Tragedy timeline

MEDIA AND PARENTING

Namitha Dipak

 

 

How many days does it take a child-centric tragedy  to slide off centre-stage in the print media?  While in Bangalore for a month recently, I was provided with a text-book example of how rapidly things can peak and plateau out. And the answer at least with reference to this particular incident is: about a fortnight.

 

On May 30^th 2009, a six-year-old boy Abhishek and his mother were walking outside their house in a Bangalore locality during a thunderstorm. The mother slipped and fell, accidentally letting go of the boy’s hand. The boy was swept away into a storm water drain, and was never found, despite the efforts of the municipality and the army (Madras Engineering Group). The heart-rending incident was reported widely in the newspapers, local TV channels and even led to the appointment of a "Drainage correspondent" by a local TV channel (News 9 channel, June 11 2009) to report on Bangalore’s notorious roads and drains.

 

Newspapers can provide an important timeline for official action, and they are much easier to track than television coverage. Tracking newspaper reports in the Bangalore edition of The Times of India, starting from June 1^st 2009, I found that it took less than a week for issues between officials to surface and be reported often at greater length than the actual tragedy. It took less than a week (June 5 2009, The Times of India) for the state government to form a team to probe the Abhishek incident, and declare that Rs. 4000 crores would be spent in cleaning the 885 km storm water drains. It took a fortnight for Dr S. Subramanya, Commissioner of the Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) to be replaced by Bharat Lal Meena (June 14 2009). Sadly, it took just a fortnight from the date he disappeared for the search for Abhishek to be called off. On June 18^th 2009, a public notice was published in the newspapers declaring that action would be taken against those who dumped waste which obstructs smooth flow of rain water and clogged drains, a sad reminder of the cause of this tragedy. Life had to go on. Another cause had to be found.

 

It may be argued that the media is merely reporting events as they happen, but it would be an extremely naïve person who would believe that in this age. People look up to the media with great hope. Here is an example of the people’s trust in the power of the media which The Times of India reported quite candidly:  "We got Rs. 1 lakh, but is it possible to get more money from the government? Can the media help us?" asked Abhishek’s uncle Jayaraj" (The Times of India, June 4 2009). The media is no longer playing a benign role as news provider, but also appears to play the role of campaigner. The only problem with being a campaigner for a cause is that objectivity could fly out of the window unless someone takes extra pains to retain it.   

 

The coverage in The Times of India about Dr S. Subramanya the then Commissioner of the BBMP was caustic, highlighting his comments in an interview  ("Mother should have been  careful", June 3, 2009), and on the same they day they highlighted that the BBMP had disbursed compensation before the body was traced ("Search for Abhishek dries up, Family paid compensation of 1 lakh"). Other incidents including a defamation case filed by Mr. Subramanya against the Lok Ayukta which was later withdrawn, and his eventual transfer to a different post continued to be highlighted in the newspapers.  Throughout the fortnight, the letters from the public (both city and general columns), interviews with the public, prominent citizens and campaigners, the newspaper’s own reporters, continued to highlight the BBMP’s shortcomings, the woes of the people and sorry state of the city’s drainage system. Fine, that’s a good thing for the citizens and to help prevent tragedies in the future.  But it was particularly laughable to see  the ease with which The Times of India tried to be generous in its praise after the Commissioner’s exit was imminent :"It’s a tough job well done: controversies aside, Subramanya changed cityscape in two years" (June 13 2009). 

 

In this age of vibrant visual media and strident anchors, it is easy to feel that the print media is much more controlled and objective. However nuances in tone and implications are possible even here. The simple things like what statements are taken in a pullout or in a subtitle do make a difference to the reader. Here is an example. In his interview to the Deccan Herald the incoming Commissioner Mr Meena said that "citizens should also remain alert to avoid any mishaps in their surroundings" ("Parks and lakes are my priority: Bharat Lal Meena", subtitled "Citizens should be alert to avoid mishaps", June 14 2009).  In a sense, this statement is not very different from what the erstwhile Commissioner Dr Subramanya had said in the interview "Mother should have been careful" (The Times of India, June 3 2009) yet take a look at the difference in the titling.

 

Positive results from media coverage do take place in the country, so it is  difficult to understand why the media has to try and find a scapegoat or bay for someone’s blood every time. It not just leaves a bad impression about journalistic standards, it also diverts attention away from what should be the most important concern at the time: the child victim.