Role of media in combating terrorism

Enough is enough, clichéd it may seem, but a reality-check determines the situation is even more serious. Indeed, the time has really exceeded in overhauling the entire system of the working of the media in India. The whole country, even the international circle, is upset with the recent media faux pas (especially the televised coverage of the attack) with their irresponsible live reportage of the NSG-terrorists encounter in the rear of the Mumbai terror attack on November 26, 2008.
The TV as witnessed was purely prioritizing ways to shoot-up the TRP ratings amidst a national crisis. There is competition among the different stories that will finally be emitted; those that are victorious are more dramatic, are more spectacular in a visual sense, are more emotional and contain other elements that are able to be assimilated by an image-oriented culture.
But then what India needs at this hour paradoxically, is sharp journalism focused on bringing to light the rampant corruption, insurgency, terror, political-highhandedness and development rather than the exclusive and sensitized reporting of terror or P3 life.

The media are not simple entities that transmit “raw” information. It has an active role in “constructing” the news, making terrorists actions understood in a context that simplifies, prioritizes, and structures the narrative flow of these stories.
The media persons should realize that they are not manipulated by terrorists into promoting the cause of terrorism or its methods. The challenge for policymakers is to explore mechanisms enhancing media/government cooperation to accommodate people’s need for honest coverage while limiting the gains that may be provided for terrorists or their cause. Communication between the government and the media here is an important element in any strategy to prevent terrorist causes and strategies from prevailing and to preserve democracy.
In the first place, we must scrutinize what terrorists want from media. It should be free publicity as it cannot be availed directly to spread their mission, and this in turn is modeled to seek a favourable understanding of their cause, if not their act. Further, it is been also said that in hostage situations, terrorists need to have details on identity, number and value of hostages, and details on the public exposure of their operation or a possibility for any plans of military retaliation. And at last but far from least, these radical elements seek coverage to amplify panic on the enemy side, to spread fear, to facilitate economic loss (like scaring away investment and tourism), to make populations loose faith in their governments' ability to protect them, and the overall threat of terrorism.
Sadly though, terrorists could achieve just that in India.
What we can infer from a series of reportages is to separate the terrorist from the media and present them as criminals and avoid glamorizing them; to foster the viewpoint that kidnapping a prominent person, blowing up a building, or hijacking an airplane is a criminal act regardless of the terrorists' cause.
Media, with its imminent power of publicity can help diffuse the tension of a situation by feeding the public relevant information during an attack to minimise damage.
The CNN IBN dished out a series of reportage which portrayed Mumbai as a ‘phoenix city’ which rose from the ashes of the shoot outs and bombings with full vigour, despite the chain of terror attacks which started from CST railway station. The cafe owner who had lost two employees during the shoot out was hell bent to re-open the shop immediately after the attack; thereby dishing out a silent but firm message to the perpetrators, ‘Nothing can kill the spirit of a Mumbaikar.’ Such messages should form the news content, and avoid covering emotional stories on relatives of victims.
It was media’s folly during the Mumbai terror attack on November 26 to have revealed the planned anti-terrorist actions or provide the terrorists with data that helps them. Media should have remembered the nation was in a state of war even if the government had not explicitly said so; also is an urgent need to cut loose talk at this juncture, with supporting instances like the Antulay issue. It is the job of the media to play down news that undermines the spirit of a nation.
During such a crisis, media ought to restraint themselves and follow governmental rules as security of the nation weighs more than the freedom of press.
From various careless coverage of news one can easily deduce that media should never reveal government secrets or detail techniques on how successful operations were performed or publicize successful terrorist technological achievements and operational methods which may inspire other anti-elements to function.
It is very necessary to form a voluntary press coverage guideline on terrorism reporting like agreeing not to air live unedited interviews with terrorists; or interview police and army officials during combat, checking sources of information carefully when the pressure is high to report information that may not be accurate, limiting information on military, or police, movements during rescue operations and so on.
If we have to curb terrorism, we need to be cleverer than the terrorists. The problem with terrorism is that they are learning from our mistakes. The media and the government have common interests in seeing that the media are not manipulated into promoting the cause of terrorism or its methods.
Terrorists will suffer a blow in the hands of people’s determination and the support of the fourth pillar of the democracy. Media can control the publicity scenario by portraying the never-die-attitude of the public that can etch the coup-de-grace of all terror outfits, and help the government in all ways in building a terror free society. In any case, optimism rules!

“Never talk defeat. Use words like hope, belief, faith, victory”, Norman Vincent Peale.

Book Review

Zionism: v. 1: The Real Enemy of the Jews
* Hardcover: 596 pages
* Publisher: WORLD FOCUS PUBLISHING, Kent, England.(2005),Camel Books, Calicut (Indian Imprint) (2007)
* Language: English

“If the conflict in Palestine goes on, it has all the potential to go to hell, the Armageddon,” said Alan Hart, a former British television executive, an analyst in Middle-East affairs, narrates the terrifying global consequences of the conflict which has certainly led to the Clash of Civilisation, that is Judeo-Christianity Vs Islam. The author is also a correspondent with ITN’s New at Ten and BBC’s Panorama Programme.
Alan Hart in his latest book, ‘Zionism: The Real Enemy of Jews’ provide a deeper analysis perhaps for the first time ever, of why we are on a course for a Clash of Civilisations and how it can be averted.
The book is a rewrite of the Arab-Israeli conflict, narrating its regional and global dimensions.
The author finds out Zionism has a negative influence on several aspects, be it world economy, politics, media, anything you name it, are under the control and fear of Zionism. It relies constantly on terror and Antisemitism for its survival.
But the author seeks to blame the "Zionists" for anything he can. Here is a small sampling of quotes from the first chapter: "Arafat is loved by many of his colleagues," his "kindness and his humanity is something unbelievable," and his courtesy is "unfailing." One person is quoted as saying that compared to Gamal Abdul Nasser, "Arafat is a saint."
The author adopts a style of writing like a novel rather than a conventional historic account to make it accessible to all. The book cannot be read in a jiffy, instead needs time and effort to grasp the points author wants to highlight the readers. But it is worth a read who like to read on world politics. He says enough for me to understand that a two state solution will never work, it will be based on the Israel state dominating the Palestine state. Hart says that a unified fight against Zionism from within Israel and beyond is the only real solution to this problem.