2008 Woodie Awards
Color Coding Terror
Laura Ruzzo
Issue date: 11/3/04 Section: Perspectives
- Page 1 of 2 next >
The establishment of the color-coded terror alert system is of little value to the American people. Since the attacks on September 11, the United States Government has issued many warnings, through the use of five colors: green, blue, yellow, orange, and red. The amount of fear a change in color ignites is more frightening than what the color foretells. Before attaching significant meaning to the warnings, Americans need to consider the political logic behind them.
Often times, a heightened alert is unaccompanied by any specific warnings. The number of possibilities a heightened alert could signify expands further than five categories. Even a box of Crayola Crayons would not be able to offer enough colors to represent such a spectrum of possibilities. This vagueness is meant to leave the American public in a constant state of panic. The color offers no specifics such as time, place or nature of the attack. Alec Solotorovsky, daily associate editor of The Cavalier Daily, states that Americans need "specific information about specific threats to their society. He deems these "ambiguous warnings" as a scapegoat for the Bush administration.
The Bush administration is deathly afraid of being criticized for another attack. Following the events of September 11, the administration was harshly criticized for failing to anticipate the attacks on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center. These accusations caused the implantation of several security-based reforms, concluding with the establishment of the Department of Homeland Security. The color-coded alert system was created as a visual to inform the general public of the nation's standing in relation to terrorist attacks. Solotorovsky summarizes its existence as a method of protection against accusations of ignorance. I summarize it as Bush's chance to scream, "I told you so."
Constantly updating the country through the use of colors is based on the preservation of the Bush administration in the upcoming elections. On July 8, 2004, Homeland Security head Tom Ridge stated "credible reporting indicates that Al-Qaeda is moving forward with plans to carry out a large-scale attack in the U.S. aimed to disrupt our democratic process." Ironically enough, this accusation fell extremely close to the Democratic convention. Although a statement was released, no change in color occurred. The Kerry campaign cried foul play as the Bush administration cried wolf.
Often times, a heightened alert is unaccompanied by any specific warnings. The number of possibilities a heightened alert could signify expands further than five categories. Even a box of Crayola Crayons would not be able to offer enough colors to represent such a spectrum of possibilities. This vagueness is meant to leave the American public in a constant state of panic. The color offers no specifics such as time, place or nature of the attack. Alec Solotorovsky, daily associate editor of The Cavalier Daily, states that Americans need "specific information about specific threats to their society. He deems these "ambiguous warnings" as a scapegoat for the Bush administration.
The Bush administration is deathly afraid of being criticized for another attack. Following the events of September 11, the administration was harshly criticized for failing to anticipate the attacks on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center. These accusations caused the implantation of several security-based reforms, concluding with the establishment of the Department of Homeland Security. The color-coded alert system was created as a visual to inform the general public of the nation's standing in relation to terrorist attacks. Solotorovsky summarizes its existence as a method of protection against accusations of ignorance. I summarize it as Bush's chance to scream, "I told you so."
Constantly updating the country through the use of colors is based on the preservation of the Bush administration in the upcoming elections. On July 8, 2004, Homeland Security head Tom Ridge stated "credible reporting indicates that Al-Qaeda is moving forward with plans to carry out a large-scale attack in the U.S. aimed to disrupt our democratic process." Ironically enough, this accusation fell extremely close to the Democratic convention. Although a statement was released, no change in color occurred. The Kerry campaign cried foul play as the Bush administration cried wolf.