The kind of stuff that makes you choke over your breakfast. This from the world’s most read English Language Newspaper.
Sphere: Related Content
Clap
Mar 312010
Aug 192009
The person i feel sorriest for in 24 hour news channels is the Sound Recordist. Having to hear our esteemed ‘news anchors’ screech their way through various issues – must deafen the strongest of ear drums.
Of all the news channels, there is none more screechy than CNN – IBN – i can hear it 2 rooms away – when my mother has it on in the hall. i keep wondering why they don’t use an audio limiter .
Over the weekend, they – like every other news channel – milked the SRK controversy for all it was worth, and the decibels were higher pitched than normal. Wall to wall discussions on a non-issue – with the view of boosting up their TRPS’. Nothing wrong in that – so long as we, the audience understand that they are in the business of making money -and take everything that they say with a bag of salt. They want higher TRPs because that means more money.
But, that is not the problem. The problem is hypocrisy. Look at todays’ blog by Sagarika Ghosh, No checks please, I’m a Bollywood star –
Perhaps the wonderfully talented Shah Rukh Khan, beloved of millions, should limit his superb skills to doing what he does best: making great movies and enhancing the silver screen. His lectures on geo-politics, America’s role in the world, security procedures and international diplomacy are a little bit hilarious. So you endured a bit of questioning at Newark because your baggage hadn’t arrived on time, Shah Rukh? So what? As Meghnad Desai said on Face The Nation, what’s the big deal? Be like APJ Abdul Kalam and just get on with it.
I take it that “Face the Nation” is a programme on their channel. and they get Meghnad Desai on – he btw is an Academic, Historian, Economist & widely read – to comment on this ????
Now, given that she and her fraternity & sorority – across news channels – had blanked coverage on this- made SRK into some sort of a martyr, and vilified some poor immigration clerk – i find it kind of absurd that she is trying to take the moral high ground by attacking Shah Rukh Khan. So, they are using him for two days to rail at the American system. And, then they are using him to rail against the Indian system. Manufacturing News if not Consent !
Maybe, Mr.Shah Rukh Khan – or any other celeb- ought to take the Paris Hilton route with news channels. You have used my image, and my name to make money – pay me ! Seriously.
Sphere: Related ContentClap
Aug 172009
At first, when my nani called me up to tell me that SRK was arrested in the USA – I thought that they had sent him to Gitmo ! Then i realised it was a 2 hour stop at the airport. I wonder how much airtime was spent on this – and to the exclusion of what ? and how much money did the “NEWS” channels make.
Take one bloated super star ego, mix a nation in the grip of paranoia ; stir in customs and immigration officers who think that they are god ; simmer with silly season ; add a dash of news channels with no ethics, and journalists who would sensationlise their mothers’ sex life if they thought it would get them better TRP’s – and bingo you get ‘……because My name is Khan’ kind of overkill.
The unkind say that this was publicity for the film. I don’t buy that – this sort of stupid serendipity cannot be paid for. It has to happen only when every body f***s up and the News media compound it by forgetting that they are the watchdogs on behalf of the public – and get co-opted by the ruling elite.
On the day Shahrukh Khan got detained for two hours — oh my god, how can someone stop SRK for two hours, hang them, quarter them; no quarter them, hang them — 21 farmers committed suicide in Andhra Pradesh because they couldn’t pay off their debt.
But, farmers committing suicide cannot be sponsored, it does not drive up TRP’s and it definitely is not conducive for off the cuff ranting by our esteemed ‘journalists’. (note: i use the term journalist very, very loosely, and I apologise to any real journalist who is offended at my comparing the lot on TV to them)
24 Hour Blogs – one can say – but that too,would be unkind. There a whole bunch of bloggers whom i follow and whose integrity and intent I respect – even if i differ with them on their views. There isn’t a single TV journalist I can put in the same category.
Since 26/11 I have stopped watching TV news – except for DD. I read papers – sometimes – but mostly I subscribe to various RSS feeds – including bloggers, columnists and news agencies – and I figure what is happening in the world. I get my updates from my mother or my grandmother – who are avid news watchers on the death and disaster and slap to ego that is happening in the world. I listen to them, much the same way that I do, when they tell me what is happening in their favorite soap 
So if we can’t call really call them journalists, or news channels or even bloggers – then what are they? If you read this excellent piece in The HOOT you will realise that a whole bunch of them are putting out ‘NEWS’ that is not in Public Interest – as they claim – but in the interest of Interested Parties – that they have close commercial ties with. So 24 hour Infomercial Channels – is possibly what we ought to call them. They have the same repetition, the same music that drives you to action, the same kind of ‘we asked 30 people and they said’ mode of driving home their point. So, if they are in the pay of commercial interests and if they are putting out content in the interest of these commercial interests, shouldn’t they be regulated by some body ?
