When the story changed
Top Stories
- In 7 lucrative minutes on May 9, Sreesanth bowled 6 balls, bookie made Rs 2.5 cr
- Indian American teen Eesha Khare invents wondrous 20-sec charger, Google eyes bid
- India and China ask Special Representatives to work on more border steps
- 51 dead as massive tornado roars through US suburb
- iGate sacks CEO Phaneesh Murthy after sexual harassment claim
In its recent verdict on the Kasab case, the Supreme Court said: "The coverage of the Mumbai terror attack by the mainstream electronic media has done much harm to the argument that any regulatory mechanism for the media must only come from within". With all due respect, I would like to say that if Kasab could get a fair trial in our land, the media deserves better. Mumbai was not the failure of self-regulation. It was the beginning of self-regulation.
Sometime around 2008, a consensus had developed in the electronic media that a process of reform and self-regulation was essential. On October 2, 2008 — just weeks before the Mumbai attack on November 26 — an autonomous, self-regulatory body called the News Broadcasting Standards Authority came into being under the chairmanship of the former chief justice of India, J.S. Verma. This body has the mandate to set standards and guidelines for news channels. It also has the right to punish violations to the extent that it could recommend the cancellation of a channel's licence. Could anything be stricter than this ?
However, it would be unfair to judge the efficacy of a body on the basis of an incident that happened barely eight weeks into its existence. We would need to judge it on the basis of what has happened since then. The first thing that happened post attack was the drafting of elaborate guidelines to cover such emergencies. Taking note of the criticism that the electronic media attracted for its live coverage, the guidelines, issued by Justice Verma on December 18, 2008, clearly said, "In live reporting of hostage situations or rescue operations, no details of identity, number and status of hostages should be telecast or information given of pending rescue operations or regarding the number of security personnel involved or the methods employed by them." The guidelines further said, "media should avoid live contact with victims or security personnel...or the perpetrators during the course of the incident... Special care should be taken in broadcast of any distressing visuals."
... contd.
Please read our terms of use before posting commentsEditors’ Pick
- 'Sophisticated' Indian cyberattacks targeted Pak military sites: Report
- Talkative Li quoted Weber, Hegel, Jobs, said PM is large-hearted
- Bihar food corp ends up with chaff as rice worth Rs 535 cr vanishes from mills
- In 7 lucrative minutes on May 9, Sreesanth bowled 6 balls, bookie made Rs 2.5 cr
- India and China ask border envoys to work on more steps
- Former Ranji player among 3 more held
- Rajasthan Royals to file FIR against tainted trio
- Family of theft accused allege police torture
- IVF breakthrough can triple number of births: Scientists
- After Khalid’s death, Muslim leaders want govt to make Nimesh panel report public
- Meteoroid impact triggers bright flash on the moon
- Cobrapost sting: NABARD chief gives clean chit to co-operative banks


Phantom democracy
Some chit chat
Three to tango
Everyone loves food security



















