In an Indian catastrophe only the Indian news channels deliver

Live TV unmasks face of terror for Indian millions

By Rezaul H. Laskar and Vishnu Makhijani, Indo-Asian News Service

American media remains as self-absorbed as ever

By Ela Dutt, Indo-Asian News Service

New Delhi, Dec 14 (IANS) The generally faceless terrorist stood unmasked for the first time Thursday in India as network television played out the attack on Parliament in graphic detail in front of millions of Indians.
Television reporters risked their lives capturing live images of the shoot-out as many of them did stand-up live reporting of the unfolding story.
Viewers watched in horror as graphic footage showed the mayhem unleashed by five terrorists, who barged into the Parliament complex with guns blazing and were threatening a catastrophe before being killed.
By then, the terrorists had gunned down seven people, including four policemen, and injured 20 -- much of which news cameramen caught on videotape while being fired at by the terrorists.
Most Indian news channels place large crews in and around the Parliament whenever it is in session, as it was Thursday, and these cameramen and reporters played a major role in providing live coverage of the strike.
And here, I cannot resist sharing with you an excerpt from an outraged posting on a South Asian Web forum. "The fact that Ashleigh Banfield thinks a white woman can dye her hair black and `blend in` really is a loaded comment--like she thinks there are no other features that make one appear south Asian [because] she`s never looked closely at any of us. What`s next? White reporters going to Africa in blackface?" Savor the hysteria!)
Cameramen from several networks risked their lives to shoot dramatic footage of the 30-minute gun battle, ducking behind trees, hedges and walls to film the terrorists, who were barely metres away as they ran around the Parliament complex, firing at almost everyone in sight.
Surendra Singh and Rakesh Negi of Zee News shot from the frontline as it were, capturing rare footage of one of the terrorists who acted as a suicide bomber, detonating explosives strapped to his body.
"I thought that I must have shots of the militants. That is why I continued to shoot and did not take cover inside Parliament," said Negi, who had earlier covered the Kargil border conflict with India in 1999 as well as the insurgency in Jammu and Kashmir.
Shankar Malik, who was assisting Surendra Singh, said: "We had a job to do and I carried on doing it."
The striking footage, however, came at a price.
Vikram Singh, a cameraman for the Asian News International (ANI) based at the makeshift media centre near Parliament`s main gate, was among the injured. He is being treated at the All India Institute of Medical Sciences for bullet and spinal injuries.
Another cameraman had a providential escape when a bullet smashed through the cover of his camera lens.
While television channels broadcast the event live from outside Parliament, actual footage of gunfight inside Parliament was aired only after security forces killed the terrorists and ended the siege of the complex.
And the cameramen, usually hidden away behind their equipment, had their few minutes of fame when the news channels put them on air so they could recount their experiences for viewers.
Media analysts said the coverage of the attack on Parliament will for long be remembered as a definitive moment for Indian television news channels.
"You can forget about BBC and CNN. Such a calamitous incident was not news for them," said media analyst Sevanti Ninan.
"It was mentioned in the headlines but there was no report for the first 20 minutes because yesterday (Thursday) was when the Osama (bin Laden) tapes were released and Israel staged another attack on the Palestinians."
"Even with our limited resources, we more than matched international standards in terms of skill and efficiency. We were there where it mattered and when it mattered," said Sanjay Pugalia, editor of Zee News, among the first news channels to beam live pictures of the terrorists firing at the security forces.
The attack not only reinforced the need for domestic news channels but also would, in the long run, improve their bottom lines.
"Just a couple of years ago, it was said that one major news event a month was enough to keep a television news channel going. Now, there is enough happening to keep everyone in business," said Ninan.
At the same time, there was also criticism for the short shrift given by international channels to the attack on Parliament.
"The foreign channels merely exposed their own irrelevance as far as the Indian viewing public is concerned. When it came to the attack on the heart of Indian democracy, it was the Indian news channels which gave a concerned and apprehensive nation the kind of detailed coverage it craved for," said media analyst Poonam Saxena.

New York, Dec 14 (IANS) American media remained self-absorbed, splashing tapes of Osama bin Laden, even as the Indian Parliament was subjected to a terror attack that should have made headlines in a country besieged by terrorists.

The U.S. administration though did not mirror the callous disregard for what happened in the halls of Parliament in the world`s largest democracy.

The so-called amateur video of bin Laden, enjoying a social gathering while he discussed the success of his alleged attacks at the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon, dominated media coverage here.

With an almost uninterrupted stream of reactions -- from relatives of victims, legislators, talking heads, think tanks, terrorist experts, Arabic language experts, reactions in other countries, reactions of journalists, man-on-the-street, anyone and everyone -- expounding on either the authenticity, veracity, or the image bin Laden projected or didn`t project went on to the exclusion of everything else.

It lent credence to complaints from many intellectuals and South Asians as well as other ethnic groups in this country that not enough news about various parts of the globe filters through to the American public.

It was a disease of perceived self-interest or narrow national interests that many countries said plagued successive American administrations. But as Washington has tried to shed this image, with the need for an international alliance particularly against terrorism, the media has become more centred on news that caters to its perception of a self-absorbed American public.

The U.S. decision to opt out of the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty received relatively minor coverage, and as for the terror attack on the legislature of the largest democracy of the world, yes, there was some mention of it.

Apparently, shredding bin Laden`s statements and his body language over and over again provided some kind of cathartic relief, if not to the public and the government, at least to a media looking to cater to what it considers the primary interest of the American public.

The terror attacks in India, however, did engage the relevant government departments.

Apart from President George Bush and Secretary Colin Powell`s calls to Indian leaders, briefs on the impact of such an attack and what it meant for the region, as well as the potential for future clashes either on the border between India and Pakistan, were prepared by the South Asian specialists in the State Department, as well as intelligence circles, reliable sources said.

But mirroring New Delhi`s careful statements, not identifying any country or group with the act, South Asia experts in the Bush administration did not wish to speculate on who might be responsible or whether any additional pressure would be put on Islamabad regarding the training camps for terrorists that continue to be located within areas in its control.

Powell`s expression of solidarity with India against terrorism, as well as Bush`s offer of help from the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation, are signs that the administration is in step with the situation in South Asia.

"Of course, the very fact that the president made a call and Secretary Powell made a call shows it is high priority," one source that did not wish to be identified said.

Richard Boucher, State Department spokesperson, released a readout that strongly condemned what it called an outrageous terrorist attack on the Indian Parliament.

"No cause can justify the deliberate targeting of civilians. This brutal assault on the heart of Indian democracy is an attack on all democracies as well as an attempt to undermine the efforts of those seeking regional peace and stability."

But it was a day laden with bin Laden. Nothing else seemed to be transpiring anywhere else in the world as far as the media here was concerned.

Just as bin Laden says on the tape, that he got more destruction than he calculated at the WTC, he has now got the kind of publicity for his cause and his strategy that could only be dreamed of. Playing and replaying the tape gave to his followers around the globe the opportunity to hear their leader by just turning the dial. Talk about a public relations coup.