SIGHT & SOUND
TV in the time of terror
Amita Malik

INDIA has its share of disasters — riots, train accidents, plane crashes, tsunamis, floods — name it. Even so, the horrific blowing up of train compartments in Mumbai, sent shock waves through the nation. And the media faced one of their biggest challenges. One must concede that most channels came through with responsibility and compassion. I feel they showed too many images of the dead and wounded which, you will recall, were studiously avoided in both New York and London, because their media have a code of conduct for such occasions.

I feel our media should also draw up such a code, because close-ups of dead persons, blood and gore can make the tragedy for the relatives of victims more painful and also arouse feelings of revenge.

The other minus points, I am afraid, remain the same on these occasions. Eager to get firsts and exclusives, individual reporters interrupt the immediate job of those coping with the tragedy, notably police officials. They ask long-winded and sometimes silly questions and while most officials retain their courtesy as long as possible, one of them was heard to remark to an over-eager reporter who had held him up from going about his job: "Will you excuse me, I have to do a job for the moment."

I think that police commissioner was far too polite. He should have stopped the reporter equally politely and said: "Sorry, I have work to do, may I answer your question later?"

I also found presumptuous and erroneous Rajdeep Sardesai’s gleeful claim: "We are giving the news internationally, the world is getting the report on the Mumbai disaster only through us", or words to that effect. I would first like to point out that CNN-IBN’s access to "the world" through CNN, an international channel, is not unique. Its sister channel, Times Now, also has a tie-up with Reuters, a news agency which was much earlier on the Indian media scene and is far more known and respected in India.

And how could Rajdeep forget the BBC, which has a world service and very competent correspondents in India? Also, to my knowledge, all the major English and Hindi national channels have instant outlets abroad through tie-ups with local channels abroad. These include Aaj Tak and Headlines Today, NDTV English and Hindi, Zee from long ago, and surely Star TV as well. To get so excited and make such a wild boast was not only childish, but in bad taste, and I am surprised at a mature mediaperson like Rajdeep, for whom I have high regard, falling into this trap.

Indeed, I find the new English channels are far more interested in building up their own so-called super stars and boasting of their exploits than building up the confidence of the viewer by not making absurd claims which make them all the more suspect.

And in the end, two images linger in my mind from the TV coverage and kept me sleepless through those nights. One is of the young boy who lay unconscious and no one knew who had brought him to hospital or who he was. But NDTV kept on showing him day after day. His parents were poor and without TV, but neighbours who saw him on TV alerted the parents and they were ultimately reconciled.

More disturbing was the exposure on TV of the body of a man young and full-bodied, no injuries showing, as if he were just sleeping. He was a victim of the attack on tourists in Srinagar. Obviously a middle-class Bengali, my heart bled for his relatives to know of the tragedy this way. But at least TV helps, however painfully.

To end on a happier note, Swathi Thyagarajan’s Born Wild programme on environment and wildlife goes from strength to strength. Last week it was the Manas National Park in Assam, second only to Kaziranga, and on the border with Bhutan. It was off bounds for its staff during the Bodo insurgency and only re-opened recently.

Swathi took us on a fascinating journey through it, with comments from the park officials. It was an outstanding programme on its flora, fauna and wildlife. I think Swathi’s worries should be compulsory viewing for both school and college students and our officials at the Centre, who seldom take a first-hand look at their administrative territories and their problems.