Case Analysis on the Case Study “The September 11 Attacks as a Focusing

Event “

The focusing event of September 11 terrorist attacks greatly increased attention to

particular interests and large acts of terrorism as a threat on United States. Media in its various
forms such as radio, television and newspapers can play a pivotal role in political conflict
situations and can spur or deter political violence. It can be used also as a propaganda tool or a
megaphone to spread information across large audiences. There’s an implied mechanism
between the media’s role in terrorism and the conflict settings discussed. The media can
facilitate the spread of propaganda and information to influence people’s political beliefs and
attitudes in the respective conflict settings. However, terrorist organizations may strike more
when media attention is already on them. Thus, it is not necessarily used explicitly to advance
specific goals but terrorist groups may aim to exploit the media platform they currently have and
additionally, the goal of maximizing media coverage may stand in contrast governments’ desire
to attack ‘when the world is not watching’.

Statement of the Problem

The US media used its ability in giving more widespread media coverage and attention
to terrorism by presenting it as a domestic problem rather than primarily an overseas issue by
using the 9/11 attacks as a focusing event. There’s an increase of foreign news exposure of
terrorism due to the extensive coverage of foreign reaction to the September 11 attacks and the
escalation of violence in the Middle East. This paved way for an opportunity in determining the
media’s capacity in rapidly changing the nature of agenda worldwide and how it triggers the
Congress to act by aggressively covering an issue for a short time and eventually fading it away
to give way for the past events to recede.

Summary of the Pertinent Facts and Assumptions

The 9/11 attacks as a major event in the world history created a large influence on
congressional and media agendas when talking about terrorism. It was perhaps the most
dramatic media spectacle and a spectacle of terror when the World Trade Center, the heart of
U.S. symbolic power and the symbol of U.S. military power, the Pentagon, were attacked in
which the terror spectacle took over live global media for days to come, becoming an
emblematic event in media history. The Bush-Cheney Administration had manipulated the fear
of US citizens and were shaken by the fact that their spaces were vulnerable to those
catastrophic attack. The administration pushed through a rightwing agenda to go to war in
Afghanistan and Iraq with the complicity of the mainstream U.S. corporate media. Wealth of
empirical research, reflection, and debates about the role of the media in contemporary society
and history were generated by the potency of media representations of 9/11 and the centrality of
the media in the aftermath of the event. The images of the World Trade Center towers
collapsing and images of planes hitting it were broadcast repeatedly, as if repetition were
necessary to master a highly traumatic event which conveyed a message that the US was
vulnerable to terror attack, that terrorists could create great harm, and that anyone at any time
could be subject to a deadly terror attack, even in Fortress America. 

The discourses of the US television networks framed the 9/11 attacks to whip up war
hysteria, while failing to provide a coherent explanation of what triggered it to happen, what
happened, and what would count as responsible responses for the attacks. The press firmly got
behind the President -— with disastrous results when he declared in his “war on terror” that you
are “either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists,”. Fear led to passivity, obedience, and
conformity as the press became a willing accomplice of Bush Administration policy. Finnegan
noted a variety of stories that the media did not do their supposed duties such as the arrest and
detention of 1,200 Arab men following the terror attacks; the threats to civil liberty in the USA
Patriot Act; the curtailment of the Freedom of Information act; or even the question as to why
the U.S. was the target of such vicious hatred.

The case study considered the nature of agenda expansion in the mass media. After the
9/11 attacks, there were at least three actual or suspected terrorist incidents between 1990 and
2001 but none of those events triggered the extent of coverage by the Times that the
September 11 did. 9/11 attacks clearly brought home the issue of terrorism. Rather than
primarily an overseas issue, terrorism became a domestic problem as portrayed by the media.
Foreign news on terrorism increased due to the extensive coverage of foreign reaction to the
September 11 attacks and the escalation of violence in the Middle East. The dramatic effect of
the event on the national news agenda also showed that the news coverage followed a typical
trend. The news media would aggressively cover an issue for a short time and then the
coverage would fade as events from the past recedes and as political institutions decide
whether or not to act in substantive or symbolic ways.

The Congress had paid a great deal of attention to the attacks but the expansion of the
agenda was not as great as the media’s attention to the issue. Two weeks after September 11,
there is a significant increase in the news coverage of terrorism followed by a substantial drop
off in coverage after that period. The news coverage of terrorism remained high as a national
issue but it never returned again to the levels that the two weeks after September 11 reached.
On the other hand, the Congress saw its terrorism agenda expand continuously six weeks
following September 11 and it actually peaked in March 2001. The Congress carefully planned
its move and moves slower than the media in order to gain a more purposive response to the
issues. This highlights the point that a shocking, impactful and big event can totally affect the
policy decisions and gives influences on the agenda that the whole world is experiencing.

Analysis of the Alternative Solutions

The following are the alternative solutions in order to address the agenda setting of media:

The public must be educated and informed about the issues that their country is
experiencing. The citizens should be media literate in which they could be able to distinguish
what’s suspicious, what’s right and know the credibility of the news. Media personnel should
uphold their morals and never forget their duty and obligation to serve the public with accurate
information. The media plays an important role in informing the public to make informed
decisions about the current issues through their own conclusions such as the 9/11 attacks. The
media should explain the situation of their country and the terror attacks that’s been going on.
On the other hand, the media is crucial in structuring communication surrounding critical issues
and will serve as the voice of truth for the people. There are a lot of news that should be given
the exposure and much more deserving for the people to know such as local and national news.
Media should not just focus on foreign news and not be a dog of crooked administration.

