TELEVISTA
Spare us the gory details
AMITA MALIK

One cannot switch on a TV set these days without coming across some terrible happening. Among these depressing images last week was the sight of a little boy, his face and torso bathed in blood, crying out for his mother. He did not know that she was in equal pain in the same hospital a few rooms away. This was Ahmedabad.

A week earlier, it was Bangalore. The question on everybody’s lips was: "Who’s next?" The only relatively calming sights were those of police dogs going about their duty. Or Manmohan Singh, Sonia Gandhi and the Leader of the Opposition paying visits to the scenes of the tragedy, which is no longer a tragedy but a heinous crime. When those who have killed and wounded people follow the ambulances to the hospital where they are being taken, and then attack the wounded as they are about to be hospitalised, it betrays the highest degree of sickness of the mind.

Whenever one switches on the TV these days, some terrible happening is always being flashed on the screen.

The reactions to such happenings, if shown on television, can be disturbing—from pity to revulsion, from a feeling of triumph, no doubt, for those spreading terror, to a feeling of terrible personal loss on the part of the relatives and friends of the victims. If it repulses people enough to make them swear that they will never attempt such a crime again, it might also encourage other people to pick up the finer nuances of such violence for the future. But on balance, it is better to show such violence on the small screen, because it is only then that people realise the enormity of such crime and violence.

But there is one aspect where one must draw the line. Even in the two worst instances in the West, the destruction of the World Trade Centre’s twin towers and the train blow-ups in London, there were no bodies, mutilated parts of human bodies or other physical details shown. I am afraid that in India TV channels seem to compete with one another in two unforgivable pursuits — one is to show bodies and huge blood spots, and the other is to interview victims, sometimes when they are dying in hospital beds.

There still floats before my eyes the image of an unfortunate young man, whose body had been pierced by a long iron rod, being interviewed in hospital after doctors had performed a six-hour operation to remove it. The man was hardly able to speak but a microphone was thrust in his face and he was asked endless questions which he answered with difficulty.

There are also other undesirable practices in Indian coverage of disasters. Reporters on the spot should convey their reports in calm voices. Unfortunately, they get excited, speak in shrill voices and are almost incoherent. At times the newscaster in the studio asks endless questions, while the reporter on the spot is struggling for accuracy and credibility.

Worst of all is the unprofessional practice of reporters on the spot holding up officials and others going about their rescue jobs with endless queries. The idea is to outdo rivals. This is something that cannot be condemned enough. It also calls for a code of conduct laid down for all reporters so that they do not cross acceptable lines. The rat race has made some of our reporters and their channels forget that there are relatives and friends of the victims of such disasters watching TV and reading newspapers.