Tsunami: unprecedented Western media coverage

IN Media Practice | 15/01/2005

This is the English version of a column published in Hindustan, January 9, 2005.

MEDIA

Mannika Chopra

Is it all about technology, globalization and increased sensitivities or is there a more subtle political message? As one sees the saturation coverage of the Asian tsunami devastation on CNN and BBC you get the feeling that these networks are outdoing their Asian counterparts in quantity if not in quality.  Two weeks after the event, the tsunami crisis is still being carried as a lead story on international channels despite the impending Iraq elections, a country which has been gobbling up news space with an appetite of a sumo wrestler. Indeed, the coverage has nicely turned upside down what used to be a favourite maxim of American networks: One American death at home is worth twenty in Rwanda.

It’s not only the international channels that are being beamed into India. A quick internet scan of what BBC World’s sister channels and other American networks are offering is revealing. All major networks have sent their leading anchors to the affected areas. One of them, NBC,  is organising a tsunami telethon to garner fund and directing the outpouring of donations to relevant charities.

After waking up to the enormity of the event, caught unawares during after Christmas holiday, CNN has sent out about 75 of its staff and BBC has nearly 90 on the job.  Stars and foot soldiers have been sent off in equal measure. From  Sri Lanka to Bande Ache in Indonesia CNN’s Christiane Amanpour and BBC’s Lyse Doucet are monitoring relief work, following feel good human-interest stories, exploring how the devastation has affected bereft children. Yes, the coverage has irritated local media on whether international networks are being insensitive or sensational by repeatedly showing dead bodies. But unfortunately, in a tragedy of this scale, one size fits all. Dead bodies make for compelling viewing.

So why is this huge diversion of media resources taking place? Granted this the biggest natural calamity of recent times. But the 1976 earthquake in China in Tangshan that reportedly caused the death of 250,000 people didn’t merit this kind of coverage. Sure, closer home, in the United States, the Mississippi River floods of 1993 and the hurricane devastation in 1999 received wall-to-wall coverage but international calamities were mostly given short shrift. The Gujarat and Latur earthquakes were reported as breaking news events with a detailing of numbers as the death tolls mounted but little follow-up coverage was undertaken.

One obvious reason for the vast reportage is technology. Technology has brought the tragedy closer home to millions worldwide. Immediate transmission of the devastation has been made possible through satellite phones, increasingly then uplinking of footage becomes so much easier. Even if current affairs channels offered their regular, limited coverage, there are enough internet links, blogs, amateur videos and cell phone images to connect with a global audience content to watch recycled videos with a sense of foreboding. An increasing migrant population located in the west, too, has changed the rules of the game. Today networks necessarily need to promote diversity. They need to think locally, act globally or perish.

9/11, also played a key role in the reaction of the Western especially the American media.  Scan the coverage, it seems that America had a personal stake in this disaster. CNN reported on school children in New York who were writing letters to those children affected by the tsunami because of the mail they had received in the aftermath of 9/11.

Then there are the some not so obvious reasons. It can be argued, cynically perhaps, that this was not really an exclusively Asian tragedy at all which, therefore, dictated intense coverage. The west was also impacted and significantly too, if you look at the proportion of their population. Over 2, 000 Swedes are still missing, 600 are known to have died. Sixteen Americans are confirmed dead and 20 are still missing, 42 Britishers have died and 159 are expected to be likely victims. In a daily afternoon show on CNN, host Larry King continuously talks to American survivors or those looking for their children. In Europe, both CNN and BBC covered live the three-minute silence for the victims of the tsunami.

Even more critically it can also be interpreted that such never before in-depth coverage has served a larger political agenda. After having offered a niggardly amount for relief initially the American President George Bush guiltily escalated the America’s commitment to $350 million. The tsunami tragedy was also an occasion to reduce the negative impression of America’s aggressive role in Iraq. Images of American largesse and sympathy to the world’s largest Muslim country was in plentiful evidence: President Bush visiting the missions of affected countries in Washington, secretary of state Colin Powell and brother of the American president, Governor Jeb Bush, swooping down to Ache, sturdy marines helping frail, traumatized victims, helicopters carrying relief material to a thankful nation. Maybe the American media has realised that one picture can be worth a thousand wrongdoings.

Contact:   mannika@vsnl.com