|
They
came to terrify. And in many ways they have succeeded,
if, only, for a while. The memories of a gun- and grenade-toting
killer army, spraying hundreds of innocents with bullets,
lobbing grenades at will, will probably never leave
us. Thanks to news television.
|
News
channels also exposed the government's, the administration's,
the army's, the police's and their own lack of
preparedness to handle the crises
_____****_____
|
I
believe that the efforts of the army, the commandos,
the NSG and the police to flush out the Taj Hotel, the
Trident/Oberoi Hotels, and Nariman House offered to
TV viewers images that will stay embedded for a long,
long time. Mumbaikars, nay Indians, were concerned,
and in some cases affected by the terrorist strike,
and wanted to know what is happening to those caught
up in the mayhem.
News
channels offered them updates, took them to the scene
of the dastardly acts. And they also exposed the government's,
the administration's, the army's, the police's and their
own lack of preparedness to handle the crises.
India
is a complex country. We have scores of news channels,
probably more than any other nation in the world. Hence,
our country requires unique treatment.
While
reporters on the field of all the channels need to be
lauded for staying on for hours together, reporting
on developments even as shrapnel was streaking around
and bombs were exploding, the key issue is could the
coverage of the carnage have been managed better? And
the answer is yes. The fault does not lie solely with
the news channels. The fault lies with systemic failure
and understanding of crisis media management by the
folks who took up the rescue act, whether it is the
government or the administration or the commandos or
the police or the media which reported on it.
The
lack of planning showed. Did anyone have a strategy
how to combat the terrorists or how to handle
and manage media? It was alarming to see that no press
briefing room was set up by the government or the administration
or the police or the army and sound bytes were given
by senior army officials and police out in the open.
No protection was provided to either. Stray bullets,
exploding window panes and shrapnel could hit one of
them.
TV
cameramen followed almost every move that the commandos
made. News editors carried those images, but could they
have been done so in a delayed manner, say with a 5-10
minute time lag right from day one so that terrorists
may have not been able to keep a tab on what was being
planned as has been alleged?
|
A
lot
more homework could have been done by the news
channels, an understanding provided of similar
terrorists attacks the world over, and how they
were handled
_____****_____
|
Could
the reporters have asked more pertinent questions? Is
there enough training being given to them on how to
cover crises such as war or terror attacks? Most news
stations internationally have war correspondents, who
know how to handle themselves in demanding environments.
Could
there have been more analysis with crisis and
terror management experts being brought in - from reputed
studio anchors rather than playing the blame game with
celebs who spouted venom against the system? Could they
instead have offered solutions?
Indeed.
News channels have been hard pressed for experienced
journalistic talent, and hence have been putting relatively
inexperienced journos on the field to handle tough situations.
That is permissible if enough training is given to them.
A
lot more homework could have been done by the news channels,
an understanding provided of similar terrorists attacks
the world over, and how they were handled. In the process,
they could have eased the panic and sense of hopelessness
that they instilled in viewers and all of us.
The
news channels behaved like little boys in a school race
all wanting to come first. Each one of them wanted to
flash that exclusive. And that sometimes came in the
form of canards, wild flights of imagination being flashed
as insights and breaking news. Some of the Hindi channels
really led in this with a sensationalist tone.
Not
that the English channels were far behind. The itch
to be seen as the leader forced one of the leading English
anchors to voice again and again that they heard it
first on his channel.
Clearly,
a code of ethics and policies need to be put in place.
Because going by the lack of focus of the government
on anti-terrorism measures, a terrorist strike in another
city may not be too far away. Hopefully, we will not
see a repeat of the media management exercise we witnessed
in Mumbai.
The
news channels would do well to live up to their raison
d'etre well, that is, to inform, analyse, and investigate.
Even if the government and administration are not doing
their jobs well enough.
(Anil
Wanvari is CEO and editor-in-chief of Indiantelevision
Dot Com)
Also
Read:- News
channels failed to balance between news and bombast
|