I’m not sure which is worse: one of Britain’s largest newspapers sending a culturally insensitive diminutive to cover a highly emotional story, or the fact that the publisher and editors of said newsrag believed the story had merit in the first place.
Let me be perfectly clear upfront. Both as a writer and someone who was working in combatting terrorism in the very part of the Pentagon destroyed when the airplane hit the building as part of a coordinated terrorist attack on America on September 11th, 2001, I did not awaken this morning with intentions of writing about that day.
I certainly have never planned on writing about extremely personal memories about the events of September 11th and its aftermath in this venue, my expat blog. The closest I’ve ever come was in the post Let the (Re)Building Begin on the day earlier this year when Osama Bin Ladin was found and killed.
I believe there is a time and a place for everything. I have been exceedingly cautious in my respect for those killed, their loved ones and indeed the cultural and historical significance of this date.
It has taken me nine and a half years to even begin to put pen to paper about that those events; it will take considerably more time to be able to write more fully on this subject.
But I have never, ever lost sight of the very truth that my story, as a survivor, pales in comparison to the tragedy that befell so many, many others.
I am well aware of the looming 10th anniversary, and I intended to spend that day in quiet contemplation and prayer, as I have each year since that fateful day. I still intend to do so.
But right now I am angry. Not as furious as I was several hours ago, but steamed nonetheless. I went for a long walk, took 372 deep breaths, and now I am going to channel that simmering anger into something productive.
I have had time to digest all of this, and I’ve decided that I will indeed address the pathetic excuse for journalism perpetrated by David James Smith and The Sunday Times Culture Section in their highly insensitive, sensationalistic and culturally inaccurate article ‘Remember the Fallen: And They Leapt Into The Abyss’.
[I read the article because we happen to buy The Sunday Times; I cannot provide a link as you must pay for that privilege. However, you can go to their website if you are so inclined.
Update: A similar article was carried by The Daily Mail online, entitled 9/11 Jumpers: America Wants to Forget Victims Who Fell From the Twin Towers. It’s similar (but not exactly the same) as the original article. Please notice that there is no ‘proof’ offered to substantiate the claim in the title. Only the sensationalistic angle, with no evidence to back it up.]
That’s right. They sent a reporter to the United States to inquire about those victims on September 11th who may have chosen to jump to their deaths before the Twin Towers collapsed, and they went with a title like that.
Is it any wonder that one widow told him his interest was ‘disgusting’?
As an expat I often speak of and write about the need for understanding and sensitivity when addressing the myriad ways various cultures operate and interact. So consider this my contribution to cultural anthropology by addressing the cultural misunderstandings that Mr. Smith so clearly missed, and what he and the so-called brain trust at The Sunday Times should have told their readership if they still felt hellbent on publishing a piece so utterly lacking in journalistic value.
The supposed investigative slant of the story was to determine why Americans are so adverse to talking about the fact that some in that horrendous situation in New York City opted to commit suicide.
Here are a few snippets:
‘Their last moments were watched around the world. Yet the subject of the 9/11 ‘jumpers’ has proved so painful and unsettling that, a decade on, few in American are willing to mention them. Why have they been erased from history?’
and this charmer:
‘Like a dirty or embarrassing secret, the people who jumped or fell…’ The article goes on to quote in excruciating detail the sights and sounds that emergency responders and others on the ground encountered.
So let me spell it out as clearly and succinctly as I can. I speak only for myself, but I would venture that many Americans likely agree with what I am going to write.
In the article, much was made of the fact that the chief medical examiner, Dr. Charles Hirsch, maintained there were no ‘jumpers’ per se: he asserted that all were victims of homicide, and the physical cause of death on death certificates cited as blunt trauma.
That is the truth. If you believe it is only the truth in America, rest assured it is not a political truth. It is a cultural one, and it is not based on denial.
Despite being told that this was done out of sensitivity for the bereaved families (is that truly so hard to fathom?), the voyeuristic Smith maintains that he knows ‘there are some people who take comfort from the idea that their lost partner or relative chose to jump and so actively took charge of the manner of their dying.’
That may well be true. But here’s a news flash: they don’t necessarily want to read about it in the news or be asked by intrusive journalists, nor do they wish to foist it upon other families who may or may not wish to discuss the final minutes of their loved ones.
