Week of April 20: Class Summary

In How We Missed the Story, Gutman hits on the same point as Moeller. One of the central issues in the wake of 9-11 is the U.S. government categorizing Osama bin Laden' s act simply as terrorism. Along with this label comes ignorant assumptions of a man and his organization being simply angry at the United States, so untilmately they decided to bomb a couple of buildings. That couldn't be farther from the truth. Bin Laden is the "charismatic public figure...of a movement...built upon shared political grievances" that is not as easily eradicated as the government sometimes conveys to the American public (Gutman 7). Being openly honest with the American pubilc at least in regard to the challenge of such a political movement may have been able to help a less than popular Bush administration as the public would have a better conception of the task at hand. I believe this enabled the media's constant critique of the administration to resonate more with the general public.

Questions of the Week

• Was overarching term terrorism used as a bit of a scare tactic? Why?
• How has television aided or hindered the distribution of the discourse promoted by the government?
  

Question Answered: Was the overarching term terrorism used as a bit of a scare tactic? Why?
Yes, to a certian extent. I believe the government in an effort to cover up its blunders in the past used the term terrorism to shift the focus away from their mistakes. Prior to 9/11, our government knew of a possibly looming attack, but chose not to act on it. Many American lives were lost and at that time many needed someone to focus their angry among other feelings. Granted, the attack was at the hands of others, our government could have chose a different course of action. With that said, that established the need for a target and without releasing an enormous amount of information, labeling the "enemy" as terrorist simply because of their actions was fitting and in the best interest of the government.