____________________________________________________________
Other Blogs with a different take on the same issue :
Churumuri on – Is an immigration clerk threat to our sovereignty?
Melissa George’s – Who is this Shahrukh Khan character anyway?
Prerna on My Name is Khan And Hence I was Detained
Shishir Joshi’s My Name is Khan…ummm…..er…so?
Reality Check India’s – We Are Not Outraged
I was telling someone the other day is that the saddest conclusion that i have reached is that the most honorable institution of them all is the Government.
Ultimately, no matter how venal, power mad, inept, or corrupt the are – sooner or later they are accountable and answerable to the people. They lose their jobs, retract their statements, are forced to back off from trampling our Constitutional rights. All we have to do is scream a bit … and they usually end up listening, especially if it is close to elections.
Amongst the insitutions that has rapidly lost my trust, espeically in the last two years, is the broadcast news media. Between the Prince episode, the Arushi Murder Case, running recorded footage with live bugs, with the 26/11 coverage – i have stopped watching TV news. I read magazines, i read newspapers and I read blogs. I do these because i have far more faith in the credibility of those who write – than the credibility of those who produce and package news on TV.
When you begin to sell TRP’s instead of credible, reliable, non sensationalized content (remember words like journalism, ethics, reportage), then you are selling a product, and rules that apply to the rest of the world apply to you. This includes getting product attributes criticized.
As a consumer if i tell you that i don’t like your product because a part of it is screechy, emotional, inaccurate, irresponsible and all over the place then maybe your job is to improve your offering instead of threatening to sue the customer for defamation.
The Ambanis didn’t sue the customer for laughing at Reliance Mobile 6 years ago, they fixed the service. Tata’s didn’t sue the customer for pillorying the Indica when it first launched. They made a better car (btw i own an Indica Marina). Maybe, NDTV needs to introspect and figure why so many of its natural target audience found its reportage appalling. And, maybe they need to fix it.
And to those who took the call to threaten the individual with legal action:
Imagine – if the Government behaved with you the way you are behaving over Chyetanya Kunte .Imagine your outrage, your self righteousness and your defence of the “Freedom of Expression. And then remember that media organizations enjoy the same ‘freedom of expression’ as individuals. There are no other separate provisions. And understand, that in attacking our Rights you are destroying yours.
I feel sad that the journalistic insitution built up by Prannoy Roy has come to this. Really, really sad.
Also read
Desi Pundit – the are running the story & reactions here
Blogbharati are running the story and reactions here
Sphere: Related ContentClap
Dec 182008
This announced today
Under the six-point guidelines framed by the umbrella body NBA (News Broadcasters Association), the channels shouldn’t be telecasting details of identity, number and status of hostages. Nor should they provide information of pending rescue operations or details on the number of security personnel involved or the methods employed by them.
The News Broadcasting Standards Disputes Redressal Authority, constituted by the NBA, today said television TV channels should avoid any “live contact with the victims or security personnel or other technical personnel involved or the perpetrators during the course of any incident.”
Addressing a press meet, Authority Chairman Justice JS Verma also said media should avoid “unnecessary repeated or continuous broadcast of archival footage that may tend to re-agitate the mind of the viewers. Archival footage, if shown, should clearly indicate ‘file’ and the date and time should be given where feasible.”
The Authority said “no live reporting should be made that facilitates publicity of any terrorist or militant outfit or its ideology or tends to evoke sympathy for the perpetrators or glamourises them or their cause or advances the illegal agenda or objectives of the perpetrators.”
The dead should also be treated with dignity and their visuals should not be shown. Special care should be taken in the broadcast of any distressing visuals and graphics showing grief and emotional scenes of victims and relatives which could cause distress to children and families.
At the outset, the Authority said all telecast of news relating to armed conflict, internal disturbance, communal violence, public disorder, crime and other similar situations should be tested on the touchstone of ‘public interest’.
Furthermore, the media had the responsibility to disseminate information which was factually accurate and objective.
more on indiantelevision.com
Sphere: Related ContentClap
Dec 102008
Two very different stories caught my attention today. Both are related to media coverage.
One was in the Indian Express by Rajat Sharma, of India TV, quoting a former Army Chief – who had come into the channel to advice producers & camerapersons on :
what precautions they should have taken while showing “live” action. My most important objective was to understand if news channels, in any way, endangered the lives of our commandos.
