If Indian television anchors had their way, they would like perpetrators of any crime, particularly terrorism, to be identified, arrested, prosecuted and punished within minutes of it being committed. They would like it even better if they are identified, arrested and punished in their own studios by skipping the boring detail of prosecution. A public hanging of the guilty would be fantastic for ratings.
The triple Mumbai blasts naturally compelled me to watch the live broadcast of the unfolding story yesterday. It is amazing how quickly such events are sought to be made subservient to the demands of 24/7 news channels. I do not mean to single out any particular anchor and certainly do not mean to hand down sanctimonious pronouncements about the way they conducted themselves. However, it was difficult to escape the impression that they would rather that the reality became tailored to their whims and fancies just as soon as it broke.
Before I get into the more substantive aspects of what ails broadcast news in India, I want to declare a ban on stating the obvious on television. Let all concerned remember that they work for an audio-visual medium where descriptions of what is going on a couple of inches away from their toes are superfluous. The viewer can see precisely what the reporter and anchor can see. So if there is a blast resulting in an orange fire and black smoke, there is no particular need to assert that there is an orange fire and black smoke.
Similarly, remember that while discussing a blast adding qualifiers such as “The blast had intensity” would sound ridiculous because it is ridiculous. That’s because if a blast has no intensity, it would not be a blast. It would just be a Ratnagiri mango.
There is no need for television reporters to start every other sentence with, “As you can see…” because we indeed can see.
There is no point saying things like, “Rain could affect forensic evidence” or “The injured are being rushed to hospital.” Tautology does not enhance the quality of the report. It also does not accentuate the drama of an already dramatic story.
Speaking of stating the obvious, there is no need to repeat what a spokesman or a witness just said because we all heard it as well. By prefixing it with “As you heard..” a television reporter is not bringing any new insight or information.
There is an advisory that I have been meaning to offer to Indian television reporters who are at the scene of a major story. Remember breathing normally would not come in the way of your articulation. If anything, it would help you sound more cogent. So please breathe. Breathing never killed anyone.
The immediate aftermath of this tragic story had some unintentionally funny moments.
One of the witnesses, himself a diamond merchant, interviewed by NDTV had this to say about the death of someone he knew: “He has lost his life. And he has lost his diamond also.” It sounded as if it was bad enough for him to have lost his life but losing his diamonds too? That’s where he drew the line. Come to think of it, he was looking at it as a diamond merchant for whom people are perishable but diamonds are forever.
Another witness, on being asked to describe what his reaction was immediately after the blast, said he thought a building might be collapsing. “Diamond market mein kain itni buildingen hein jo girne ko taiyyar hai” (There are so many buildings ready to collapse in the diamond market),” he said. And in the same breath, he spoke about the district exporting diamonds and jewelry worth 700 billion rupees (about $15 billion). The disconnect between so much wealth being generated in a district where buildings just collapse because of their age and poor upkeep was striking.
Another witness at Dadar, one of the three sites under attack, said, “Dhamaka itna jor ka tha ke kaan mein kuch sunai nahi diya. (The explosion was so loud that one could not hear anything).” Of course, he was referring to the temporary loss of hearing caused by an intense blast but under the circumstances it sounded hilarious.
In one instance, while a witness was describing in some detail how he carried a blood-soaked victim, a guy behind him was calling his family on his mobile phone to say with a triumphant laugh that he was on television. He even waved to them.
Coming back to my original point about how television anchors look for instant resolution of everything, here is an exchange between NDTV managing editor and high profile anchor Barkha Dutt and Maharashtra state Chief Minister Prithviraj Chavan.
Remember this was happening within less than three hours of the first blast. Cue the clip to 1.54 for the portion I am talking about. Before this bit Chavan had already said he would not like to “speculate” as to who might have carried out the blasts.
Dutt: “And sir, you are saying it is too early to make any guesses about who may be behind this and why?
Chavan:"No I don’t think I would like to speculate on that. Let the police come to you officially…”
One cannot fault Dutt for trying to get as much information from the state’s leader as she could and that too first on her channel, but in the process she ends up asking a question which is devoid of rational reasoning. Why would the state’s chief minister “make any guesses” on television about who could have carried out the bomb blasts barely within a couple of hours?
Is it possible, not to mention prudent, for any state agency to crack the identity of the perpetrators and announce it on national television barely as body parts have been scraped off ? What’s the point of asking that question to someone whose immediate task is to ensure that things do not go out of control any more than they already have?
There seemed to be genuine bafflement on NDTV that the government had “absolutely refused” to talk about who could be behind the blasts. Unfortunately, terrorists do not plan their operations keeping mind the considerations of 24/7 news channels. What compounds the problem is that even the government refuses to “make any guesses” about the perpetrators. The notion that it may be too early to make any guesses is genuinely incomprehensible for the 24/7 news channels. I am not even getting into the dangers of “making guesses” about such crimes.