The 9/11 terrorist attack is one of the most shocking and devastating catastrophe captured on live television. The above video clip is the Live Unedited CNN News Coverage on 11 September 2011 from 8.50am – 11.30am.
The news is always structured, segmented and prepared. When a crisis happens, the terror news erupts spontaneously and takes over the schedules (Marriot 2011).Live_Television_Time_Space_and_the_Broadcast_Event
From the beginning of the clip, it is evident that the live coverage interrupts an advertisement with the voice-over of presenter saying “This just in…”. This interruption highlights the fact that live tv, just like real-like occurrences, are unexpected. This is explained in a Gadassik reading (Spring 2010) : “the attraction of television liveness, as an ideological (or simulated?) media construction, depends precisely on such brief, unexpected ruptures in television’s controlled daily flow.
Gadassik (At a Loss for Words: Televisual Liveness and Corporeal Interruption) : https://lms.rmit.edu.au/bbcswebdav/pid-6027190-dt-content-rid-12384773_1/courses/COMM2626_1510/Alla%20Gadassik_Televisual%20Liveness%20and%20Corporeal%20Interruption.pdf
Marriot’s article on the Live Event also mentions getting information directly (first-hand witness) and from second or third hand knowledge from external sources at the scene of the event. In the case of the 9/11 coverage, the anchors relied heavily (for at least the first 15 minutes of the coverage) on eye-witnesses and people that had a different viewing perspective of the World Trade Centre. The anchors themselves were taken aback and unsure of what was happening, and just speculating to fill air time. They had multiple phone interviews with different people to get eye-witness information, which also led to the anchor not being able to be fully in charge of the news “program”, as evident from 12:28 to 14:32 when the eye-witness Winston was just going on about what he saw and what he is currently witnessing, and the anchor was trying to get him on hold after awhile, saying “let me put Winston on hold for just a moment…i just don’t want to panic here on the air”. This sudden reliance on many third party sources via the phone live on air is an intrusion of routine, and the anchors are seen at this point trying to gain control to get some “routine” back in the broadcast even if they are improvising.
I agree with Mary Ann Doane cited in Gadassik who argued that “the catastrophe is crucial to television” because that disruption of flow brings about the realness. In this case, the realness of the catastrophe is best conveyed to the audience tuning in to the broadcast through first-hand reports. Later in the coverage, CNN had their reporters on the rooftops where they could be both eye witnesses while anchoring. The unanticipated reactions of the anchors while reporting also add to the liveness of the coverage, as no one is certain of what might come out of their mouths next, just like how no one is certain what was going to happen to the World Trade Centre next at that moment.
I feel that terror news reports are the fastest and best way for the world to witness what is happening “live”, and at least for those moments, the information and content of the broadcast are ad-libbed – a break from the scheduled and structured way television programmes would run.
thiscouchpotato 