It was a Tuesday morning, and all over the country American eyes were glued to television sets.
Six years ago today 2,974 people were killed when four hijacked planes crashed into American soil.
That was 2001.
"When I woke up that morning after finishing my exercises, I turned on CNN just in time to see the second plane crashing into the tower," said John Rothgeb, professor of political science at Miami University and author of the book U.S. Trade Policy. "I thought that the (news) coverage was reasonable under the circumstances. They weren't trying to create more alarm than necessary."
In the years since the attack, national newspapers have published special editions, 24-hour cable networks have kept the public informed with a streaming news ticker, and photos of the two crumbling towers have been circulated around the World Wide Web.
However, soon stories of personal experiences and plans for rebuilding were replaced by anxious coverage of the impending War on Terror-with mixed results.
According to a Knight Ridder and Princeton Research poll in 2002, a large segment of the American public still remained misinformed about many of the issues surrounding September 11, especially who to blame.
"Since the invasion was launched, not much has been done to investigate," Rothgeb said. "Especially on networks such as the History Channel-they linked Saddam Hussein directly to the attack and the media played to that idea."
Director of journalism at Miami, Richard Campbell, said he believes the reason for this type of coverage is that immediately after September 11, media coverage, combined with the political climate of the times, created a "culture of fear," especially for journalists.
"Newspapers were afraid of being called unpatriotic," Campbell said.
However, Campbell believes it is the media's job to ask questions and to investigate claims made by the government-not to be complacent.
"I think you're patriotic if you're holding the government's feet to the fire," Campbell said.
Campbell said he was disappointed with coverage in the years following 2001, saying that it wasn't until journalists began asking questions in the wake of Hurricane Katrina in 2005 that the media began to admit to previous mistakes.
With the six-year anniversary, Rothgeb is curious to see how the media will handle their coverage.
"The proper thing to do (on September 11) would be to have coverage of memorial services, maybe a couple different places around the country to show we're all still remembering," Rothgeb said.
Joe Sampson, an instructor of journalism at Miami, believes that no matter what is covered, the media should reflect the national attitude.
"I think that media really should follow and take its cue from society from what New Yorkers do, from what people in Washington do, from what people in Pennsylvania do," Sampson said.
According to Sampson, it is not the amount of coverage that is important but the fact that there will always be coverage.
"I think in 50 years time, it will be remembered," Sampson said. "It will be in the newspaper."
Sampson points out that previous national tragedies have remained engraved in the media's eye years after the events have passed.
"However small the coverage might be, television always remembers certain dates," Sampson said. "We always remember Nov. 22, 1963, when President Kennedy was killed. Television always remembers Pearl Harbor and Oklahoma City."
For the 2006 anniversary, not all major sources will be saturated by September 11 memorials.
The Dayton Daily News has no special plans for this year's anniversary, said Arts Editor Ron Rollins. He said that the need for information is almost nonexistent now, due to the number of events that have occurred since the attack.
"A six-year anniversary is an off-year and I think that's a part of it," Rollins said. "History has overtaken it. There is actual news that has overtaken the event in terms of what you would say about it."
According to Campbell, September 11 should now be a day for the media to reflect upon what has been done in the past, and to address the challenge of shedding new light on an old story.
"I think we should honor the memory of the event," Campbell said. "That has to be acknowledged. But it has to be more than that."