To my surprise, the former army chief was emphatic: “News channels did nothing wrong. Your coverage didn’t do any harm whatsoever to the commandos! I’ve handled action as a major, then as a full colonel, and finally as an army commander in anti-terrorist operations, and there’s nothing I could make out from the news channel about the strategy of our commandos.”
Frankly, I expected him to echo what some have been saying—how terrorists got valuable clues on the commando plan by watching our channels. But sample what he said: “Do you think that terrorists holed up in a hotel facing commando fire had time to watch TV?” A young reporter persisted. He reminded the general of the “widespread belief” that the terrorists were being briefed on their Blackberries by their bosses, watching our news channels. Promptly came the angry reply. “Anyone suggesting this must be mad. (Even) I could not get an idea about the action plan. Who has the time to look at TV and Blackberries when you are in the midst of gunfire?”
The second was in the International Herald Tribune, quoting Indian authorities :
And, perhaps most significantly, throughout the three-day siege at two luxury hotels and a Jewish center, the Pakistani-based handlers communicated with the attackers using Internet phones that complicate efforts to trace and intercept calls.
Those handlers, who were apparently watching the attacks unfold live on television, were able to inform the attackers of the movement of security forces from news accounts and provide the gunmen with instructions and encouragement, the authorities said.
Clap
Dec 072008
Like most others in blogosphere, I too read Barkha Dutt’s passionate defense of reportage on News Channels. My first response was to Fisk it. Wikipedia quotes Eric S. Raymond from the the Jargon File:
A point-by-point refutation of a blog entry or (especially) news story. A really stylish fisking is witty, logical, sarcastic and ruthlessly factual; flaming or handwaving is considered poor form.
As i began scanning through the justification, i mentally made notes. It was going to be a line by line rebuttal. the post began taking shape. I began typing it out. And then I stopped. What am I becoming ? Does Fisking really serve any purpose but to polarize opinions even more?
It is not about absolutes. It is about a continuum in which we all want to coexist, live, play, work and be happy. It is not about digging yourself into a hole or painting yourself into a corner. It is about meeting people and ideas half way. It is not about shouting someone down. It is about conversation, dialogue. The aim is not sarcasm, or wittiness or getting into a ‘tu tu mein mein‘ zone. It is not personal. It is not aimed at one person and their reportage, but a system that is failing us, as much as the politicians are.
The News media are the fourth estate. They are the watchdogs on behalf of civil society. They are supposed to keep a look out for when the state or the system messes up, and they are supposed to make us aware of lapses. they are supposed to be unbiased, neutral and a means for the audience to get timely reliable information.
Their role is not to pally up or be part of inner circles – they can’t by definition. Their role is not to gloss over the truth, because their patrons will get offended; and their role is not to cover the peccadilloes of the rich and famous to the exclusion of everything else. Their role is not to scream about the stable door after the horse has bolted, but before. The reason i am bringing up something that most bachelor level students of the media will know and appreciate is because the News Media in general and TV News media in particular has forgotten it.
So Let’s start with basics. Unedited footage, with a spur of the moment commentary, in situations like this, is dangerous. This is not a cricket match. This is National Security .
The basic defense is that mistakes were being made because it was a 60 hour coverage under tense, dangerous and emotive conditions. I appreciate the difficulties of 60 hour coverage. But, I don’t think that anyone asked the media to cover the issue live non stop. There were other stories breaking. A cylcone in Chennai that left 75+ dead (I could be cynical and say that slum people drowning is not news) , a dangerous situation in Thailand, where many Indians travel , elections in parts of India. As, Anjali Deshpande and S.K. Pande of the Delhi Union of Journalists point out:
The media behaved as if the country was so terrified it came to a standstill. As if Madhya Pradesh did not go to polls, as if Delhi did not vote, as if a former Prime Minister, V P Singh, did not pass away
Was there other news? Of course. But, the desire to keep viewership up by upping the pitch, and trying to vie with each other to get more gruesome and gory, won the day.
NDTV English continued showing the operation. It also took us to the scene outside the Trident. There Barkha Dutt spoke to the Deputy Chief Minister R R Patil asking him for details. She asked him whether there were any Indians among the hostages. RR Patil said he could not disclose information for it could affect the security of the people held hostage. Patil also pointed out that firing from outside could give away the direction from, which security forces were approaching the building. Despite that the channel showed where the commandos were hiding behind pillars! …..Whatever happened to the earlier decision to not telecast live in the interest of the ongoing operation?
