Although Tuesday’s terrorist attack was centered thousands of miles away, The San Diego Union-Tribune treated it for what it was: a personal story to every American.
As did numerous metropolitan newspapers, Union-Tribune executives decided to put out an Extra edition Tuesday for distribution hours after the attack. It was only the fourth Extra since the merger of The San Diego Union and Tribune in 1992. Todd Merriman, senior editor for news, asked R.B. Brenner, senior editor for Business and Sports, to be in charge of the Extra that was made possible with the cooperation of production and circulation employees.
Two hours after work began, the section was rolling off the presses; it hit the streets around noon. Above the Union-Tribune logo were the words: “EXTRA: AMERICA UNDER ATTACK.”
On the front page were photos and a map; a time line; quotations from public officials; an Associated Press story, and an article by staff writer James Steinberg on how San Diegans were being affected.
On Page 3, usually reserved for state and regional news, appeared an editorial headlined: “We will overcome this devastation.” Articles, photos and graphics filled the remaining pages.
Why did the newspaper bother to put out an Extra? Weren’t most readers already getting more timely information from television? Yes, but not all workers had access to television. And, the newspaper did what television, which performed admirably during the disaster, could never do. It gave people an immediate printed record, something tangible to hold in their hands and to have for later reference.
Although reader appreciation was shown by single-copy sales that exceeded regular levels by more than 47,000 copies, a handful of people objected to advertisements in the Extra. They were most of the national ads that had appeared in the regular edition; the newspaper did not make additional income from the ads, but the numbers of papers sold were counted in official circulation figures that are determined by rigid rules.
Efforts to give readers a printed record didn’t end with the Extra. Even as Brenner and his crew launched their efforts, Merriman and other journalists were planning Wednesday’s paper. For some, the week would hold more than one 16-hour day.
Production of Wednesday’s paper was interrupted by a bomb scare that evacuated the Union-Tribune with minutes to go until deadline. Even with a 30-minute extension, the paper was on the presses on time and ready for distribution ahead of schedule.
Wednesday’s 16-page ad-free A-section was headlined: “NATION IN ANGUISH.” The front page had three photographs, one of the burning north tower of the World Trade Center that showed the aircraft that would shortly hit the south tower. The second photo showed the towers after the second attack. The dominant image showed the devastation after the towers collapsed.
Wednesday’s paper resulted in street sales nearly three times the number on the same Wednesday a year ago and reflected the public’s hunger for news. Two photographs in the A section resulted in reader comment. The Union-Tribune was excoriated by a few readers for one and praised for the other. Both were by The Associated Press, but the decision to run them was made by Union-Tribune editors.
A few readers objected to the image of a man plunging head first from the north tower. Those who complained said the photo was too graphic, cruel, in poor taste, immoral, disturbing to children and unnecessary to convey the tragedy. The man was not identified, but his fate appears certain.
Disturbing as it was, the photograph (which also appeared in The New York Times) gave readers “the opportunity to see and understand the magnitude of the moment,” said Robert York, senior editor for visuals. He acknowledged that “the question of whether or not to publish troubling pictures is one of the most difficult and agonizing decisions I am involved in as an editor.
“If we decide not to publish these images, there is an equally troubling result: we risk shielding our readers from the truth.”
Yes, the image was upsetting. Yet, was it any more disturbing than the word picture painted by columnist Ellen Goodman who told about a construction worker “who had counted 43 people choosing air over fire as they jumped from the towers?” I am haunted by both images. The photograph was sad but not sensational; it reflected what happened.
Raves came for another photo, also published Wednesday, on the back page of the A-section. It showed fire fighters hoisting an American flag amid the World Trade Center rubble.
Michael Franklin, director of photography, said the photograph made him catch his breath. It reminded him of the flag raising on Iwo Jima. A decision was made to use it on the last page of the section, an offering of hope after images of so much destruction, pain and sorrow.
