PIL No.56 and more guidelines
News Broadcasters Association, Specific Guidelines Covering Reportage
In furtherance of the principles of self-regulation as contained in NBA¿s Code of Ethics & Broadcasting Standards, the following Guidelines set-out specific standards which are to be adhered to by member-broadcasters.
Fundamental Standards
All reporting must be done keeping in view the following supervening criteria:
A. All news reporting must be done in "public interest".
B. Reporting should not sensationalise or create panic, distress or undue
fear among viewers.
C. ‘Content’ of matter broadcast should not be shown out of ‘context’.
D. Subjects which promote horror, supernatural, superstition, occultism,
exorcism, divination, and the paranormal should be avoided.
E. Broadcasters should exercise care and objectivity in featuring
activities, beliefs, practices, or views of any racial or religious group
in their content to prevent any negative impact thereof.
F. "Reconstruction" of events, when shown, should be clearly so
marked, and to be consistent with these Guidelines.
G. Broadcasters should eschew unhealthy competition that may lead to
deterioration of broadcasting standards.
1. Accuracy
1.1 Information should be gathered first-hand from more than one source, if
possible.
1.2 Reports received from news-agencies should be attributed and where
possible be verified.
1.3 Allegations should be reported accurately as made.
1.4 Use of archival material should be clearly labeled "file" and preferably also
state date and time of initial broadcast.
1.5 Errors of fact should be corrected at the earliest, giving sufficient
prominence to the broadcast of the correct version of fact(s).
1.6 Facts should be clearly distinguishable from, and not be mixed-up with,
opinion, analysis and comment.
2. Impartiality, Neutrality & Fairness
2.1 For balanced reportage, broadcasters should remain neutral and ensure that
diverse views are covered in their reporting, especially on a controversial
subject, without giving undue prominence to any particular view.
2.2 In editing content, broadcasters should ensure that there is no distortion of
the facts and events being reported or of the views expressed.
2.3 Broadcasters should not use information or pictures obtained through
misrepresentation or deception. (For Sting Operation guidelines see
separate section below)
3. Law & Order, Crime & Violence
3.1 Content should not glamorize or sensationalize crime or condone criminal
actions, including suicide.
3.2 Content should not depict techniques of crime that may tempt imitation,
especially with reference to terrorism and suicide.
3.3 Reports on crime should not amount to prejudging or pre-deciding a matter
that is, or is likely to be, sub judice.
3.4 No publicity should be given to the accused or witnesses that may interfere
in the administration of justice or be prejudicial to a fair trial.
3.5 Identities of victims should not be disclosed in cases of sexual crimes and
violence on women and children.
3.6 The dead must be treated with respect. Close-ups of dead or mutilated
bodies should not be shown.
3.7 Violence must not be depicted solely for its own sake, or for its gratuitous
exploitation or to pander to sadistic or other perverted tastes. Scenes with
excessive violence or suffering such as close-up shots of persons being
subject to brutality, torture or being killed and visual depiction of such
matter should be avoided.
3.8 Broadcasters should not glamorize or in any way promote individuals,
groups or organizations that employ or advocate the use of violence or
engage in criminal / nefarious activity. Hooliganism, vandalism and all
forms of delinquency should not be shown in favorable light.
3.9 Live broadcast of sensitive and distressing material without prior scrutiny
by senior editorial personnel should be avoided.
4. Good Taste & Decency, Sex & Nudity
4.1 In selecting content, broadcasters should abide by current norms and mores
of decency and taste, in visuals, language and behaviour, keeping in mind
the context in which any visuals, language or behaviour occurs, including
the broadcast time, type of content, target audience, use of parental
advisories, cautions and content classification.
4.2 Content that contains violent or sexual material, crude, offensive, or coarse
language or other content likely to disturb or offend even a reasonable adult
viewer should be avoided.
4.3 Subjects dealing with incest and sexual abuse, especially of children, must
be handled with extreme care and sensitivity.
4.4 Combination of violence and sexuality designed in a manner that titillates
should not be shown.
4.5 Coverage of killings, including terrorist attacks, executions and
assassinations, should not be explicit or prolonged.
5. Privacy
5.1 Broadcasters should exercise discretion and sensitivity when reporting on
distressing situations, on grief and bereavement.
5.2 Persons should not be featured in content in a manner that denigrates or
discriminates against sections of the community on account of race, age,
disability, sex, sexual orientation¸ occupation, religion, cultural or political
beliefs.
