Acceleration Phase: September – November, 2001

Media Coverage: September 11, 2001, has been described as ―a media operation if ever there was one‖ (Vossoughian, 2003). In the immediate wake of the attacks, millions of people around the world wanted to know all about it and began searching for

162 news-related content wherever they could find it: television, radio, the Web, newspaper sites. Google activity on September 11, 2001, showed a substantial increase of searches for the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, Osama bin Laden, American Airlines, the Federal Bureau of Investigation [FBI] and CNN, with some 6,000 users per minute searching for CNN alone (Wiggins, 2001). The popularity of CNN as a news source emerged as a result of the first Gulf War coverage and many now turned to it instinctively for the big stories. Online news is often thought to be always accessible, however the Internet, being a narrowcast medium, was inadequately equipped at this time to handle millions of people trying to access sites at once. Hence, the role of traditional broadcast media proved pivotal during the September 11 crisis, both in terms of access and immediacy. The saturation media coverage kept millions intensely focused on television screens for hours, with many channels replacing usual programming with continuous news bulletins. In New York, the CBS-TV broadcast affiliate saw ―a surge in ratings, not only because of the nature of its saturation coverage, but also because its in-town rivals had lost their broadcast towers on the World Trade Center‖ (Wiggins, 2001).

The repercussions of the event were being felt worldwide and there were reports of resource-stretched newsrooms, even in Africa. Other international broadcasters took USA blanket network coverage but, in the case of Africa, some USA networks lost viewers to British broadcasts because of alleged bias. The global hunger for information was just as strong as in the USA, with reports of Web users abandoning chat sites, turning instead to news sites and official government announcements (Gibson, 2001).

Web traffic for the Arab news site al-Jazeera also soared, with the site ―seen by the

163 West as a window into the Muslim world‖ (Hodgson, 2001c). The rise of 24/7 global news resulted in pressure on government analysts to produce fresh reports at a faster pace while also trying to add context to supplement the media‘s central angles (National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States [9/11 Commission], 2004).

This was suggested as a reason for perceived inaccurate reporting or misinformation, with official responses often needing to answer or correct media stories. Pew‘s national survey in the US in November 2001 (Kohut, 2002) found that the public image of the news media actually improved for the first time in 16 years in response to the way the terror attacks were reported, and that Americans held more favourable opinions of the press‘s professionalism, patriotism, and morality than before September 11.

Tourism Response: The major impact of September 11 on the tourism industry was an immediate and significant reduction in demand for air travel and journeys by both domestic and international travellers (Blake & Sinclair, 2003). Economic impacts of the crisis – particularly costs to the tourism industry – were included in news reports on September 13 focusing on costs to the airline industry of grounded aircraft (Jones, 2001). The psychological impact of the USA as a target and the use of commercial aircraft in acts of terror was expected to have a much bigger impact on tourism than the Gulf War from which, according to the World Travel and Tourism Council, the tourism industry had taken three years to recover (Bogdanowicz, 2001; US National Tour Association [NTA], 2001). The prevailing uncertain atmosphere led the NTA to declare the tourism industry‘s short term future as ―survival of the fittest‖ (NTA, 2001). In fact, the NTA‘s advice was that focus would have to be rerouted to short-term solutions with longer-term projects and long-haul products put on hold. Marketing plans written just

164 weeks before the attacks had to be ―thrown out and replaced by plans that look more like they should be written for 1992, not 2002‖ (NTA, 2001, p. 11).

Assessments of the financial sting of the attacks followed on from the emotional fallout as travellers cancelled trips en masse and airlines were forced to announce massive staff cutbacks, some closing operations altogether (Hovind, 2001). Airlines sought to implement other measures to offset financial impacts, with American Airlines ceasing its in-flight meal service to save money. Although insisting that ―passengers on some flights won‘t go hungry‖, the measure also affected services to Canada, Mexico and the Caribbean, and some flights to Central and South America (CNN, 2001c). The Los Angeles Convention and Visitors Bureau suffered from the cancellation of several large conventions, affecting many tourism sectors. In an effort to attract customers, Las Vegas hotels and casinos cut prices; however, this resulted in a different clientele – a more frugal one.

Most US airports resumed operations on Thursday, two days after the attacks, but not without a host of cancellations and anxious passengers. Washington‘s airport remained closed due to its proximity to government facilities. Although airspace had reopened, international flights were not allowed entry apart from those diverted to Canada for screening. Airports that did reopen struggled to meet new, tighter security guidelines including a ban on all knives, the elimination of curb side and off-airport check-ins, the introduction of federal air marshals, and a prohibition of all but ticketed passengers beyond airport metal detectors (CNN, 2001w). The measures at the time were a big departure for Americans from the relaxed conditions of air travel pre-9/11. Together

165 with the new restrictions, the public was told security measures would continue to slow operations at airports and lead to longer lines for passengers (CNN, 2001an).

The tourism industry was helped immeasurably by the ―showering of sympathy‖ on New York and an appeal by Mayor Rudy Giuliani for visitors to ―flock back to the city‖

was generating results (Thome, 2003). For some international markets, however, information was causing damage. Suffering their own collateral negative effects, countries dependent on travellers from the West were further hit by the US issuing travel advisories for its own citizens, instructing them to avoid certain countries for safety reasons. Moves by the US Government to declare that it was not so much America that was unsafe, but rather countries that were either linked directly or indirectly to the terrorist attacks, led to other Western governments following suit with their own advisories (Opanga, 2003). Increasingly, media coverage was focusing on the September 11 crisis as an external issue, reinforced by business-as-usual messages.

International media commentators observed that the USA ―never advised tourists to stay away from its shores because of the events of September 11 or in the face of heightened security alerts‖ (Opanga, 2003). US leaders encouraged Americans to return to normality, yet there was a morose mood in restaurants, diners and other public areas (CNN, 2001aj). International leaders were taken on tours of Ground Zero by the New York Governor and Mayor (CNN, 2001av), gaining considerable media attention. Big city life was portrayed as returning and Mayor Giuliani used an appearance on popular television show Saturday Night Live to declare the city open for business. The reopening of the Empire State Building, now New York‘s tallest, attracted scores of people in queues stretching around the block.

166 5.4.5 End Phase: late November, 2001

Tourism Response: The crisis was not entirely over for the tourism industry with activity improving but still considerably down (Blake & Sinclair, 2003). Importantly however, consumer confidence seemed to be rebuilding after a dramatic impact on willingness to travel amid fears for safety; although the industry also had to contend with the emergence of other economic situations that would impede recovery efforts (McKercher & Hui, 2004). Security measures remained topical with recovery efforts hinging on the travelling public‘s perception of them as adequate and necessary.

New York Mayor Giuliani – declared the hero of the New York response to the attacks and attributing his success to not allowing newspaper editorial boards to guide his actions – would also stand tall as Time magazine‘s Person of the Year for 2001, adding the accolade to an honorary knighthood from Queen Elizabeth II (CNN, 2001ab; CNN, 2001z). New York City had also begun to build public viewing platforms around the World Trade Center disaster site to give visitors a vantage point, in an obvious move from aftermath to recovery (CNN, 2001ar). Although the impacts of the crisis were considered so severe that thoughts of a quick resolution were dismissed (Blake &

Sinclair, 2003), the growing perception of the crisis as an exogenous event assisted the tourism industry in moving toward recovery by shifting the source of fear to outside the US.

Media Coverage: Two months on from September 11, two of the three major American networks chose not to play a national broadcast by President Bush – NBC instead

167 choosing to show an episode of popular TV sitcom Friends (Silverstone, 2002). As the media started being able to put a face to the terrorists, links and ties became the terms of choice by which government and media connected Iraq to the September 11 attacks.

The crisis morphed into the war on Afghanistan and Iraq, ensuring ongoing media coverage, but further shifting the effects of the crisis away from the USA. Indeed, through the shift in media coverage of September 11 from incident to recollection, together with the reinforced messages of the crisis as an exogenous event, the tourism industry was finally liberated to look toward recovery. The shift in coverage was not the only shift happening; Pew Research Center surveys found that as the public‘s worries and fears declined, so did extremely positive ratings of the media‘s terrorism coverage (Kohut, 2002).