Vanity Fair has a heckuva story, listening to the complete NORAD tapes from 9/11 and — in a nice web move — interspersing links to let you listen online.
This entry was posted
on Wednesday, August 2nd, 2006 at 10:20 am.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Wow. I clicked over to VF just expecting to glance at it and now it is 45 minutes later. Absolutely riveting and a great use of writing and audio to convey the total chaos and urgency of that day at NORAD.
I’m not clear on the “discrepancies” in the military account; if the Langley fighters were launched to protect DC, not intercept AA77, and an hour later UA93 was determined to be headed for DC, then the fighters were indeed launched to protect DC from UA 93. The fact that they didn’t know about UA93 at the time doesn’t make that statement false or misleading in any way. Is there more to this, or is this guy desperately looking for some way to claim a cover up of some sort? Why are “journalists” so desperate to throw that charge at people?
[...] Vanity Fair’s report on the NORAD recordings from 9/11 is a simple and elegant integration of audio and writing. The reporter, Michael Bronner, pored through 30 hours of the recordings when he was doing research for his work as associate producer on the movie “United 93.” He then wrote the report for Vanity Fair. The online version takes reporting one simple step further: it includes audio with the transcripts. The result is more immediate and far more compelling. Multimedia doesn’t have to be complex and Flash-intensive; it can be as simple as incorporating the material you already have into your work. (via Buzzmachine) [...]
Why did Vanity Fair take off the NORAD TAPES. I CAN NOT REACH THEM FROM YOUR WEB SITE. Please help me find these transcripts, I have been looking and looking, I am most interested in the plane that hit the Pentagon. Thank you,,,,
August 2nd, 2006 at 10:33 am
So much for those who think Jarvis has consigned traditional journalism to the (pick a figure of speech).
August 2nd, 2006 at 1:36 pm
Wow. I clicked over to VF just expecting to glance at it and now it is 45 minutes later. Absolutely riveting and a great use of writing and audio to convey the total chaos and urgency of that day at NORAD.
August 2nd, 2006 at 7:11 pm
I’m not clear on the “discrepancies” in the military account; if the Langley fighters were launched to protect DC, not intercept AA77, and an hour later UA93 was determined to be headed for DC, then the fighters were indeed launched to protect DC from UA 93. The fact that they didn’t know about UA93 at the time doesn’t make that statement false or misleading in any way. Is there more to this, or is this guy desperately looking for some way to claim a cover up of some sort? Why are “journalists” so desperate to throw that charge at people?
August 3rd, 2006 at 10:16 am
Thanks for link. Inspiring to hear the moments of grace under pressure.
August 3rd, 2006 at 9:02 pm
[...] Vanity Fair’s report on the NORAD recordings from 9/11 is a simple and elegant integration of audio and writing. The reporter, Michael Bronner, pored through 30 hours of the recordings when he was doing research for his work as associate producer on the movie “United 93.” He then wrote the report for Vanity Fair. The online version takes reporting one simple step further: it includes audio with the transcripts. The result is more immediate and far more compelling. Multimedia doesn’t have to be complex and Flash-intensive; it can be as simple as incorporating the material you already have into your work. (via Buzzmachine) [...]
November 24th, 2006 at 5:44 pm
Why did Vanity Fair take off the NORAD TAPES. I CAN NOT REACH THEM FROM YOUR WEB SITE. Please help me find these transcripts, I have been looking and looking, I am most interested in the plane that hit the Pentagon. Thank you,,,,
July 1st, 2007 at 3:24 pm
I also have been trying to get the Tapes on my computer, but am not able too. Any ideas of how I can get them. calynn@ptd.net