|
The Times of India, SATURDAY, MARCH 02,
2002 9:44:43 PM
Gag orders issued against TV
news channels
AHMEDABAD: Censorship today doesn’t necessarily need a pair
of scissors. It can be done by the click of a button. Police
across Gujarat, apparently on the orders from the government in
Gandhinagar, is using its powers to gag the electronic media.
News channels across Gujarat, which were giving a blow-by-blow
account of the riots, blinked off the television screens in
several cities as the police silenced certain channels.
On Saturday, Ahmedabadis were cut off from the world in more ways
than one. Forced inside their homes for the third consecutive
day, desperate attempts of the people to know what was happening
in the city met with blank screens as the state government
blocked all satellite news channels from beaming into city homes.
Exercising special powers, city police commissioner PC Pande
issued notices to cable operators in the city directing them to
block all programmes that could incite violence, enmity between
two communities and disrupt law and order situation in the city.
Those not adhering to the directives would be subject to
punishment, the notice said.
Following the same, all three news channels were pulled off air
early morning by most cable operators. Black screens irked
residents no end who were depending on the news channels to
provide them with updates on the situation in the city.
In Vadodara, Star News channel was blocked, while authorities in
Surat blocked two local channels - MY TV and Channel Surat. In
Rajkot, police commissioner Upendra Singh has directed cable
operators to block Star News and four local news channels. He has
also banned publication of special supplements of three local
Gujarati eveningers.
“Most of the control rooms in the city received phone calls
from the collector's office to black out Star News, Zee News, CNN
and Aaj Tak," said president of the Ahmedabad Cable
Operator's Association Pramod Pandya.
According to Surat police commissioner Vineet Gupta, directives
had been issued to all cable operators to refrain from showing
anything which was provocative. "We directed them not to
show anything which could flare up communal sentiments or cause a
law and order problem" Gupta said.
“How can they black out the news channels when news is what
we need the most?” Vipul Patel, a resident of Manekbaug
asked. An inquiry made to his cable operator revealed that the
cable network hub near Dharnidhar Derasar has been set on fire so
restoring the service would take time.
Ramesh Thakkar of Paldi was given the same justification that
cable is not working because the network distribution hub was
damaged.
Interestingly, most resident felt that blacking out news channels
was actually more damaging as people then had no option but to
rely on rumours. “We are not getting the news channels.
Withholding information will only backfire as we would be forced
to beleive in rumours that are flying thick and fast,” says
Jigna Shah of Shahpur.
“We pay Rs 200 per month for cable services but in the
critical time when we need to know local news, we are not getting
the news channels. Right to information is a basic right. How can
anyone snatch that right away from us?” quizzed Shyam Sundar
of Vejalpur.
Cable service providers when contacted confessed that they had
received official notice ordering ordering to discontinue showing
news channels in Gujarat till the riots were fully controlled.
(With inputs from Surat, Vadodara and Rajkot bureau)
Tehelka.com, March 12, 2002
'The media does not incite
violent passions, events do'
NDTV's Rajdeep Sardesai speaks to Aman Singh about the ban on
Star News following its vivid coverage of the gruesome carnage in
Gujarat
New Delhi, March 9
On the occasion of a discussion on Media, the State and Gujarat,
present among many other senior journalists and editors, was
NDTV's Rajdeep Sardesai, who spoke about his experiences in
Gujarat and on the need for a code of conduct in the media. He
felt there definitely was a need to compile some ethics and
boundaries, while at the same time recognising that in today's
age, the people need to be informed what is happening fast.
The print media follows certain guidelines like not naming or
identifying communities, referring to them instead as "one
community" and "another community". Since the
electronic media is based on visuals, do you need to specify any
community?
When we were in Gujarat, half an hour after
interviewing Chief Minister Narendra Modi, who went on saying
that the situation was normal, we were told that our channel had
been banned. As we were moving out, we saw mobs virtually every
20 metres, stopping vehicles and killing people. We were stopped
twice; the press sticker did not matter. The first time, we were
asked whether we were Hindus or not and if we were then we could
go unharmed. The second time, we were stopped by a Muslim mob.
And the chief minister says the situation is normal.
In such situations, what are we supposed to do? I personally
follow one thing. We are supposed to report facts and tell the
people what is happening. What are the options in front of us? We
either say "one group and another group", or we say
"minority and majority communities", which again is
telling enough. In the Tata Sumo case, where eight or nine people
were charred alive, we did not name communities but we had to
show the visuals.
We have to show things as they are. In this age, we have to tell
the people what is happening all the time and this results in new
needs.
So you are justifying your visuals by saying that a 24-hour
medium demands instant coverage, may it be a bit insensitive?
No, I don't mean that. As a media expert once
said, today's electronic media has seen a complete tabloidisation
and this is inevitable because it needs visuals that strike a
chord with the audience. My motivation in Gujarat was showing
facts as they existed. In-your-face journalism has gone
completely. We need to bring that back. I am ready to defend all
arguments.
But don't you think such extensive coverage could cause an
adverse reaction?
I am very clear about this. It is not the media
that incites such passion among the people it is the event. Our
responsibility is to report actual facts. First there was the
Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) bandh that prevented us from any
reporting and later when the first pictures began to come in, the
situation was already out of hand. While the government kept on
saying the situation was normal, we were seeing quite different
scenes in Gujarat. How can I permit myself to agree to Chief
Minister Modi's statement that only 10 villages are burning when
I myself have seen at least 56?
How did the people of Gujarat react to Star TV's reporting?
There is no question of any one reaction. That
state has become so totally divided that there is no unanimity
left there. The Muslims are so insecure, fearful and anxious for
themselves that it is impossible to stand there and not feel bad
about it. They feel we are somehow trying to bring in differences
whereas that is not the case; we are just showing the clashes.
So you would say the polarization between Hindus and Muslims
is complete in Gujarat?
Definitely, they are so terribly divided that
there is no question now of their unity. It is very badly
polarized.
The Governor of Gujarat Sundar Singh Bhandari and Chief
Minister Modi are full-time RSS pracharaks. Do you think they let
the situation get out of hand?
Modi has spent his entire life working for the
RSS. So has the Governor. Gujarat is the only state where both
the governor and the chief minister happen to be full-time RSS
workers. These people have practically eaten dal-roti with the
VHP and the RSS!
But, a very significant point here is that all governments that
have come to power in the state are culpable for the present
state of affairs and not the BJP alone.
During the carnage in Gujarat, the Army was first on standby
and later staged a flag march. How did Star TV show the
development?
The army has always been effective in riot situations and it is a fact that it should have been brought in much earlier. If we had not shown the place as it was and the killings as they were happening, maybe the Army would have not been deployed till another 24 hours with a thousand more killings. So what we did has, according to me, contributed to the restoration of peace there.