Ethics In The Indian Media 2011
(Excerpts from a Report by TheHoot.org)
Terror Reporting
No mea culpa
On November 16, 2011 seven Muslims arrested for the Malegaon 2006 blasts were released on bail. Media frenzy accompanied their release, with photographers telling them to make the V sign. The same media had accepted the Maharashtra ATS’s claims that these Muslims had planted the bombs that killed 37 of their own community, giving hardly any space to claims made by Malegaon’s Muslims that they were innocent. At the release, the lawyers of the accused and community leaders from Malegaon were being hounded for interviews; there was no sign of the ATS. Neither were they asked for an explanation; nor did the media think it necessary to explain their own conduct.
Naming names, Prematurely
The reportage of the bomb blast at the Delhi High Court in September this year had much media speculation based on briefings by the National Investigation Agency. Student suspects were named in the press before anything could be established, One of them, Sharique Bhatt was released when the police found he had been wrongly picked up. But he had already been named in news reports. He is a class XI student of Islamia Faridia Higher Secondary School in Kishtwar, and was painted as a terrorist by the media.
On November 1 the Indian Express reported NIA briefings in detail while raising questions about the assertions made by the agency, in the same article. The article had detailed information about the third accused and how he had been plotting the attack. The paper picked holes in this information at the end of the article. But it named the accused even while disbelieving what the police said about him.
One December 20, the same paper, the Indian Express reported that Malik said he had been tortured in custody and had been framed. The letter he gave to a special court contradicted the facts put out by the NIA its briefing.
Father of an alleged suspect sends a legal notice
Tehelka reported in a story posted on December 19 that The father of alleged Indian Mujahideen (IM) operative Yasin Bhatkal has sent a legal notice to the tune of Rs 5 crore to the The Hindu newspaper’s Editor-in-chief N Ram and reporter Praveen Swami, for defamation. It said, “Muhammed Zarar Sidibapa, resident of Bhatkal, Karnataka, has sent a legal notice to The Hindu demanding an unconditional apology for a front-page story published on 1 December. According to the article, titled “Breakthrough in 2010 attacks raises fears of renewed jihadist campaign”, Sidibapa is an IM commander who had masterminded a series of bomb blasts in several cities since 2005 and was absconding. However, Sidibapa claims that he has been managing his business in Dubai since the last three decades.”
Paid News
The Year 2011 saw the first action ever against a politician for ‘paid news’, the Election Commission on October 20 disqualified a woman MLA from RLD from Uttar Pradesh for three years for incorrect statement of election expenditure incurred on ‘news items’ in two Hindi dailies.
In September, the Times of India re-ran a three-year-old story on Bt Cotton without any updates as paid news, to neutralise a bad press on the biotech company Mahyco Monsanto Biotech on August 28. The newspaper re-ran the news under the section “Consumer Connect Initiative” in September. In 2008 the TOI, Nagpur edition published the original story, and similar news reports had appeared in The Economic Times and news feeds of UNI and PTI.
Slander
Slander against the leading activists of the ongoing anti-nuclear movement in Koodankulam – S P Udayakumar, M Pushparayan and M P Jesuraj were observed in a story published by Dinamalar on 24th November. A story titled ‘Truth and Hype behind the Koodankulam row’ contained statements that the project has been funded by US who did not want Tamil Nadu to develop. Dinamalar published the personal details, phone numbers and email addresses of the three activists after which they reportedly received threat calls and messages.
Violence Against Women
India TV was “admonished” by the News Broadcasters Self-Regulatory Authority for a programme on July 1 titled “Operation Gang Rape”. It showed MMS footage of a gang-rape that was explicit and therefore grossly offensive.
The Broadcasting Content Complaints Council(BCCC) found several channels guilty of objectionable depiction of violence against women in serials.