. I only think of the thousands of lives lost, the impact on their families, parents, children, friends, co-workers, and all the millions of American citizens that were left bereft and heart-broken.
The terrorists are not worthy of my focus.
Gary D Rhodes on September 13 at 11:51 a.m.
Those thousands died because of “blow-back” from our years of meddling in Muslim nations.
Frankly I don’t care what the nations of “Chaostan” do, as long as they are not a threat to us. In my opinion, radical Islam will continue to be a threat as long as we try to influence their sphere of influence. They would have no reason to hate or attack us if we just left them alone.
If a person decides to volunteer, they would certainly be free to go help women organize against abuse in these nations.
We need to withdraw all of our military from whatever corner of the world they are currently in. Bring them inside the borders of the US.
Lulubelle on September 13 at 12:23 p.m.
has always wondered…..why the 9/11 attack is more sacred and deserving of note than say the Oklahoma City terrorist attack?
May be instead of focusing on attacks from “them feriners”, we should take a look in the mirror and at our own homegrown terrorists. Their leaders are feeding the flock vile fundementalist ideas not unlike the teachings in Madrases. Sooner or later they will reap what is sown.
Costa Rica is looking better everyday…..in every way
Gary D Rhodes on September 13 at 1:37 p.m.
People murdering people is bad no matter who is murdering whom. It doesn’t matter to the dead why they were murdered.
In all cases we should determine why the murdering was done and bring those guilty to justice. We should also do what we can to prevent such occurrences in the future. This is why we spend so much on security. We should be secure.
Did Terry Nichols learn how to make his bomb from a radical Islamic cell?
richard on September 13 at 7:52 p.m.
Gary, did I read you correctly that you view the war in Afghanistan as a war of “choice”? Is that solely a reflection of your isolationist views; or do you also believe that we should have “law enforcement” pursuing al Qaida and the Taliban?
In either case, it would seem as if you would also believe we should have let law enforcement chase down, arrest and bring to trial, the Nazi’s in Germany and the cultists in Japan who followed the Emporer.
I don’t see much difference between the enemies then and the enemies now. Both reflect a militeristic, world domination philosophy. The biggest difference is their tactics, as I see it.
And you believe 9/11 was “blow back” because we had troops in Saudi Arabia. But bin Laden did not speak for the Saudis. In fact the Saudis asked us to protect them from Hussein.
If it was blow back, it was bin Laden’s and al Qaida’s blow back - not that of a soverign nation, the whole of an ethnicity, or the religion of Islam - at least that is what we are led to believe, so why would bin Laden’s preferences supposed to take precedence over that of the Saudi government.
I doubt that it is your intention, but your views seem to extend to bin Laden the level of legitimacy that he does not deserve.
I suspect your level of devotion to Ron Paul has clouded your views on the rigid belief in isolationism. But that is only my opinion.
Gary D Rhodes on September 13 at 8:36 p.m.
Ron Paul voted to go after bin Laden in Afghanistan. We have now morphed into a nation building effort that we can not afford, no matter how good of an idea some think. The Taliban is not a threat.
garyc on September 14 at 9:38 a.m.
<< BTW here’s my email to the S-R:>>
Your posts always amuse, Ron. They start of with something about us not being relevant, then bounce to a promotion of something you wrote about some conspiracy.
It’s funny that you choose an irrelevant site for advertising.
garyc on September 14 at 10:06 a.m.
<<doug, i=”” think=”” you=”” would=”” do=”” better=”” if=”” you=”” would=”” stop=”” assuming=”” people’s=”” motives.=”” that=”” is=”” very=”“ unprofessional.=”“>>
Is it unprofessional for everyone? I kept reading about the motives of the MSM.
addyh on September 14 at 10:19 a.m.
I fielded a number of those Friday-morning calls. One particularly disgusted me: the caller who said the S-R is “always running some sob story about dead soldiers” but according to him, didn’t carry a word about 9/11. I asked whether he didn’t think soldiers were worthy of coverage; he sputtered for a minute then responded, “…and you haven’t had any stories about ACORN.” (We did - on that day’s page A3 as well as the previous day.)