Not because it is dirty or embarrassing or shameful, because it isn’t.
Because it’s private; it is their loved one’s death, theirs to grieve and mourn, and as a culture we respect that.
Nor, as Smith argues, am I as an American adverse to speaking about the supposed suicides of September 11th because of religious conventions. While it is true that most religions practiced in the US, and the world for that matter, caution against the taking of one’s life on the basis of considering it an act of destruction of life believed only to be the purview of God, many religious denominations also have a significant amount of compassion for those who would choose to do so.
I recognize that suicide is the act of someone in pain and extreme emotional upheaval. There is no room for moral condemnation; there is only room for compassion and empathy, two traits sorely lacking in The Sunday Times article.
That said, I happen to fervently believe (and feel that as a culture many Americans feel similarly) that choosing to hasten the end of one’s life in the face of an imminent death caused by the actions of others is NOT suicide.
It does not matter whether those tortured souls chose to leap to their deaths due to physiological reaction to the billowing smoke and searing heat of the raging fires (‘flight’ instinct, if you will), a sense of last-minute empowerment over the horrific situation in which they found themselves (‘this will be on my terms, not the perpetrators’), or a grace-laden acceptance of death and embrace of God’s will following the physical end of one’s life.
They did not commit suicide. Absolutely. Did. Not. I am very clear on that.
I have no sense of ‘denial’ in this, none whatsoever. They simply were not suicides. To categorize them as such shows an abhorent lack of cultural sensitivity for the manner in which they died: at the hands of terrorists bent on killing as many as possible. It is not about the stigma of suicide that Smith so eagerly sniffs out.
They were murdered as clearly as those who died on impact when the planes hit the buildings or the ground in Pennsylvania, or those felled by the ensuing fireballs or choking, acrid smoke.
They are not forgotten, nor erased from history. They are every bit a part of the emotional and historical fabric that has been woven about 9/11, tiny strands included in the larger tapestry of horror, pain, anguish, steely determination, resolve and ultimately resurgence.
As a culture, we do not speak of these final actions for one reason, and one reason only: we believe it is culturally insensitive and therefore unthinkable to show or discuss people in the act of dying.
We avert our eyes and still our tongues not because we are immature or squeamish, but because we culturally consider it the utmost respect to allow someone the privacy of their grief. Collectively as a nation we embrace that concept.
This is an important point totally lost on Smith, as he cites conversations with some New York firefighters a year after September 11th. What they may have told him, face-to-face, is not something that they would have shouted out in lurid detail in a story such as Smith’s.
Those firefighters and emergency responders suffered grievous losses and know enough not to add to other families’ sorrows by discussing the intimate details of the demise of their loved ones. That includes those victims in the airplanes, in the buildings and on the ground, not only those who may have chosen to jump or who fell to their deaths.
It doesn’t take an investigative reporter to understand why there is precious little footage of the bodies landing. It may well exist, but if it does it certainly hasn’t been shared ad nauseum with the American public.
Similarly, there are no piles of news articles going into great depth about the distressing sounds survivors in the immediate area heard. We may know of it, but we are not and have not been bombarded with it.
Did journalists fulfill their duties in documenting that some people died in this manner? Yes.
Was there any ‘hiding’ of this information for any reason (shame, embarrassment, religious concerns, conspiracy theory)? Unequivocally NO.
As one firefighter on the scene that day explained so eloquently in the article, ‘I felt like I was intruding on a sacrament. They were choosing to die and I was watching them and shouldn’t have been…’
She and her partner turned away and faced a wall. I’m sure they were traumatised by what they were observing, but she turned away because she was showing respect, giving the victims the privacy they deserved.
To write about or discuss these developments outside of an exceedingly private conversation as was likely the case with the aforementioned firefighters (and, I suspect, with many a therapist in the intervening months and years) is to revisit cruel and unnecessary grief upon the families and friends of those who died in the World Trade Center buildings.
Another woman, whose brother was killed, said it best in Smith’s article: ‘They were falling into the arms of God, they really were’.
I cannot for the life of me imagine why this article was pitched, approved, investigated, written and published. And yet it was.
What is its redeeming value?
Are you telling me Smith et al will be proud many years from now to tell their progeny that on the Tenth Anniversary of September 11th, they chose to write and publish this article?
