News » September 27, 2004 » Web Only

Government Approved

Journalism in the age of terror

By Maya Schenwar

In August, I attended the first-ever “News and Terrorism: Communicating in a Crisis” conference, the Chicago kick-off of a year of counterterrorism workshops geared toward journalists in 10 major cities, sponsored by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The keynote speaker was none other than the DHS head honcho himself, Mr. Tom Ridge.

As we settled into our seats, the late-arriving Ridge laid forth our mission: “We’re going to work together to achieve some common goals,” Ridge informed us. “There may be a time when your audience needs more than just the story.”

Journalists, according to Ridge, are the “constant reminders of the freedom of expression we all enjoy.” Nonetheless, when it comes to terrorism, everyone could use a few tips from the good old DHS. The goal of the day, Ridge said, would be to provide the press with a “detailed playbook” for responding to crisis, providing journalists with the strategies and (government-affiliated) contacts needed to deal with a terrorist scenario. “A consistent message to the public is critical.”

It’s a difficult task, freely expressing the “consistent message” you’ve been fed by the feds. We needed instruction. Thus, along with a hundred other Chicago-area journalists, government officials and public health officers, I underwent two hours of interactive crisis response role-playing, following the minute-by-minute details of a make-believe terrorist scenario involving mass casualties, radiation, George W. Bush’s daughter and the wife of one of the reporters. City officials granted the unnamed Bush daughter privileged status, carting her out of the danger zone, despite the quarantine in effect. The reporter’s wife, who’d called his cell phone while he was “on-scene,” was left to bleed in the street. Nervous laughter ensued, but in times like this, the journalists agreed, one must think in terms of the “public good.” Conspicuously absent from the scenario, however, was any mention of the numbers of people dying. The actual toll on human life was left to the ambiguous description, “mass casualty event.”

Throughout the role play, journalists were encouraged to call on experts, to think critically about when to release information to the public, and to ask who, what, when, where-everything but why. The role of the press, said moderator John McWethy of ABC News, is to accurately report information as government officials release it. In other words, in a state of emergency, the media morph into a PR department for Washington. Each speaker emphasized that business, government and the media all must learn how to function in crisis mode. And in crisis mode, baby, we’re all in the system together.

Take, for instance, Ridge’s assessment of the DHS’s color-coded terror alert plan: “It’s a signal, like a traffic light is a signal, that we expect a certain conduct from you.” Apparently, such conduct includes leaving one’s wife bleeding in the street because the news must go on, and remaining in quarantined areas even under the threat of radiation-unless your papa’s the president, that is.

Although a few journalists asked for procedural clarifications (“What’s the protocol for a pregnant reporter covering a radiation crisis?”), real questions were markedly absent from the conference. Does the press have a responsibility to seek out the roots of terror, or to weigh the various complex factors involved in international terrorist scenarios? Nope, according to Ridge. “Our job is to eliminate confusion,” he said. Goodbye, gray zone. Hello, unthinking certainty.

The “coming together in time of crisis” mentality need not apply only to the press. Next April, Connecticut and New Jersey will witness the DHS’s TopOff 3 campaign, the largest-yet terrorist-attack simulation. Governmental organizations and businesses will be called upon to respond to a series of simulated WMD incidents described by the DHS as “round-the-clock exercise play.” Similar events took place in Chicago and Seattle last year, during TopOff 2. The DHS asserts that the simulations will help the nation “prevent, respond to, and recover from terrorist attacks in accordance with DHS protocols.” Yet no one at the News and Terrorism conference was able to articulate what, exactly, it meant to be prepared for a terrorist attack, other than complying with governmental mandate.

The elusive goal of “preparedness” is hardly limited to those in the public eye. Did you know September is now “National Preparedness Month”? To celebrate, the DHS is about to kick off its “Ready for Kids” program, a campaign of TV ads, school programs and events in cities across the country, designed to alert your tykes to the terrorist threat. It’s even got a mascot-an “American Shepherd,” a fictitious breed of dog that nonetheless urges kids to nag their families into developing emergency plans to meet the terror challenge. (Stay tuned: A mascot-naming contest is currently under way.)

However, as in the case of TopOff 3, the specific goals of September’s multimillion dollar program remain hazy. When I asked Ridge to clarify the month’s kid-directed activities, he assured me that the games would be “interesting” and “creative,” then hurried on to discuss the DHS’s Ready for Business blitz in equally vague terms.

So what did I get out of the News and Terrorism day besides a few soundbytes and seven different flavors of bite-size, tax payer-subsidized muffins? A renewed sense of the way that the power of words can be used to distort. When “cooperation” means “blind compliance” and “freedom of expression” means the freedom to express DHS press releases, it seems incredible that, in a room full of journalists, not one raised a question about first amendment rights.

“Our culture within the DHS needs to be a culture of disclosure,” Ridge said, in closing. Perhaps the American media should take a hint from Tommy on this one: No matter the terror alert level, journalists have a responsibility to disclose the truth, regardless of whether they’ve got a fed-signed permit to do so.

• Help In These Times publish more articles like this. Donate today!
• Subscribe today and save 46% off the newsstand price!