Gary D Rhodes on September 14 at 10:19 a.m.
I think the MSM is a slave to a political agenda, as was clearly displayed by the reporting of the “9/12 March on Washington”.
In my opinion, the “Million Man March” had far more reporting and analysis than the 9/12. Cindy Sheehan’s anti war protests garnered more interest from the MSM.
Why do you think over one million American peacefully expressing their views was so uninteresting to “Big American Journalism”?
Why did English news have some of the best reporting?
Cindy_H on September 14 at 10:25 a.m.
Things to be grateful for #174:
I don’t have to answer calls to the S-R editorial desk.
Sheesh!
garyc on September 14 at 11:03 a.m.
<<doug, i=”” think=”” you=”” would=”” do=”” better=”” if=”” you=”” would=”” stop=”” assuming=”” people’s=”” motives.=”” that=”” is=”” very=”“ unprofessional.=”“>>
Yeah, leave that to the pros.
<>
Paranoid?
garyc on September 14 at 11:05 a.m.
<<why did=”” english=”” news=”” have=”” some=”” of=”” the=”” best=”“ reporting?=”“>>
Why hasn’t the free market solved this alleged problem? No audience/market for the reporting you seek?
garyc on September 14 at 3:30 p.m.
From Media Matters:
“Behold the media’s glaring double standard. Today, the Post puts the “tens of thousands” of Obama-hating tea bagger protesters on A1; makes it the lead story as a matter of fact.
“Back in 2002, when more than 100,000 anti-war protesters gathered in the nation’s capitol to protest the Bush administration, the same WashPost did its best to ignore them:
“The Washington Post put the story not on the front page, but in the Metro section with, as the paper’s ombudsman later lamented, “a couple of ho-hum photographs that captured the protest’s fringe elements.”
Any media bias experts want to field this one? Why would the 9-12 protest merit more prominent coverage?
richard on September 14 at 4:05 p.m.
<<any media=”” bias=”” experts=”” want=”” to=”” field=”” this=”” one?=”” why=”” would=”” the=”” 9-12=”” protest=”” merit=”” more=”” prominent=”“ coverage?=”“>>
The answer lies in the bias of your question! Why wouldn’t it?
And that quote from Media Matters … “Obama-hating tea-baggers” demonstrates why that organization has nearly zero credibility.
I would ask you why there has been an apparent lack of any realistic number of attendees on Saturday reported in media. and why was the one picture selected of a sign at the protest the one of the poster made famous a few months ago Obama in white-face?
I saw many, many, many signs that said nothing about Obama.
Fueling the arguments put forth by leftists in the Democratic party that every form of protest against an Obama policy - including Joe Wilson’s remark - as racist.
any media person want to feild these questions?
garyc on September 14 at 4:40 p.m.
<<the answer=”” lies=”” in=”” the=”” bias=”” of=”” your=”” question!=”” why=”” wouldn’t=”“ it?=”“>>
Exactly. This applies to you, too.
<<“Obama-hating tea-baggers” demonstrates why that organization has nearly zero credibility.>>
You don’t do that with liberals and progressives?
<< I would ask you why there has been an apparent lack of any realistic number of attendees on Saturday reported in media. and why was the one picture selected of a sign at the protest the one of the poster made famous a few months ago Obama in white-face? >>
Because nobody counts any more. No matter who marches. This helps explain why.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-crowd15-2009sep15,0,1062512.story
The ralliers themselves always exaggerate.
Why are the most flamboyant pics the ones chosen at gay rights rallies and marches? That’s a complaint we hear.
Arch_Druid on September 15 at 6:55 a.m.
Wonder why we don’t hear about the neo-lefties among the GOP? Oh, that’s right, because the neo-lefties spout continually on AMOO.
Ron_the_Cop on September 15 at 10:00 a.m.