Really?
Truly?
Well obviously so, as the deed is done.
I can only think to paraphrase that American literary great, Dorothy Parker:
‘You can lead a media whore to culture, but you can’t make him think’.
Linda, you sum it up so succinctly with the quote from Dorothy Parker. I don’t read The Times on a Sunday and certainly will not be going to the website to read this particular piece. isrespectful does not even seem to cover it and I will NOT validate such journalism with so much as a page view.
Thank you for sharing what must have been painful to remember.
Thanks Kym. I’ve nothing against a hard-hitting piece of investigative journalism, but this was neither.
Linda, this is where the power of words can be abused in its empowerment. The spirit of writing courageously was clearly not present in that Sunday Times article. But your empowerment speaks volumes. I applaud and honour that about you Linda. xxN
Thank you Niamh. I wish I understood why they wrote it in this manner, or at all. I cannot get my head around what some will do for publicity.
Thank you for the power of your words. Thank you for your bravery. This is not a subject to be treated lightly.
I am stunned the Sunday Times, so long considered a serious, morally upright newspaper should sink below the standards of the basest tabloid. In fact, in issues like 9/11 it is often those same tabloids that show the greatest respect.
With everything that has happened recently in the British press ( the ‘News of the World’) you would expect editors to learn a cautionary lesson – readers have a better moral compass than those writing articles.
“We avert our eyes and still our tongues not because we are immature or squeamish, but because we culturally consider it the utmost respect to allow someone the privacy of their grief. Collectively as a nation we embrace that concept” – any compassionate person from any culture or religion would feel the same.
“As one firefighter on the scene that day explained so eloquently in the article, ‘I felt like I was intruding on a sacrament. They were choosing to die and I was watching them and shouldn’t have been…’ ” – again, what humane being anywhere would feel any differently?
How can anyone not ‘get’ this? There is nothing to be gained from the publication of this article – it is not newsworthy, it is not commemorative, it is not respectful. It is salacious journalism at its worst. It is whoring.
David James Smith may be rubbing his hands with glee at the notoriety of his piece, but anyone with any compassion will be sickened.
The contact details for the editor of the Sunday Times are listed below.
Phone John Witherow : +44 (0) 20-7782 5000
letters@sunday-times.co.uk
Editor
Sunday Times
1 Virginia Street
London
E98 1RL
Oh thank you for this. I’ve just sent a short email to the link you provided. So glad to have good friends when one can’t even see straight for the fury. In the cool light of morning, my feelings haven’t changed one iota. How sad to think of Americans waking up to enjoy a nice Labor Day holiday and be faced with this.
Linda,
Your anger is palpable and well expressed. I believe you are absolutely right that there are personal and private circumstances in the choices we all make. The people who jumped were faced with an excruciating decision which none of us have the right to quantify or qualify. They did indeed fall into the arms of God and we should treat their choice with respect and humility.
Thank you for your courage.
Thank you Christina, I appreciate this. Under the anger is the absolute sadness not only about what occurred, but what people will feel when they read an article like this. I’ve no problems with articles exploring the political and policy decisions that came out of September 11th, and I certainly know that there are those in this world who rub their hands with glee at this sort of stuff. But to go for a story angle that really has no traction is beyond my comprehension.
As someone who was living and working in NYC that day — although fortunately far enough away and fortunate not to lose any friends that day — I’ve kind of been dreading this anniversary. It seems to be an excuse for a proliferation of programs and articles that serve no purpose other than sensationalism. It was a horrible day and to go after the victims and their families in ways like this is truly disgusting.
As I said, I was lucky that my friends in the building got out in time. That still doesn’t change the fact that that day had a profound impact on me and still leaves me in tears when I think about it all. If it still affects me that deeply, I can’t imagine what it must be like for people who lost someone that day. I wish more respect would be shown. Ten years is a blink of an eye when it comes to something so horrifying.
Thank you for sharing this Alison. Many people don’t understand the manner in which Americans have been affected by September 11th; some of this is cultural in nature. No matter where you were when it happened, everyone remembers. Everyone grieves. You’re right – ten years is a blink of an eye, especially for those dealing with the loss of loved ones.
Linda you should send your article to the Sunday Times in its entirety because I believe that what you wrote is a representation of how the majority of people feel about David James Smith’s incredibly insensitive article on an event that has left its own scar on every single one of us.