There is something terribly scary about unedited footage going out with unedited scripts. And, when i talk about editors here, I don’t mean the function on a word processor or a the video editing system that you use to assemble a story. I mean the human who is competent and qualified to add ‘reason’ to a report. For reference of good reportage in emotional situaions, please look at Michael Buerk’s coverage of the Ethiopian famine, or Kate Adie’s coverage of Tiananmen Square, or even the US Network Coverage of 9/11. Let’s face facts, editorially 26/11 coverage was a disaster. You had live footage going on, with commentators trying to describe the events – almost like a ball to ball coverage, without the knowledge & insight that a cricket commentator has on the game.
Bring in systems that prevents this. News, has to go through an editorial filter. Having your editor on the ground sending out unfiltered thoughts and images is really a cop out !
At the second level you have the role of watchdog. It is all very well to bay about the fact that the NSG has only one plane tucked away in Chandigarh. now, that the delay has happened and the deed is done, let me ask the media – our watchdog- a question – Were you sleeping for all these years? Where is your reportage on things that impact us and our security? Where is your reportage on corruption? Where is your reportage on why Delhi houses aren’t really earthquake resistant – and what will happen there if there is an earthquake tomorrow ? How much petrol goes walkies from the army everyday ? Why is it that you aren’t asking why people are dying in floods 60 years after independence in a Capital city ? What can be done to prevent it? Where are your North Eastern Reports? Where are your features on Naxal activity? Where are your exposes on human right violations ? Where are you on people who make a difference, beyond the Page 3 crowd ? Is Saif Ali Khan’s tattoo really more important than this country and its people?
The sacrifice of news in the altar of ratings is again something that needs to be addressed at a policy level. Maybe a different metric needs to be evolved for news media, that is apart from the metric used to measure entertainment. Maybe news channels need to sit with agencies and clients to evolve this. There has to be a political will within the system to do that. I hope that they find it before it is too late.
The next is the issue of Responsibility and Common Sense. ‘The Government did not tell us to stand away’ is like one fifth standard play ground excuse. The analogy I will give you is with drinking and driving. Many of us didn’t drink and drive, even before it was an offense. If the Government had cracked down on media coverage, the response would have been ‘ they can’t catch the terrorists, but they cracked down on us’. What would you have the security forces do ? Get the situation in hand, or babysit a bunch of people who should have known better.
And what about its irresponsibility in inflaming passions. Whose idea was it to put Simi Garewal’s statement on ‘flags in slums’? She should not have made the statement. But, the broadcasters definitely should not have carried it. What are you trying to do? Start a riot – would that mean more TRP’s. Again, my question is, where is the editor ? Where is editorial ? Does it still have a role to play in news media ? This is the same kind of irresponsible behavior that had got us all inflamed during the Arushi case.
I hope that all of us are aware that News has become a platform for polar opposite Views. Not views that will come to a consensus, but views that will try and drown each other out with their decibels. They find nutcases on both sides of the spectrum and it is a free for all orgy of bad behavior! Because, when people behave badly, audiences watch. The same is the case with entertainment channels? But, at least they are more honest. They don’t occupy the moral high ground like news channels or journalists. They know that they are selling TRP’s and they fine tune their content accordingly. What is your excuse?
At the next level is this entire thing about Nation – India, Bharat. Why is there such media bias towardsMumbai and Delhi. Is it because your friends live here? Why are 60,000 people dying in Naxal attacks not news ? Why is 30% of our districts under Naxal control not an attack on India. Is it because they don’t drink at the Taj or Trident ? You need to answer the question whether you are metro news channels or National News Channels. And, maybe only National News channels have exclusive access to certain kinds of news !
And, finally sensitivity. Put your self in the shoes of Mrs. Karkare, Mrs.Kamte and Mrs.Salaskar – and ask your selves one question – how did they find out that their husband died ?
I believe in freedom of expression. I believe in a free and independent media as a cornerstone of a Democratic Republic. I believe in plurality of voices, opinions and thoughts. And, I believe that the news media, as it exists currently, is a threat to these . Because of their consistent bad behavior, their lapses as a watchdog, their irresponsibility and their insensitivity they are going to curb all of our freedoms. I wish that sense will prevail. I hope that they agree to bring in a code of conduct, i hope that they build a consensus for marketing and selling news differently, and i request the best among them to go and train the next generation.
Others on the role of the media, 26/11
1) Three days of Mumbai terror reporting - The Hoot
2) When Nationalism Triumphs responsible Reporting – The Hoot
3) Media and the Elite - The Statesman
4) We, the People- The Mumbai tragedy and the English language news media - Hindustan Times The Telegraph
5) The Channel box Carnage – Indian Express
Clap
Dec 022008
A friend called me up after this post. “not fair” he said. “Pimps are honest – they tell you what they do and how much they charge”. So i apologise to all the pimps who may be offended by that post. I didn’t mean to insult you.
