Shoddy
Journalism :: [Author: Chetan Kunte]
Note: Original blog taken out
because of perceived threats to the author (I need not name who was
threatening). I have taken the original content
from another PDF source that was available on the internet and have tried to
re-compile it in the original format. I
have NOT EDITED this, just presented every word as was in the original.
Appalling
journalism. Absolute blasphemy! As I watch the news from home, I am dumbfounded
to see Barkha Dutt of NDTV break every rule of ethical journalism in reporting
the Mumbai mayhem.
Take
a couple of instances for example:
*
In one instance she asks a husband about his wife being stuck, or held as a
hostage. The poor guy adds in the end about where she was last hiding. Aired!
My dear friends with AK-47s, our national news is helping you. Go get those
still in. And be sure to thank NDTV for not censoring this bit of information.
*
In another instance, a General sort of suggests that there were no hostages in
Oberoi Trident. (Clever.) Then, our herione of revelations calls the head of
Oberoi, and the idiot confirms a possibility of 100 or more people still in the
building. Hello! Guys with guns, you’ve got more goats to slay. But before you
do, you’ve got to love NDTV and more precisely Ms. Dutt. She’s your official
intelligence from Ground zero.
You
do not need to be a journalist to understand the basic premise of ethics, which
starts with protecting victims first; and that is done by avoiding key
information from being aired publicly—such as but not limited to revealing the
number of possible people still in, the hideouts of hostages and people stuck
in buildings.
Imagine
you’re one of those sorry souls holed-up in one of those bathrooms, or
kitchens. A journalist pulls your kin outside and asks about your last contact
on national television, and other prying details. In a bout of emotion, if they
happen to reveal more details, you are sure going to hell. Remember these are
hotels, where in all likelihood, every room has a television. All a terrorist
needs to do is listen to Ms. Barkha Dutt’s latest achievement of extracting
information from your relative, based on your last phone-call or SMS. And
you’re shafted—courtesy NDTV.
If
the terrorists don’t manage to shove you in to your private hell, the
journalists on national television will certainly help you get there. One of
the criticisms about Barkha Dutt on Wikipedia reads thus:
During the Kargil conflict, Indian Army sources
repeatedly complained to her channel that she was giving away locations in her
broadcasts, thus causing Indian casualties.
Looks
like the idiot journalist has not learnt anything since then. I join a number
of bloggers pleading her to shut the f⋅⋅⋅ up.
Update:
In fact, I am willing to believe that Hemant Karkare died because these
channels showed him prepare (wear helmet, wear bullet-proof vest.) in
excruciating detail live on television. And they in turn targeted him where he
was unprotected. The brave officer succumbed to bullets in the neck.
Update
2 [28.Nov.2300hrs]: Better sense appears to have prevailed in the latter half
of today— either willfully, or by Government coercion2, and Live broadcasts are
now being limited to nonaction zones. Telecast of action troops and strategy is
now not being aired live. Thank goodness for that.
Update
3 [30.Nov.1900hrs]: DNA India reports about a UK couple ask media to report
carefully: The terrorists were watching CNN and they came down from where they
were in a lift after hearing about us on TV.
— Lynne Shaw
in an interview.
1. Oh,
they have a lame excuse pronouncing that the television connections in the hotel
has been cut, and therefore it is okay to broadcast. Like hell!
2. I’m thinking coercion, since Government
has just denied renewing CNN’s rights to air video today; must’ve have surely
worked as a rude warning to the Indian domestic channels.
Instead of apologizing, and introspecting on
how to improve, this is the kind of crap we get in response to shoddy
journalism.
Radhika
Sahasranaman rips the guts of that response on a 3000 strong, and growing
Facebook group, whose title couldn't have sent signals any clearer:
NDTV's response is in itself a giveaway of misplaced
notions: "In the absence of any instructions on site and in the absence of
any such framework we broke NO rules" ("convenient transference of
responsibility" or what?); and the entire argument, she concludes, amounts
to "which television journalist tops the charts or falls to the bottom"
(is that how they keep score?). It is important that we don't shoot the
messenger but when the messenger loses the message, there is something to be
done. Which is why, for once, I will take Barkha's advice. Use the remote
control when emote control doesn't work - Radhika Sahasranaman.
Do
read her entire post. (Sign-up on Facebook just to read this—if nothing; I
guarantee it's worth it.) She conveys it with such clarity, that I kept reading
it over and over.
Here's
another:
TV news would no doubt argue that most other
critiques of 26/11 coverage have been answered, too. Shoving mikes in front of
distressed people? They wanted to share. Too close to the theatre of operation?
If someone told us we would have moved away. And just in case anyone still has
doubts, Narayana Murthy and Suketu Mehta, among many others, rated 26/11
coverage as first class.
Maybe the Government goofed up not laying down rules
of coverage. Does that end all questions on journalistic responsibility? Think
about it. If journalists, especially senior editors, say they need the
government to tell them how to do their business, they are opening a door many
politicians would love to never shut again.
— Saubhik
Chakrabarti on Indian Express
The
choice could not have been simpler: you either kick the idiocy, and if that
does not work, then kick the idiot out.
Update:
Oh, by the way, there is a framework (Self-Regulation Guidelines for the
Broadcasting Sector [pdf]) for anyone who cares—and has been in existence for
more than a year.
Update
2: NSG says media got in the way, wants guidelines.
Update
3: Presstalk: In the name of fair and balanced.
Update
4: The Hoot: "Those who argue that viewers can use the remote to not watch
what they find unethical or irresponsible should note that many in India did,
people went to offices and went to vote but the TV all the same managed to give
important information to the backers of the terrorists who were glued to their
screens. The remote is not the solution to such irresponsibility."
Harini
Calamur: "Week 1 - Post 26/11 - Quo Vadis News Media?"