Thank you, you’re absolutely right that it has affected everyone in some way or another. I sent an email and they don’t allow links as they fear computer viruses (fair enough); I had to resend with the post in the body of the email. Who knows whether they’ll even bother to respond. I feel better for having written it, and sending it in. So incredibly insensitive is right.
Unbelievable. As an (expat) British woman I feel ashamed. How would the British feel if an American journalist had written such a piece about a tragedy that happened in the UK? It’s a disgrace. I have shared your post on Facebook and Twitter. I agree with every word. In fact, your post made me feel quite emotional. I work for the US Embassy in Kingston, Jamaica and we are having our own commemoration this weekend. Thank you, and all the best.
Thank you so much Emma, I really appreciate your kind words. Please don’t focus on Smith being British, as I certainly don’t. He obviously wanted an ‘angle’ to stimulate publicity, but I do feel he tried to generate an issue where one doesn’t really exist.
Linda,
I have not read the article to which you are referring. I got the gist of it from your post though and think others have expressed themselves so much better than I could, but I did want to validate one of your opinions.
It may be because I live in the states and haven’t traveled much, but I have NEVER (EVER) heard the word suicide used in connection with ANYONE who lost their life that day (other than the terrorists who committed these horrible crimes). I’m still shaking my head at the premise of such an article. Was the author suggesting Americans are trying to erase some of our own fathers, mothers, husbands, wives, sons, daughters, friends from history–because we are in denial or embarrassed??? That is preposterous. You said it, and I’ll back you up on this–the reason Americans don’t talk about people committing suicide is because no one did. I guess I’m more than a little shocked to discover that is not everyone’s reality.
Thank you Stephanie, I really appreciate your commenting. My guess is that the journalist wanted to write about the sad aspect that many in the Twin Towers were faced with such horrible choices, and decided to give it an attention-grabbing (albeit false) angle for publicity’s sake. Pitiful and unnecessarily cruel. While there are most definitely people in this world who view 9/11 very differently than Americans, I’m not sure Smith does.
I watched a doco on TV last night which followed one of the principal fire chiefs (you’ll have to excuse my bad memory but I can’t remember his name – he’s now the head of counter-terrorism incidents) and a French camera crew were following him and his team as they gathered in one of the buildings, shortly after the first attack, to start the emergency response.
As the victims fell, you could visibly see the change in the faces of his firefighters. They realised what was happening and they didn’t want to be there. They looked uncomfortable, embarassed, call it what you will. I saw some turn away, some gather together. I even felt like I was invading someone’s personal space, the sanctity of that individual personal moment, whilst I was safe in front of my TV.
It makes me extremely uncomfortable every time I see related footage to the victims and it isn’t so much the nature of the ending of these lives, awful as it is, but the fact that I’m eavesdropping on the ending.
Beautifully written Russell, so well said. Those French film makers happened to be in a front row seat to a horrific attack, and their documentary was well-received and appreciated for their own sensitivity. I’ve seen it a couple times over the years and always felt grateful that they didn’t sensationalize anything, unlike what I believe to be the case with Smith’s article. Thank you so much for sharing this.
Linda, it’s the sensationalizing that society has accepted as being normal. Our children are being brainwashed with these awful reality programmes. They are being privy to pseudo-journalism at its worst. Thank you for sharing your blog on this sensitive subject. We have to fight back with our words, our integrity, our protests. It’s not acceptable. It’s this horrific shift in humanity to prey on the pain of others that has to be crushed by the warriors of the pen, the warriors of the light. xx
It’s sad, isn’t it Niamh? I accept differences of opinion and understand that people will have other viewpoints, but creating what is essentially a false angle’ for this story and sensationalizing it is beyond the pale. Smith has the ability and skill to have written a piece without either.
@LAJ
I thank you, too, for speaking out with such passion on a press treatment of 9/11 that is more than any of us needed or wanted to know. I was living in New York City then — but my husband and I were on holiday in Crete when the attacks occurred. My sister and her young family were living in Battery Park City right near the Twin Towers, so you can imagine my horror at learning this kind of news and not being able to get in touch with her (as phone lines were down) to make sure they’d been evacuated. They had — and they subsequently came to live with us (in Greenwich Village) until it was safe to go back.
