Page 99 - Conflict, Terrorism, and the Media In Asia

88 Prasun Sonwalkar

● the pro-Hindutva bias of sections of the mass circulation Gujarati-language
press; and
● the dangers and problems faced by journalists while covering the Gujarat events.
In several respects, the coverage marked a significant departure from the way the
Indian news media had approached Hindu–Muslim relations since 1947. It also
highlighted the disjuncture between the English-language press and the influential
sections of the Gujarati-language press.

India’s first television riot

For the first time in the history of covering Hindu–Muslim clashes, ‘violence was
carried live’ on television (Ninan 2002) as television cameras brought home
graphic images to viewers in Gujarat and elsewhere. There was no live coverage
of the attacks against Sikhs in 1984 or of the 1992 Hindu–Muslim clashes in
Mumbai and elsewhere. It was then the era of print, and television news reporting
was years away. It was only in 1996, when STAR News – the first of the 24-hour
news channels – was launched, that television news added a visual dimension to
2
politics, political violence and the public sphere in India. In 2005, the television
newscape had turned dense, with several 24-hour news channels broadcasting in
different languages, drawing more people and regions into the public sphere and
rejuvenating local networks of culture, politics and economy. The proliferation of
satellite television also sparked off an intensely competitive brand of journalism.
During the Gujarat events, there was a large presence of journalists and television
crews in the streets, each trying to outdo the other, as politically mobilized mobs
attacked Muslim men, women (including pregnant women), children and their
property. Reporting the clashes, often live, made for riveting television, the likes
of which the Indian audience had never been exposed to.
The coverage by the print media – English and Gujarati-language – also made
news when sections of the press (Gujarati-language dailies Sandesh and Gujarat
Samachar) covered the events from a pro-Hindutva perspective while other
sections (The Times of India, Indian Express) were severely critical of the attacks
against Muslims. The Godhra incident occurred on 27 February and was reported
extensively the next day. But news channels and newspaper editors devoted more
time and space to the Union Budget that was presented in the Indian parliament
in New Delhi on 28 February. The budget coverage pushed Godhra to the mar-
gins, and it was further relegated in the news columns when large-scale retaliation
against Muslims began in others parts of the state.

Ethics: medium is the message

Since the 1950s and 1960s, the Indian news media followed a set of guidelines
formulated by the Press Council of India, a quasi-judicial watchdog organization,
stipulating that the identity of victims or attackers should not be mentioned in
news reports to prevent further escalation of communal violence. The guidelines