• subscribe to print magazine

• stay in touch with our email newsletter

  Subscribe to our regular weekly e-mail newsletter. It's packed with updates on recent and upcoming stories, events, campaigns and things every progressive should be informed about.

   

• email this article to a friend

  Your Name Your Email Recipient Email

  Personal message Thought you might be interested in this article from In These Times.

   

  Please help us prevent spam by verifying the word you see in the image above

  Send to multiple recipients. Just separate each email address with a comma.

• Reader Comments

  I gotta wonder when the author states “it seems incredible that, in a room full of journalists, not one raised a question about first amendment rights”. Isn’t this In These Times I am reading, the news magazine which is the voice of the progressive American left, so why didn’t the author raise this question?

  Posted by Richard Rhodes on Sep 28, 2004 at 6:11 AM

  This is just one example of why I always get a hoot out of the tired “liberal media bias” bullshit. Yeah… where was this so-called bias as tanks were rolling into Iraq?

  That’s right… the “reporters” were embedded/in bed with the troops!!

  One of the biggest failures in the post 9/11 era, aside fromt the obvious deficiencies in W’s “leadership,” has been the appalling lack of decent media coverage. Bastards!

  Posted by g-love on Sep 28, 2004 at 1:58 PM

  Hi Folks,

    This problem with the Press started way before 9/11. Journalists with ethics are very hard to find, as they find it ever harder to stay employed. Reporters are no longer allowed to print the truth.
    Just look at the 9/11 attack on America. Not one person has been arrested & convicted, although President Bush put the entire resources of the American Government on the case! The FBI has to be THE most incompetent Federal Agency ever! NORAD is a close second.
    The evidence that the government is hiding must point to either gross incompetence or gov’t. COLLUSION in 9/11. There is no other explanation to the FBI’s sitting on evidence for 3 years, and not making any of it public. More & more people are charging VP Cheney with mass murder, and consider him the brains behind the 9/11 attacks. If the FBI had any evidence that would show that the government wasn’t involved, they would have shown it by now!

  Posted by Joe Perry on Sep 29, 2004 at 8:34 PM

  How appropriate that the DHS would use the name “American Shepherd” for their child-friendly mascot.  Bah, bah.

  Posted by the man on Sep 30, 2004 at 5:28 PM

  I won’t belabor the point that I believe the present administration needs to replaced but I would like to know why the press is not pursuing some important things peripheral to the main flaws of this administration and may never be learned by the public.
  Molly Ivins reveals that those secret meetings between energy companies were indeed as we expected and worse but not much in the mainstream news, why not?
  In the NYT article about how the administration ignored many of their experts in making the case for going into Iraq. The very long presentation didn’t mention Joseph Wilson’s finding concerning the Niger/Iraq connection, no mention of what the white house attempted to do to Wilson and his CIA agent wife because he refuted the assertions of the white house. But this wasn’t an article concerning the politics but the failure of intelligence (all the way around).
  The Wilson thing has to come up again because it’s still sitting there like a boil waiting to be lanced.
  I blame the media for its spineless behavior during this entire process and they could be getting to the bottom of the white house’s disclosure of Wilson’s wife’s name quicker than the FBI. They actually know and are clinging to that privilege of not revealing their sources which at this juncture and given the credibility of the press is shallow in my estimation!
  The so-called “liberal media” is undermining our democracy!!!
    The media, the media, to my mind has become an ugly word and I’m sick of the nonsense they focus on and I wonder how in the world they can look those cameras in the eye and utter the nonsense they do. We, don’t want entertainment and Dr. Phil post debate analysis of their personality quirks…we can see that for ourselves. What they are saying is the most important part of the so-called “debates” and not all this side nonsense that I expect to find in the Enquirer, Star or the Globe. 
  The tragedy of 9/11 didn’t mean that we should compound the damage by ignoring that this tragedy allowed our president to rise above the rubble and suddenly the country went into a collective coma and saw him as our leader against our enemies whoever he said they were and we couldn’t ask any questions.
  The media, the congress and the people didn’t ask the hard questions before we entered Iraq and frankly this president didn’t allow anybody to ask him anyway. He doesn’t need our permission or the world at large’s approval for a preemptive war to protect the good and “patriotic” members of our country .
  The distortions and outright lies continue in 30 second spots to suggest Kerry was a traitor after he came home from Vietnam and he’s treasonous now for opposing the the “commander in chief”. The same commander and chief that supported the Vietnam war 30 years ago and served so gallantly to protect Texans from attack from the North Vietnamese.
  The media owes the American people some truth telling.

  Posted by BAM on Oct 5, 2004 at 1:51 PM

• extended discussion >>>Continued...

  Discussions with more than 5 comments are continued on our special discussion page to encourage continuity and ease of use. There are currently 8 posts.

Also by Maya Schenwar

• Freedom Reborn
  Youth activists learn techniques for anti-racism, voter registrationPosted on August 5, 2004
• International Court of Justice to Rule on Israeli Wall
  On July 9, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague ruled… morePosted on July 9, 2004