Through their influential power and effect on the government, interest groups that are
composed of people with similar policy goals working to influence the political process by
achieving common goals that are in business, industry and government professionals, laborers,
and public interest groups should work and coexist with the purpose of influencing the political
process at the local, state, and national level. These interest groups are very important to the
political process as they have positive impact on the government’s agenda and do so with
considerable frequency. It is their purpose to adjust the political agenda to meet their needs and
concerns and strive to block the agenda that occurs when interest groups want to maintain
entitlements and benefits they are currently enjoying and therefore block initiatives that would
reduce those benefits. Interest groups have a large impact on the political process whether they
choose to directly influence the political process or block the agenda. Having interest groups in
a society can help the people in deciding whether to put trust in the administration and in the
media.

Another thing as an alternative solution for the society is to have extension educators
that offers research-based knowledge that is applicable to answer difficult questions and provide
solutions in which they have the responsibility to instruct the public on all sides of a public issue.
According to Boyle and Mulcahy (1993), their role is to support people in the development of a
broadened perspective, so they are prepared to make reasonable judgments about the critical
public issues we face today and will also inform the people with future policy decisions by
presenting both sides of a story to government officials so they are prepared to make informed
decisions concerning policies. The society should produce more credible and effective
policymakers. Crisis communication should be further studied and give value to research given
that these focusing events happened as a guide for better future decisions.

Decision, Choice or Recommendation

1. Journalists and other media personnel are recommended to “decide whether to

report,” “modify or remove information that may increase risk” and “present
information that may be helpful and not misleading.
2. Regulate reporting on terrorist groups and maybe even ban reporting entirely. Of
course, such drastic measures cannot be reconciled with a strong commitment to
press freedom and likely do not present a socially desirable solution, since they may
produce substantial and likely negative externalities. However, journalists and news
program directors may be well advised to re-think the extent to which terrorism is
covered.
3. Too much exposure on foreign news should not be implemented.
4. Give highlights for local news.
5. Media should serve for the public and do their roles fairly.
6. More researches for crisis communication.

Conclusion

Media can be very influential in telling us how to think about issues or objects. The way it
covers international events and foreign countries has serious consequences on what the public
thinks about the outside world, and – to a degree – on how policymakers shape foreign policy,
these are good reasons for scholars to keep studying international news in order to better
understand these relationships and how they take place. It is especially true in foreign news,
because most people do not have first-hand experience with foreign countries, and media very
much provide us with how we should perceive other countries. This was confirmed by this study,
which suggest that there is a strong connection between media coverage of foreign countries
and public opinion.
References:

Matthew D. Matsaganis, J. (n.d.). Agenda setting in a culture of fear: The lasting effects of
September 11 on American politics and journalism - Matthew D. MATSAGANIS, J.
Gregory PAYNE, 2005. Retrieved February 19, 2021, from
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0002764205282049

Politics, media and WAR: 9/11 and its aftermaths. (n.d.). Retrieved February 19, 2021, from
https://www.open.edu/openlearn/ocw/mod/oucontent/view.php?printable=1&id=4537

9/11, spectacles of terror, and media manipulation. (n.d.). Retrieved February 19, 2021, from
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17405900410001674515

Birkland, T., & Schwaeble, K. (2019, June 25). Agenda setting and the policy process: Focusing
events. Retrieved February 19, 2021, from
https://oxfordre.com/politics/oso/viewentry/10.1093$002facrefore$002f9780190228637.00
1.0001$002facrefore-9780190228637-e-
165;jsessionid=94F09E1BA064360A146FD93D4B8BE34B?t%3Astate
%3Aclient=H4sIAAAAAAAAAFVOuUpDQRS9cUEl2Nj4A2KXWRKyIcFCIoQ8RAiK
7fBy85w4mRnv3CyvsbX0R%2Fwha2s7KyufTcDiwNk4nPcv2F
%2FvAUAtEYwDFcJEkz
%2BiYBMxMZVtYT0jeeNEQlrZHJO4chY93yIlm7hi1xbddMKBTIGjRXRnYyw%2Fvk
%2FfDj5%2FXndgN4N6HhYx%2BKo6mjKcZHOzMtIZX8gJk
%2FXFRQZHs7%2BRG7PAZ3iBWgaHsVrb6k2MDHXCqSXM
%2BY4cw3FIQd5bXA999ZNhLmNwlm2e5KpypVZCq35LmpxwFghlv9tTuq
%2BazV6n1RVK6QpKb%2FPGv7yBDd1pX1J6wnKwHPbKzsM5YVo6HujuLwiEI
%2Fo2AQAA

Matusitz, J., & Ochoa, D. (2018, September 26). Agenda-Setting theory in the u.s. media: A
comparative analysis of terrorist attacks in France and Nigeria. Retrieved February 19,
2021, from https://www.globalmediajournal.com/open-access/agendasetting-theory-in-the-
us-media-a-comparative-analysis-of-terrorist-attacks-in-france-and-nigeria.php?aid=87202

Edwards, G. C., Wattenberg, M. P., & Lineberry, R. L. (2006). Government in America: People.

Politics, and Policy. New York: Longman.

Kingdon, J. W. (2003). Agendas, alternatives, and public policies. New York: Longman.

Kingdon, J. W., & Thurber, J. A. (1984). Agendas, alternatives, and public policies. Boston:
Little, Brown.
Boyle, P. G. & Mulcahy, S. H. (1993). Public policy education: A path to political
support. Journal of Extension, 31(4). Retrieved from http://www.joe.org/joe/1993winter/tp1.html

Gould, F. I., Steele, D., & Woodrum, W. J. (2014). Cooperative Extension: A century of
innovation. Journal of Extension, 52(1). Retrieved
from http://www.joe.org/joe/2014february/comm1.php

Kalambokidis, L. (2004). Identifying the public value in extension programs. Journal of

Extension, 42(2). Retrieved from http://www.joe.org/joe/2004april/a1.php