Before sharing my 9/11 paper with Chinwei I asked him how the event changed American media and how it changed the media within Singapore. He mentioned that there were very emotional live updates and that it seemed to increase the distrust in the media because it wasn’t being covered thoroughly and in an unbiased fashion. After sharing the paper our conversation turned to a discussion about the psychology of a terrorist and their rationale but this conversation focuses entirely on the media’s coverage of 9/11.

CW: When it happened we were shown pretty updated footage, from the american media and it certainly gave me the impression that the report was rather emotional. That wasn’t typical of what i expected from a news report, but then again it must have been a really painful experience to many americans. It was emotionally charged, to say the least.

No doubt the public’s perception of terrorists were influenced by the news reporting. Some believed the media and some felt that the media were covering up something they didn’t want the public to know. If there was any distrust in the media it certainly intensified then.

Over here, there was certainly a lot of air time allocated to that event. It was aired really soon as it happened. I remembered it was a live update, so you can imagine the kind of attention given to it. It was a really big thing.

I don’t remember any significant changes in the news media after that, but the government became really sensitive to that issue and responded. Trash bins from crowded areas such as our train stations were removed and notices to alert passengers about suspicious baggages were shown on tv at all stations.

The event affected to a great extent what people thought of terrorists too. It was the first time it became so close to our daily lives.