PressEthic

I was on the site of the World Trade Center today for the 4th anniversary of the terrorist attacks on 9/11. As I was walking around the site, three people, from three different groups of protesters came to me. The first person showed me his banner that said: “9/11 WTC controlled demolition”. The second one gave me a handout entitled “True patriots learn the worst and tell all”. The last one offered me a 3-hour long DVD called “Confronting the evidence; a call to reopen the 9/11 investigation”.

These three groups defend the same idea that somehow, the US government is directly responsible for the collapse of the twin towers. This thesis is ridiculous, absurd and outrageous. There is no question about it: this is all false.

But these “revisionist” people were there. Everybody who was at the ceremony saw them and therefore got to hear about their thesis. These people are pretty numerous and apparently they have sufficient funds to edit a DVD.

Nevertheless, I have never heard about this thesis in the media. Why? Isn’t it news that some people still deny the evidence, on the very day we remember the tragedy? As outrageous as it is, isn’t it worth being mentioned?

This is obviously not a question of giving equal time to different opinions on an issue. What happened on 9/11 is not an opinion matter. It is facts upon which any decent person should agree.

But it is still hard to justify the decision of the media not to talk about this thesis. Should it not be reported just because it is false? But does that matter, as long as there is a significant number of people who believe it? Is this issue too sensitive? But should journalists refrain themselves from tackling sensitive issues?

I think the silence of the media only reinforces these conspiracy theorists, by making them think that nobody contradicts them. It would take less than one minute in a news broadcast to mention them and prove that these theories are bogus.