9-11/Media response

9-11/Media response
In the days and weeks following September 11th, 2001, news broadcasts never repeated the collapse of WTC 7, but the collapses of WTC 1 & 2 were repeated a lot. No evidence implicating Al-Qaeda was presented, but collapse videos sometimes had an inset showing Ossama Bin Laden in the same frame.
The failure of the media corporations to investigate 9-11 on any level is an indictment of the controlled nature of the corporate media of the 21st century. Independent media has to an increasing extent filled the gap, as the unwelcome truth of September 11th is accepted by ever more people.

More than any other issue of modern times, the reponse of the commercially-controlled media to the events of 9-11 has been a lock step march to refuse to contemplate significant deviation from the official "19 hijackers"-based official narrative. However, in contrast to 1963, the internet has facilitated discussion and leaking of information, allowing independent media to fill the gap and to critically examine how this story fails to explain the observable evidence.

Corporate media

The controlled media was quick to call the 9-11 attacks "an act of war", a decision which effectively precluded a criminal investigation from being carried out.

On the day itself, there was a relatively wide variety of material produced. For example, dozens of reports of bombs going off in the WTC were televised, and live, on the spot reporting evinced skepticism and even incredulity about the official narrative. Media reports from the day itself are particularly recommended to those researching the truth of 9/11. By the next day, several of these primary reports had vanished never to be rebroadcast as the careful decisions of senior editors saw the corporate media fall in lock step with the US government's official narrative about "19 men with box cutters".

The 19 Hijackers

Full article: “9-11/The 19 Hijackers”

The BBC reported on 23 September, 2001 that 4 of the hijackers were alive and well. However, this story was not folloed up on and in 2006 it concluded by quoting the official position from the FBI (in bold): "The FBI is confident that it has positively identified the nineteen hijackers responsible for the 9/11 terrorist attacks."

Burying of existing news

Pre-9-11 news stories, such as the Pentagon's trillions of unaccounted funds or the new evidence in the Lockerbie case were effectively buried, under a long (2-4 week?) "no real news, but we're showing it to you again" extended spectacle which uncritically echoed the US government's story of Al Qaeda. The Internet Archive has assembled and published a collection of over 3,000 hours of 9/11 TV News.

World Trade Center 1 & 2

In marked contrast to their absolute silence about WTC7, the corporate media played countless repeats of the planes hitting the twin towers, often with an inset of Ossama Bin Laden in the corner, as if to establish a link between the two.

World Trade Center 7 foreknowledge

Full article: 9-11/WTC7/Collapse/Censorship

Perhaps the most dramatic demonstration of how big media just follows orders is how it provided by the unprecedented collapse of World Trade Center 7. BBC and Fox News both announced before the collapse of this building that it "had collapsed" while MSNBC reported having "heard several reports from several different officers now that [WTC7] is the building that is going to go down next" and CBS also passed on such reports.. The source of these reports has been obfuscated and commercially-controlled media basically didn't go near the topic of WTC7 until the above videos of their reporting it started to circulate widely on the internet.

Hit pieces

Popular Mechanics has been the most prominent in its efforts to 'debunk' any theories challenging the 9-11#Official narrative. Many hit pieces have been written over the years to try to ridicule and undermine the 9/11 Truth Movement.

A 2007 episode of the BBC's Conspiracy Files raised the difficult issue of WTC7, after it had become publicised on WWW.

Critical journalism

A small number of media outlets have dared to question the US government's official narrative.

2016 UK Daily Express

The first indications of a change in direction were visible in coverage by the UK Daily Express. On June 22, 2016 it headlined a story "Were 9/11 towers blown up by bombs? University probes if planes REALLY were responsible", which centered on the University of Alaska's sponsoring "a full investigation into claims that World Trade Center Building 7 was brought down by a controlled demolition during the 9/11 attacks". On September 10th, 2016, John Austin published a second article entitled "Was 9/11 an inside job? Call for TRUTH over Building 7 collapse on eve of 15th anniversary" which conceded that "growing numbers of people STILL claim the Twin Towers atrocities could have been an inside job."

Independent Media

The rise of citizen journalism, especially using the internet has proved a boon to 9-11 researchers, and several significant efforts exist online which highlight weaknesses of the 9/11 official narrative.