According to Andrew Hoskins, author of “Journalism And September 11, 2001,” Barbie Zelizer, a research professor, focuses on the cultural aspects of journalism and claims that “to publish photographic representations of ‘collective gazing’ and examines how diverse pictures of bearing witness to the site of the assault had a healing role.” Despite not being there to witness the World Trade Center collapse and the ensuing death toll, Americans felt as though they were there and could emotionally identify with the tragedy. There had never been an attack of this magnitude on American soil before, and journalists, who are constantly exposed to gruesome and horrible imagery, had never seen anything like it. Grey Brad’s movie, In Memorium: New York City, refers to the September 11, 2001, terrorist events as history’s most recorded event. In Memorium is a 9/11 documentary, but the investigative journalism it spawned has had a tremendous impact on American politics and government (Mogensen, 2017). As a result, images and videos of 9/11, with all of their gory and terrifying details, made a lasting impression on the American psyche, forcing the federal government to pass the Patriot Act.
The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, had a profound impact on the US intelligence community as well as many of its allies. According to one former director, during his tenure as CIA director, the agency shifted from collecting information to actively pursuing it. The pledge made in the 2002 National Security Strategy to “disrupt and destroy terrorist organizations with worldwide reach,” which stressed kinetic counterterrorism, was reiterated with this additional aim. In the worldwide war on terror, terrorist networks have replaced conventional state threats and armies as surveillance targets (Moran, 2020). The danger posed by non-state actors necessitated the development of new surveillance technologies and procedures. In the post-9/11 world of surveillance, controlled by the United States, the drone, a new image intelligence technology, has gained prominence. The drone has quickly developed into a dual-purpose weapon that can collect data as well as hunt in armed form.
The growth of local and worldwide internet surveillance, as well as mass data collecting and analytics, was a vital second stage. As a consequence, new data storage, management, and analysis methods were necessary, including unrivaled processing capability and the use of artificial intelligence to filter through previously unselective data. It was critical to legitimize this new kind of monitoring, which marked a historic shift away from centralized data collection. Intelligence agencies now claim that analyzing the haystack is required in order to concentrate on the needle-like objectives. The revelations made by Edward Snowden about the scope of the US surveillance program, which was carried out in coordination with the Five Eyes intelligence partners of Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom, sparked further worldwide political instability. Furthermore, the Snowden disclosures sparked lengthy and contentious debates regarding the legality of bulk data collection, as well as worries about democratic privacy safeguards and rights.
The United States and the rest of the world have updated their understanding of international law standards and the use of force against terrorists in the wake of the September 11 attacks. Despite the fact that several of George W. Bush’s post-9/11 policies and legal interpretations were questioned at the time, the Obama administration has upheld many of them, and other countries have either explicitly or implicitly accepted them. Despite human rights activists’ concerns, the Obama administration and many other countries acknowledged that states may use military force against non-state organizations like al-Qaeda and the self-proclaimed Islamic State and that international law of war, rather than domestic terrorist legislation, maybe the appropriate legal principles to follow (Michaelson & Tosti-Kharas,2020). Many nations currently agree that if endangered states are “unwilling or incapable” of minimizing the threat, they may employ military action against non-state terrorist groups and terror suspects in non-consenting third countries.
As a consequence of the post-9/11 war on terror, counterterrorism has become an acceptable rationale for other, unrelated operations all around the world. Both China and Russia often use it to justify their abuse of the opposition, activists, and minorities at home and abroad. Additionally, brutalization has a negative influence on democracies. The West’s international prestige and image were harmed by the participation of American leaders and European allies in criminal activities. When it comes to upholding and honoring international norms, democracies have traditionally been seen as hypocrites. The war on terror’s cultural repercussions has yet to be completely appreciated (Moran, 2020). As a consequence of feelings of constant fear, pervasive surveillance, Islamophobia, and other forms of xenophobia, people’s trust in politicians and authorities has so far deteriorated.
It’s crucial to remember that this study did not only produce negative findings and that there were a number of positive tendencies in the immediate aftermath of September 11. To begin with, more academics are focusing on the subject than ever before, and joint research is on the rise. Although there has been a little movement away from literature review-based research in terms of data gathering and analysis, descriptive and inferential statistical analysis has seen a far more promising increase. Researchers’ capacity to develop reliable and accurate results will only increase as inferential statistics have more than doubled since 9/11. This is an improvement from a very low starting point, and it still pales in comparison to other significant publications, but it’s unquestionably a move in the right direction. It is too early to determine how 9/11 and the new global order will affect terrorist studies. This research was carried out by a group of academics and was based on publications published in the first three years after the attacks (BAlestrino). This is a relatively brief span of time in terms of research timelines. Several major probes ordered during 9/11’s first year have just recently become public.
For three to four years, there will be no honest and full evaluation of the influence of 9/11 on terrorist research. To date, the industry has put a greater emphasis on current events than at any time in history. This tendency might be harmful if it continues, but it is reasonable given the evident issues that existed prior to September 11, 2001. Although data collection and analysis have improved, several concerning tendencies have emerged, such as a greater focus on chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear research. Although this is not always a negative thing, there is no particular academic field dedicated to the study of terrorism. There is no requirement for a specialist academic organization to do high-quality research. As a result, terrorism study has always had an interdisciplinary component. Thus, other findings in this study provide cause for caution.
References
BAlestrino, A. Post-9/11 Rhetoric and The Split of Safety in Amy Waldman’s The Submission.
Michaelson, C., & Tosti-Kharas, J. (2020). A world changed: What post-9/11 stories tell us about the position of America, purpose of business, and meaning of work. Academy of Management Review, 45(4), 877-895.
Mogensen, K. (2017). Journalistic norms: The media as a shepherd. In Lessons from Ground Zero (pp. 61-77). Routledge.
Moran, M. (2020). Rummaging Through the Ashes: 9/11 American Poetry and the Transcultural Counterwitness. European Journal of American studies, 15(15-2).
write