|
Democratizing Debate on Development
How State Machinery Succeeded In Deflecting Public Anger from Political Class to TV Media
|
|||
|
|
Why media should be present on the spot `recording’ every happening Take situation 1 in Mumbai. Remember Indian Navy attack on Thia fishing trawler recently. It was a clear case of mistaken identity. Suppose the same happens in Taj hotel on 27/11. Over-enthusiasm, casual approach to identify the enemy, inaptitude, pre-conceived notion about terrorist and his religion ---any or all of them together carry the potential to create the greatest havoc in human history. And to top it all, the State apparatus can make criminal attempt to camouflage the misdeed by branding hapless bearded man as terrorist by placing an AK-47 by the side of his body. So TV media should have been there at the scene of occurrence. Situation 2: Terrorists having seen the news on TV sets (that is what the allegation against the electronic media is) that they have been hemmed in and are being attacked both vertically and horizontally with weapons which have more killing range then their assault rifles may surrender finding their escape difficult. Many wars in the world history were won just on propaganda. So we should have been there to support state machinery. Situation 3: Now take another example: A bearded man passing for terrorist in Taj kills dozens of tourists including some children. Electronic media shoots the incident. Again it shoots the mother crying on the body of her only slain yelling passionately “Manoj Tum Ko Kaun Mara, Main uska Kya Bigada Tha”. In the last two scenarios in situation 3 the media has no control over the developments ---neither we can remove the beard nor can we ask grieving mother not to mention the name of his bereaved son. If we air both pictures live in conjunction –which is very obvious-- communal passion is bound to flare-up leading sometimes to riot. Therefore it is imperative that electronic media develop its professional sensitiveness and avoid live telecast unless such airing of delayed live is important for educating the masses. However such education cannot override the consideration that peace and harmony are supreme responsibility. But no healthy democratic system can countenance any suggestion that we should be absent from the scene. In fact the problem lies not with media airing situations live but with weak social fabrics –antagonistic social identities and lack of rational thinking. We do add and abet it by showing irrational fortune telling programmes. The only solution is: (A) Training of reporters including so called seniors (some of them conducted themselves in Mumbai in a very inapt, nay, boorish manner) on social issues, logic and elementary laws. (B) In such situations (we can categorize them) live can be deferred for one hour. Editors can discuss jointly to take a decision. The I & B Advisory dated December 3 had sought to project electronic media as working against `national interest’ four times, directly or indirectly, in its five-point note. Later within 48 hours, we had newspaper stories `quoting sources’ to the effect that the NSG too had claimed that media got in its way causing operational hazard leading to death of a Havildar”. The Government advisory does not carry `desired’ credibility but NSG rue does-- even if it may be a bureaucratic `plant’. Very subtly the powers-that-be have sought to divert post-Mumbai public anger against political class, mainly the ruling coalition, to media –bashing through its advisories. If not nipped in the bud, the trumped-up impression against the Mumbai coverage may damage the media irreparably. Riding the crest of engineered anti-media wave the Government sought to issue “discipline channels order” in “national interest”. Media has to fight in the larger interest of “operational” democracy. Engineered though it is, the Government has succeeded in creating a palpable murmuring in the public with respect to our coverage. TV Media leaders will have to effectively say that what we had done was in the best national interest. They will also have to demolish the basic premise that coverage led to death of Havildar. Let the Government not forget that in Mumbai-like situation where the terrorists are in their aggressive best and the Government might in its fiercest form, the media presence cannot be blocked in any healthy democracy. And there were no operational details that we were privy to. We had disseminated only that which was in public gaze and was most obvious.
[N K Singh is a Political Editor with ETV. He can be contacted at 2E/12, Jhandewalan Extension, New Delhi –110-055 e-mail: singh.nk@etv.co.in M-bile 9312623020] |
Go to Policy Brief Contents Page
************************
|
|
|
© Quay Coordination Sbvervices (P) Ltd. Associated Website<http://www.nsa.org.in> |
|||
