Monday, November 23, 2009

This Is Not Breaking News


Tuesday, November 24, 2009 New Delhi Today's Issue
Home ePaper


City Nation Edit Op-Ed Business The Big Story World VivaCity Avenues Sports Columnists Forecast Editor's Mail
STATE EDITIONS Bhopal Bhubaneswar Ranchi Kochi Lucknow Chandigarh Dehradun
SUNDAY PIONEER Agenda Foray
OPED Tuesday, December 16, 2008 Email Print

This is not breaking news

Venkata Vemuri

Trivialising a terrorist strike story by making its coverage indistinguishable from that of a sensational story has left 24x7 news channels looking utterly silly and frightfully immature. Broadcast journalism in India is no longer in its infancy and its practitioners claim they are masters at their job. It's time for them to prove itI was a broadcast journalist in India and so when news about the string of terror attacks in Mumbai broke on the evening of November 26, I knew exactly what to expect from the television channels there. They would 'break' the news, send their OB vans to the spot and lay siege to it, the coverage will be characterised by visuals running in loops, anchors and field reporters saying the same thing over and over again, bringing 'experts' into their studios, introducing a sentimental element of how 'Bharat' is under attack, churning out labels like '9/11' or something like 'maut ka aatank', trying to solve the mystery about the attackers by themselves, apportioning blame on the police for 'arriving late', and finally, ensuring that everything put out on the screen in 'exclusive'.The news channels, by and large, did not belie my expectations. And that is the point of this article. Whether it is a story about a stampede in a temple, a boy falling into a manhole, a thief being beaten up by the public, the Sensex going up or down, or an act of terrorism, the treatment by channels more or less follows the above routine. If one cares to go through the archives, one would find a striking similarity in even the words and phrases used then and now. Indian journalists have been reporting on conflicts and terrorism for over two decades now, from the militancy in Punjab, Jammu & Kashmir and the North-Eastern States, the low-intensity conflict on the India-Pakistan border, and in recent years, the number of attacks on several Indian cities -- even the Indian Parliament -- by terrorist groups.What is missing from reporting on terrorism in India, unfortunately, is the big picture, not only in terms of (a) exhaustive reportage on the event, but also in terms of (b) the geopolitical impact in the global sense.The first points to the gullibility of the journalists, the second to their lack of awareness. Whether both notions are wrong and such impressions are primarily caused by the newsroom chaos in handling breaking news, it is up to the channels to introspect.Keeping cool in breaking news situations is a basic tenet of journalism. A channel's coverage depends on it. Every news channel has its own editorial crisis news committee that oversees how breaking news is treated. But somewhere along the way, things snap.Often it is found there is no one in the newsroom drawing up coverage plans and directing the news team. But it is the 'live' element that dictates the coverage plan. As a result, a dish-it-as-it-comes mentality takes over. It is the duty of the newsroom seniors to ensure that information is not repeated throughout the news wheel, but is refreshed frequently. It is true that new information is flashed as soon as it comes, but it does not stand out in the general melee of visual loops and continuous, non-informative chats.In the initial hours of the Mumbai attacks, foreign channels were far ahead with factual information, which they culled out from blogs and chat rooms -- inputs coming from the guests in the hotels -- and strengthened with details from interviews, including with guests at the two hotels attacked by the terrorists.Broadcast journalism in India is no longer in its infancy and many of its practitioners have reported on conflicts worldwide and, therefore, there is no excuse for substandard coverage of such a serious issue. Secrecy and chaos on part of the official agencies and lack of access by journalists both played a role in this blank phase of news on the second day. Indian journalists, routinely attuned to covering crime, often find it difficult to cope with such situations. How to keep their channels moving forward? Lack of knowledge about the country's anti-terrorism apparatus, the types of agencies and personnel involved, and general information about their operational techniques hindered the journalists. Uninformed theories, reporters' opinions, even rumours were reported as news.Such reportage looks childish. Like, for instance, a channel showed its reporter, standing at the back of one of the Mumbai hotels, telling the audience that the police were clever enough to post themselves at the hotel's rear so that the terrorists would not be able to escape unnoticed. And that was an 'exclusive' report! Of course, the security agencies themselves exhibited an unprofessional manner in the way they happily chatted with the media about the operations. They did not even cordon off the hotels -- the first rule at a crime scene -- and the presence of media and onlookers turned the entire event into a 'tamasha'. And yet the Government had the gumption to issue notices to some news channels on coverage of the operations. Funny! But the point to ponder is: If a channel gets information of an ongoing security operation, should it use it with discretion to ensure that broadcast of such information does not harm the operation itself?What Indian broadcast journalism should now look for is specialised reporting on terrorism. Treating a terrorist strike story in the same way as a child falling into a manhole will not help, simply because news channels influence people's perceptions and an unprofessional approach to news dissemination can result in inappropriate fallouts. Also, terrorism is not a domestic issue restricted to the borders of one country. There was no attempt to see the strikes in the perspective of the global, or even sub-continental, spread of terrorism. This calls for journalists undergoing training programmes in terrorism reporting, on the lines of conflict reporting.It is also vital to develop a professional attitude when dealing with terrorism and not giving in to bouts of sentimentality and competition. It is professional to break the news first, but a race to break it can be hazardous in such situations, with accuracy, objectivity and credibility being the first victims.-- The writer is a senior Indian journalist, currently doing his PhD in the UK. vevemuri@gmail.com

No comments: