Positive fallout of Indian TV's racism overkill

BY MAYA RANGANATHAN| IN Media Practice | 12/11/2009

In four months the story has moved from the front page to the inside pages, and from being looped 24/7 on TV news channels to just a mention in the daily news.  The 25^th victim of racial violence in Australia definitely got less coverage than the earlier victims, perhaps indicating just how long a news story can be milked, however sensational it is. But what is more interesting and significant is that the Indian media's coverage of the attacks on Indian students in Australia has made more than a splash and wrought far-reaching and unforeseen consequences in distant Australia.

As Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd followed a row of dignitaries including Deputy Prime Minister and federal Education Minister Julia Gillard, Foreign Minister Stephen Smith, Victoria Premier John Brumby and Victoria's Minister for Skills and Workforce participation, Jacinta Allan who have visited India in the past three months to assuage the fears of the Indians about the safety of the Indian students among other things, it is worth evaluating just what changes the Indian media, particularly the 24/7 news channels that have been flayed for their excesses many a time, has contributed in Australia and how.

The series of measures that the Australian Government has initiated following the attacks on Indian students can all be traced to the media coverage in India that has seriously dented the image of Australia as a safe education destination. Since May-June this year, the Federal Government has initiated investigations into the practices of dodgy educational institutions, mostly vocational institutes that offer qualifications to facilitate permanent residency; a rethink on the migration policy making some of the procedures more stringent; making a public acknowledgement that racist elements still dog the society; and in general initiating a hard look at the problems that international students face in Australia.

This 'unique case in Australian history' where media coverage of incidents in Australia in distant India had repercussions on the country's policies and practices (Sheridan, 2009: 5) was made possible by a number of factors, perhaps the most important of which are the Indian media's penchant for news that lends itself to sensationalism and the evolution of information technologies that have made possible transfer of bits and bytes across distances at the click of a button.

Given that Indian students were the victims of violence, answers to why they chose the Indian media to vent their feelings of anger and helplessness over the media in Australia, are not far to seek. Australian newspapers are easily accessible with email addresses provided for those wishing to pass on news leads. Yet, the largely private-owned media in Australia works to different agendas as in most countries. In fact, the attacks on Indian students were initially ignored both by the prominent newspapers and the television channels. It was the overdrive in the Indian media that forced the Australian media to take cognisance of the incidents.

The burgeoning Indian diasporic media ('Australia's Indian media', The Hoot, Nov 26, 2007), run mostly by businessmen of Indian origin and employing hardly any or few trained journalists comprises monthly publications that seldom go beyond reporting the cultural activities of the diaspora. The rift between the well-settled members of the diaspora and the students was apparent at meetings called to address the issue of violence against Indian students. While the older members of the diaspora felt that the students over-reacted, the students blamed them for wanting not to fall foul of the Australian government and society for fear of upsetting the status quo. It is only when the Indian media relentlessly pursued the issue that both the mainstream media and the diasporic press in Australia jumped into the fray, the former often with well-researched articles and some deeply insightful TV programmes on issues affecting international students, particularly Indian students. Indeed, some newspapers continue to write on the issue.

Although it is not clear if the victims of violence turned to the Indian media owing to indifference from other quarters, the students willy-nilly addressed a much-felt need of the Indian media, especially the 24/7 news channels, for information that can lend itself to sensationalism and with a life-span of more than an hour. And the attacks on Indian students in Australia contained all the elements of drama ('Learning from Australian racism story', The Hoot, July 27, 2009) with its potential to be placed within the frameworks of nationalism, victimisation and discrimination. Supplemented by video clippings that could traverse distances in minutes, the story snowballed into a major issue with literally far-reaching consequences.

It would however be specious to argue that Australia's reaction establishes the power of Indian media growing to extend across geographical distances or even typifies the dynamics of 'the twin forces of media and migration' that Appadurai elaborates (1996). For, the Australian government response is clearly an effort to control the damage that could lead to serious economic implications. The attacks have posed a threat to Australia's AU $ 15 billion education industry, the third largest export. It is anybody's guess just what effect the Indian media coverage would have had, if Indians did not comprise the second largest overseas student community and in the process a 'commercial interest'.

References

Appadurai, Arjun, 1996, 'Modernity at large: cultural dimensions of globalization', Minneapolis, University of Minneapolis press.

Sheridan, Greg, 2009, 'Asian Democracy and Ausralia: No Gold Pass to a Trouble-Free Future', The Asialink Essays, No. 6, August, Parkville, Asialink Sydney Myer Asia Centre, The University of Melbourne.