and she doesn’t know the specific time when the planes hit the tower occurred, unlike when I researched it, the articles gave me the specific time everything happened by step to step and as well they gave me a brief explanation on what occurred during those times. Also, a major difference is that my mom got experience it by watching and hearing it on the news while the people who wrote the articles weren’t there to watch it on the news or experience it live. What I learned about the interviewee based on how they told the story was I felt like my mom was feeling sorrowful when speaking about the 9/11. Which is understandably but you could hear that tint of sadness in her tone of voice when she spoke but yet her voice did change throughout the interviewee, in some parts she was sad but then assured when speaking.
I believe the thing that is important to my mom was knowing that her family and including her were safe from the attack, but she did feel bad for those who died and who lost part of their families. I know this because when I was interviewing her during the end she told me that she was glad that she didn’t loose me or anyone else in our family, and of course her friends. What I learned about myself when I compared how I wrote the interviewee’s story to how I wrote the objective account was I feel like I got more information down when hearing my mom telling me it because she was watching it happen live on her TV when that time occurred and her getting to talk about it in her version actually made me know a few new facts that I hadn’t known before. Unlike searching it up on the internet and having to read about it behind a computer who probably the writer wasn’t even there to experience it or see it live on TV and I wouldn’t get so much information down like I did with my mom’s
version.