The live telecast exposed much more than met the camera eye
The nation has not yet extricated itself from the pangs of gloom and anger over the Mumbai terrorist attack. It’s a time for post-mortems and discussing the system threadbare. The public outcry has been exceedingly loud and reverberating. During the attack, which went on for 60 hours, it was the media which kept the nation on the boil and the international community updated with its live footage – which also served to fulfill India’s longstanding goal of providing evidence to the world of Pakistan’s role n terrorism in this country.
Yet, while the electronic media has been lauded for exposing the issue, it has also come under flak for irresponsible coverage, blatant publicity to the so-called cause of the wrongdoers, and an utterly unprofessional approach. The hollowness of the claims of news channels to be professional and mature opinionbuilders was exposed.
The main problem was the lack of judgement of how much and for how long coverage was appropriate. There was the mediocrity of editorial inputs, loud and shrieking on-the-spot anchors repeatedly falling short of words and palm-rubbing studio experts to boot. At the same time, it did not take long for some highly-rated television reporters’ inadequacies to get exposed. Those doing minor stories on “night shelters” were not equipped to be virtually war correspondents in this war-like situation. It was akin to combating a hardcore terrorist with a lathi.
Again, the channels could not find, from across the length and breadth of this land, different faces for those studio discussions. The Page 3 crowd was all there was on air, holding forth with their researched opinions. The man on the street was not considered intelligent enough for his inputs to be sought.
The anchors spouted paragraph-long questions, and strongly-worded to keep the fire in the public mind raging. The government, taken by surprise, was left groping for answers and attempting to shield itself from the onslaught of accusations. For the moment, the media was truly ruling the country.
Now, all this relates to the other TV channels but the state-owned Doordarshan. DD notched up a big red “A” for “absent” in creating any wave. Despite its vast structural base and possessing one of the biggest studio networks in Mumbai, there was not a single shot or sound byte that could assuage the sentiments of the public. Doordarshan, it seemed, was not concerned with the happenings!
And so it is. For Doordarshan is not clued in on what is happening in the country any more. Though claiming to be a non-profit Public Service Broadcast entity when seeking annual budgetary grants from the government, its shoddy programming and lustreless leadership spawn abysmal gaps when, with a properly laid down broadcasting code and infrastructure, it could have done laudable work.
Instead, there has been a series of blunders by Doordarshan in the recent past which has led to doubts over its professional capability to cover events of magnitude. Be it the Olympics, the Commonwealth Youth Games, Independence Day or the International Film Festival, Doordarshan really seems to be floundering on the professional front. Add to that a depleted viewer base, directionless bureaucratic set-up, and the absence of seasoned television professionals and the writing on the wall is well and truly visible.
None could have imagined the critical state that both All India Radio and Doordarshan have fallen into. The concept of Prasar Bharati has been hijacked and autonomy usurped by bureaucratic ambitions. The organization is more akin to a Labour Commissioner’s office than a thriving media house. And, if this state of affairs continues unchecked, it might well be ticked for disinvestment soon.
Equally alarming is the approach of the Ministry of Information & Broadcasting, which too was unaware of any existing code or law to rein in the television channels. Nor did it have any contingency plans for effective media control. Shockingly, while all Ministries and departments have experts retained for professional guidance, the I&B Ministry does not. It is perhaps an indication that bureaucrats of any hue consider themselves media experts.
It is time to reinvent. New definitions have to be carved out. The present system has ceased to command interest. The scars of the Mumbai attack are going to remain for long. It is high time the policymakers reduce the dependence on a generalist bureaucratic system. There is a need to evolve a code under which each person, of any level or scale, is accountable for his services. With the bonanza granted by the Sixth Pay Commission, the nation is right in seeking explanations. And one and all are aware that those who saved the day in Mumbai were those very same professionals whose upgradation by the Commission was stalled by the bureaucracy.
The writer is a television consultant
There was the mediocrity of editorial inputs, loud and shrieking on-the-spot anchors repeatedly falling short of words and palm-rubbing studio experts to boot
Equally alarming is the approach of the Ministry of Information & Broadcasting, which too was unaware of any existing code or law to rein in the television channels