[Note: I thought I posted this yesterday but I may have forgotten to hit the “post” button:-(]
Gary,
ROTFLMAO:-) My point was journalists should report objectively the news and not infer the intent or motivations of newsmakers e.g., Hitler is a maniac vs. some policy makers have said Hitler is a maniac.
Mr. Floyd’s drippy attitude was more than I could bare. Had the S-R’s article on the CDA Memorial reflected its associated with remembering the 9/11 tragedy I wouldn’t have been so miffed. In my opinion this was a case of burying the lede.
As for posting here, I don’t think you’ve caught on as to the importance of the new/alternative/social media as a check on the of the MSM for failure to follow its journalistic principles
You may appreciate this piece at a blog that gets over one million hits per month:
The MSM Doesn’t Get It
http://noisyroom.net/blog/2009/09/14/the-msm-doesnt-get-it/
garyc on September 15 at 2:05 p.m.
<<my point=”” was=”” journalists=”” should=”” report=”” objectively=”” the=”” news=”” and=”” not=”” infer=”” the=”” intent=”” or=”” motivations=”” of=”” newsmakers=”“ e.g.,=”“>>
It was a blog post, not a news article. It was from an opinion writer, not a reporter. Can’t believe you still don’t know the difference, since you are an opinion writer who infers motivation all the time.
richard on September 15 at 3:49 p.m.
Ron … I believe Gary may have his eyes on a political career and he is practicing being “slippery”. Either that or he has plans to go to law school when the establishment media folds up and dies out.
Just a hunch, but I don’t think it is far off the mark.
:-)
Ron_the_Cop on September 15 at 9:04 p.m.
Gary,
Yes I do know the difference. Yes Mr. Floyd was expressing an opinion that I happen to disagree with. My point was to call him on burying the lede re the 9/11 story.
It was Mr Floyd’s paternalistic attitude that he expressed in his opinion piece that carries over to hard news selections e.g., the burying of lede of the 9/11 article that is tanking the MSM. You are no longer the sole purveyor of news/thought of the day as I expressed in the piece a linked to.
Arch_Druid on September 16 at 10:02 a.m.
Neither are most blogs, Ron solid news stories. The blog(s) I run are opinions. I try to base my opinions on facts, but they are still opinions. Nor am I paid to express my opinions. You have expressed on more than one thread the need for a journalistic code of ethics. Well now, what if I were to tell you that most journalists do uphold a code of ethics but that what they present in news stories and opinion isn’t always something that you agree with. So be it.
Are these journalists violating some code because you have a problem with what they report or write? Or is it only because you have a problem with what they report or write? That’s politics, Ron, that’s all it is.
Ron_the_Cop on September 16 at 10:26 a.m.
Arch Druid,
I agree. My issue is when they don’t report the whole story and let the reader decide what the truth is. In my former profession I was held to the standard, “To tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.” The jury was the ultimate finder of fact.
My complaint is lying by omission. When the MSM fails to fully report I have to go to the new/alternative media for additional views. Not that any one blog is the purveyor of the truth but when one reads many threads a better sense of reality emerges. Juswt like witnesses to a traffic accident.
See my related post in the other thread:
http://www.spokesman.com/blogs/opinion/2009/sep/15/tuesdays-loose-thread/#c69316
Arch_Druid on September 20 at 10:06 a.m.
Alternative media, Ron; are publications such as “The Inlander.” And “The Inlander” has over time discussed under-reported or never reported news stories that “alternative” news sources went on to discuss. Not only was “The Inlander” attacked for featuring the “Censorship Project,” but those doing the research were attacked as well. Reason being, Ron; the news media wouldn’t report on what was being claimed about the last (GOP) administration. If you are claiming biases and a refusal to tell “all the truth” about the current administration by the MSM; if the “alternative media” was not to be “trusted” as to its sources where the last administration was concerned, neither are they to be trusted where the current administration is concerned. It is a matter of partisan political opinion and that is all.