tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15602189.post271068021005500287..comments2023-09-21T16:17:51.838+05:30Comments on Law and Other Things: 24/7 news and 'No time to Think'Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09348738084817273397noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15602189.post-54720877106132160222008-12-04T19:48:00.000+05:302008-12-04T19:48:00.000+05:30And here is Barkha Dutt's defence of the media cov...And here is Barkha Dutt's <A HREF="http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv/mumbaiterrorstrike/Story.aspx?ID=COLEN20080075194&type=opinion" REL="nofollow">defence</A> of the media coverage of the terror strikes.Tarunabh Khaitanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07234574402062317396noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15602189.post-47003289324142229632008-12-04T16:42:00.000+05:302008-12-04T16:42:00.000+05:30Dear Swathi, thanks for your comment. Generally, I...Dear Swathi, thanks for your comment. Generally, I am not a big fan of any regulation of speech. I have had some doubts since I wrote this post. Perhaps there is a strong case for some self-restraint, but perhaps a lot of good comes out of live broadcast as well. Books like 'No time to think' are good for a debate, and give cause to the media to reflect. But I will be hesitant to take the next step of requiring censorship. Perhaps public criticisms of the role of the media, as we saw last week, will suffice. I will be even more sceptical of regulation of print media.<BR/><BR/>As the divergence between the post and this comment will show, my views on this issue are tentative, with a presumption against regulation.Tarunabh Khaitanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07234574402062317396noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15602189.post-68299609203711395732008-12-03T12:43:00.000+05:302008-12-03T12:43:00.000+05:30Tarunabh,The issues of standards and contents of 2...Tarunabh,<BR/><BR/>The issues of standards and contents of 24/7 news reporting that you have convered in your post, are raised repeatedly with every tragedy that is telecast.<BR/><BR/>There needs to be a basic code of conduct among news channels which regulates at least:<BR/>(a) the repeated telecast of disturbing images, <BR/>(b) dramatisation of events by excited news reporters,<BR/>(c) immediate telecast of unverified information, that could potentially cause civil disorder, including naming of communities, countries or people in the course of news reporting, especially in the case of terror attacks;<BR/>(d) proximity to security forces that could hinder and endanger the efficiency of the operation<BR/><BR/>I distinctly remember that the coverage of the bomb blasts in Hyderabad last year was particularly insensitive to the dignity of the dead victims. Prominent news channels repeatedly telecast images of victims that were both dehumanising and just plain sick.<BR/><BR/>I agree that the best way to do this may not be through a legislation. A model of self-regulation may be preferable where news channels agree to a mutually acceptable code, which is adhered to strictly.<BR/><BR/>Do you have any thoughts on how regulation ought to operate in relation to reporting of terror attacks in the print media?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com