• by John Gaffney , September 12, 2002

OPRs For the Week of Sept. 9:

Usually I run my little file of funny, absurd and offbeat items on Friday. But it was an awfully serious week. Here’s a representative sample of some of the better (albeit serious) comments on the week that contained 9/11.

From Don McLeod in The New York Press: “The 9/11 media assault—from the weekly magazines' "One Year Later" onslaughts and the Sunday New York Times' wall-to-wall rehash to television's inescapable video replays—resembles not some solemn remembrance but a profane run-up to the Super Bowl of Terrorism: It's Super Wednesday! El Anniversario Gigante! Nine-Eleven Heaven!…It's all the selling of 9/11, another OJ trial with airplanes instead of bloody gloves, with unrelenting coverage from every angle. The only thing missing is a Dick Clark-like countdown clock for the exact moment the first airplane struck.”

From Phil Rosenthal in the Chicago Sun Times: “To flip the channels early Wednesday morning, you would have trouble finding ones that weren't recalling 9/11 in some way. Basically your alternatives were kids programming, some movies, a few syndicated shows, "The Best Damn Sports Show Period" and home shopping, which just goes to show that capitalism cannot be thwarted so easily.”

From Jay Bookman in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution: “Clearly, though, neither the media nor their audience can repeat this year's onslaught. Coverage that might have been sincere and even healing in 2002 will be viewed in the future as maudlin and exploitative. Beyond that, though, it's impossible to predict what role the anniversary will play in our national life. So much will depend on what happens from here on out. In future years the day could evolve into a national holiday of sorts. On the other hand, it could also recede from official notice.”

Reader Riff Of The Week: On Monday Laura Bush gave an interview to CNN that advised parents to keep their kids away from 9/11 anniversary coverage. I wrote that she should mind her own business. I got flamed. One of the brightest flames came from reader Andrea C. Theoharis: “In the same vein, maybe you shouldn't use your stature to pooh-pooh prudent parental advice. See, here's the thing... there are so many BAD role models out there - and if you're a parent, you know what I mean, especially since you admit that you must closely monitor what your kids are exposed to. So, why is everyone so ready to criticize role models who are trying to offer a positive influence? In this day and age of televisions serving as surrogate parents, don't you agree that someone somewhere has to drive home the point that children need some protection from the insanity in this world? No, it's not Laura Bush's job to tell people what to watch. But it wasn't Nancy Reagan's job to tell kids not to use drugs either. Should we criticize Nancy for being a killjoy?”