It was a most surreal period, and my sister and I (as well as our spouses) remember it as though it were yesterday. Something definitely changed in our feelings toward the city, towards each other in the wake of this tragedy.
But like you, we don’t really talk about it with others except in the most superficial way — where we were, what we did, etc.
Meanwhile, the stories I wish the press would write haven’t been written. For instance, having been down to the smoldering remains of the Twin Towers just afterwards (to help my brother-in-law collect my sister’s things), I keep wishing that they’d kept that fragment of the towers that was still standing in place, as a kind of memorial. Never mind the official memorial that would take over a decade to argue about and build.
Back in those days, I was working in communications at the Carnegie Council for Ethics in International Affairs, and a colleague of mine, who is an expert on societal reconciliation, wrote about this topic very eloquently for the Council’s newsletter.
However, I’ve never really heard it discussed in the thoughtful way my colleague did, by the mainstream media.
A shame, I think!
I really appreciate your sharing your story with me. When the killings in Norway occurred earlier this summer, there was talk of a country in pain as well as the citizens in pain for their country, and I understood what was meant. Everyone knows where they were when they heard the news, what they saw and heard and read. I think it’s good to ask people what they recall, to remind future generations of the magnitude of this event. I suppose, too, if asked (through intermediaries), that some of the families would like to share something about their loved ones. But there is definitely a line (perhaps a band wider than a line) that doesn’t need to be crossed, because then it tends to be about other peoples’ motivations. You should definitely look up your Carnegie colleague’s article and share; I for one would love to read it, and I sense there are many others. Thank you
Just when we think our British press could not stoop any lower. Untrue and unnecessary. Truly everyone taken that day against their free will fell straight into His arms and was carried away. We can only overcome the darkness by celebrating love. Well done for your tough love piece.
Why thank you Sarah. I hadn’t thought about it as ‘tough love’ but I’d say that’s accurate.
I don’t expect anything different from a Murdoch paper. Dieing in the inferno or leaping to one’s death is hardly an informed choice. We buy the Observer on sundays when we can. It’s a much better read.
Will have to look into the Observer, Jack. We like to get a good cross-section of coverage in print, television and online, to get a sense of the differences of opinion.But this was beyond the pale. Way beyond.
That’s your view. I don’t think you have read the article in an objective way. There are valid questions raised. The article gives a balance to the selective reporting of the event by the American press.
Thank you for taking the time to read the post and comment Chris. You are a talented photographer as evidenced by your site. You and I can agree to disagree. Too bad the reporter, his editors and the paper didn’t have the guts to give the article the title that they wrote to rather than the sensationalist one they used to ensure readership. At least then it would have been accurate. Not sure why you think the American reporting was so selective in this instance given that Americans are well aware that people chose to leap to their deaths. So once again, just exactly what was the purpose of that article with that title?
Reading passion is always a moving experience. Thank you.
I have been sitting here trying to sort through thoughts and feelings that your post invoked. As a Canadian, it was horrifying to watch while our neighbour endured the unendurable and yet, like so many, I was riveted unable to turn away. But it was not voyeurism it was that an event so horrific demanded to be witnessed so that we would never forget nor be able to gloss over it and dull the memory. I knew of the jumpers, saw those flickering smudges plummeting down. Intellectually I knew they were people but there was just too much horror that day and the days following to focus too much on the details, the spirit can only handle so much at a time. But oddly, the word suicide never occurred to me so when I read your post I was mildly surprised to see the word. I was surprised more by my not thinking of it before. See, to me, suicide is almost always about what you talked about in the paragraph starting with “It does not matter whether those tortured souls…” No one chooses to die unless they truly feel that it is the lesser of the evils that they face. The pain of staying is just too much. So for me, there is no stigma, no judgements on the word or the deed so that is why I am surprised that I never even thought the word in relation to those people who chose to jump. They did what they had to for their spirit to survive.
As for the article, well the ever elucidative Ms. Parker delivers my attitude towards the press. Your post served to illuminate, which is what the damn press is supposed to do, but so rarely does.
My apologies for the rambling comment.
No rambling whatsoever, Donnae. I think you captured a host of emotions that day engenders in so many of us. Their spirits do indeed survive. Thank you.