Due to the negative repercussions this had all over the world, the next day, on the cover of the newspaper, the editors had to apologize publicly “to the families of the victims of 9/11” and labeled themselves and their own campaign as “disgusting”, removing it from circulation. This obvious representation of what is politically incorrect be it moral or immoral, might fall under a grayer area in the future.
In the future, people might simply think that there is no mockery behind that sort of advertising, targeting a lady from New Jersey who lost her son on the 30th floor of a building in flames. If the advertisers had used a photo of another historical event which happened 2000 years ago, there would have been no reaction from the public opinion, even if it is an event depicting people that have died. The difference is that it is about “very” old people, far far back in time; people that either way would be long dead by now. The scandal is generated by the proximity (temporal or physical) of a dramatic event. Its intensity and its echo. If someone makes a joke about 9/11 or uses it as an advertising campaign in, say 300 years, no one would react because it happened a long time ago.
So, will humor always have victims? Or will there be a day when people stop feeling aggravated? Humor should not be a tool to cause pain, but to appease it. Humor might be merely the messenger of an idea, an event or a happening, and perhaps should not be blamed for the pain someone might feel. However, society is not yet quite ready to understand that when pain arises, this can also be the embryo of humor. That technicality eventually will expire. Perhaps, today, all dogs in the world are howling at the moon.