Now I might as well be democratic. piss off all media companies simultaneously
There is someone in Times Now who has lost their sense of perspective. There is a feed of the cc camera tape running. it seems unedited. what next ? a live feed of two people having sex ? NDTV is broadcasting the police briefing to the CM at the Taj and the Oberoi. ‘tyana strangulate kela’ says the cop to the CM.
Star News has a recreation of the events of 26/11 – on a show called City 60 where the voice over artist ( i am sure that it can’t be a journalist) has voiced the piece – it cannot be a story – with the urgency of someone covering the Derby. it is followed by a piece on the mourning in Jerusalem accompanied by music out of a Ramsey horror show episode.
Sansani is scaring the hell out of me. it is telling the terrorist or the potential armed robber how to breach mall security. Sneak into the basement 101
And there was Barkha who had a question as long as a dissertation. if you have the answer in the question then why call the guests ?
Why don’t our TV journalists let other people speak? many of them don’t know enough to be filling that much air time- though ‘woefully ill informed’ and ‘foolishly speculative’ would be more apt. Which possibly explains why the get celebrities who are more stupid and more proactive than them. Simi Garewal anyone ? Are there no people called editors in news channels anymore – people who look at content and ensure that it follows the law of the land and keep the channel from being shut down in violation of broadcasting laws.
What are channels trying to do? Goad the people to demand war or to start rioting ? That would be good for TRP’s.
And finally, which of them is telling the truth.
NDTV headlines
NDTV Online
or
ibn
ibn
or is Pranab Mukherjee identical twins with the same name, and someone forgot to tell us?
Technorati Tags: Times Now, Star News, 26/11, City 60, Sansani
Sphere: Related ContentClap
Dec 022008
The last post gathered a flurry of comments on both this blog and on FB where i reposted it. There hasn’t been a single comment supporting the media.
Kishore Ajwani wrote in :
This is Kishore Ajwani. I apologise to all of you who think that I demeaned the profession I belong to. This was not about me, or MICA, or Mumbai, or my news channel. It was about India and I take full responsibility for all the things that I am being blamed for. I can only submit that I would try to ensure that such conduct is not repeated if I happen to be in any such situation ever again. I know nothing that I do or say can assuage the feelings that I would have hurt. I am sorry.
Thank you Mr.Ajwani. It is nice to see decency in journalists. After seeing the coverage on TV i feared for your profession. thank you for restoring some of that faith.
Sphere: Related Content
Sep 202008
Sometimes Media Bias can come through in something as simple as a the difference between the headline and body copy.
This from CNN IBN
The Headline reads – “Cong Not in Favour of PM-BJP Unity : Khursheed”
And the content of the article
(refer to the part that has been highlighted)
Rajdeep Sardesai: You can’t make this battle, Narendra Modi vs Congress.
Salman Khurshid: No, it is not a battle between Narendra Modi and the rest of the country. It is simply a battle of being transparent, open and accountable. I have to be accountable and Narendra Modi has to be accountable. But I think what is important is that everytime there is an incident like that, if Salman Khurshid picked up his phone and rang Arun Jaitley and Arun Jaitley rang me, things would be different. But we don’t do that. Our parties dont allow us to do that.
Rajdeep Sardesai: That’s interesting. You are saying that your parties wont allow you to build consensus? Right be honest.
Salman Khurshid: I know. I’m telling you our parties don’t allow us to build consensus.Rajdeep Sardesai: I am glad that you have been as honest as that. Arun Jaitley would you be equally honest and say that? A Barack Obama and John McCain can stand on the same platform at least on terror.
Arun Jaitley: I think it’s about time that all of us spoke on terror in the same voice. It’s ultimately a campaign to save the country, otherwise the way you are headed is not a great path. With almost 170 distrcits under the grip of Naxalites, you have regions all over where terrorists can strike at will. This is not the time to show differences on the issue. The issue is not Gujarat. You denied that law to Rajasthan. You have a problem with Gujarat. What about Rajasthan, what about Madhya Pradesh? The fact is that India today needs an anti-terror law. Since you talk of consensus, Home Minister Shivraj Patil has been saying he needs a federal investigative agency. We are willing to look at that demand provided the federal agency has substantive powers.
as usual the option is that the person who put up the story headline, doesn’t know their job !
Clap
You Said