5.3 Content that would cause unwarranted distress to surviving family
members, including by showing archival footage, should be avoided.
5.4 No information relating to the location of a person’s home or family should
be disclosed without permission from the concerned person.
5.5 Surreptitious recording of any person or event should only be made without
committing any illegality and if editorially justified.
5.6 Interviews of the injured, victims or grieving persons should be conducted
only with prior consent of the persons or where applicable their guardian.
6. National Security
6.1 Broadcasters should not disclose confidential information of operations
involving national security.
6.2 Broadcasters should use due discretion in reporting on operational methods
used by perpetrators of serious offences against the State during the
occurrence of the event.
6.3 Live interviews with perpetrators should not be aired.
6.4 Reporting of events which erodes public confidence in the capacity of
national institutions meant to protect them should be avoided during the
occurrence of the event.
6.5 Broadcasters should not reveal technical details of operations, to prevent
information relating to strategies and operations of security agencies
becoming known to the perpetrators.
7. Supernatural, Occultism & Paranormal
7.1 Subjects promoting horror, supernatural, superstition, occultism, exorcism,
divination, and the paranormal, which may be frightening to children should
be avoided.
7.2 Belief in superstition, occultism, exorcism, divination and the paranormal
should not be promoted.
8. Children’s Interests
8.1 Broadcasters should not screen content that would disturb or alarm children
or tend to have a deleterious effect on their psyche during their normally
accepted viewing times.
8.2 At other times, broadcasters should use appropriate parental advisories,
cautions and content classification. Content relating to or containing antisocial
behaviour, domestic friction, drug-use, smoking, alcohol-use, graphic
violence, menacing or horrifying imagery, sexual material, crude, offensive
or coarse language or other content that is likely to disturb, alarm or
otherwise affect the psyche of, or cause distress to, children should be
avoided.
9. Racial & Religious Harmony
9.1 Racial and religious stereotyping should be avoided.
9.2 Caution should be exercised in reporting content which denigrates or is
likely to offend the sensitivities of any racial or religious group or that may
create religious intolerance or disharmony.
10. Sting Operations
10.1 Sting operations should only be conducted in "public interest" and when no
other means is available to obtain the requisite information, without any
illegality or inducement and subject to the legitimate right to privacy.
10.2 Broadcasters should resort to sting operations only if editorially justified, for
exposing wrong-doing, particularly of the public facets of people in public
life.
10.3 No sting operation should be conducted except with the concurrence of the
person overall in-charge of editorial function; and the Managing Director
and/or the Chief Executive Officer of the broadcaster should also be kept
fully informed of any sting operation.
10.4 Sting operations should be so conducted as to obtain "evidence" of an
offence but not to induce "commission" of an offence.
The Hoot urges you to send feedback on these guidelines to nbanewdelhi@gmail.com
PIL no. 56
The Petition
TO THE HONOURABLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND OTHER PUISNE JUDGES OF THE HIGH COURT AT
My name is Vishal Dadlani. I was born in
Just like the rest of the world, from the moment I learnt of the attacks, I stayed up watching television. I saw our local Police try to figure things out, I watched our valiant Officers Karkare, Salaskar and Kamte arrive, and almost immediately, lose their lives. I saw the NSG and Marcos arrive and started to watch each step of their operation, when suddenly, realization dawned! Over the next thirty or forty hours, I watched, helpless and frustrated, as our very own electronic media did things that seemed blatantly wrong to me.
What they were broadcasting in the name of the news, were in fact the exact operational procedures, locations, and actions of our anti-insurgency forces! Minute-by-minute!
I don¿t know anything about how the Armed Forces work, and I understand nothing of terrorist-strikes and the correct media procedures involved. There are a few questions I would like to bring up, and have answered, though.
1. Is it acceptable to us that what should have been a classified operation, was in fact an open book? Are we fine with the fact that terrorists inside the besieged buildings could have had real-time access to the same news channels that we did, thus giving them complete and thorough information about the actions of our forces? Is it condonable, that some of our men may have been placed at a disadvantage (and even killed) due to the fact that the very terrorists they were trying to locate and subdue, probably knew every detail of their positions and plans?
The electronic media may defend their position with the "Freedom of the Press" slogan that has been so often invoked, but I beg to differ. I think that in the absence of responsible self-censorship, the media must be instructed to act in a particular manner, as required by on-ground reality.
The TV channels may try and say that their "live" feeds are slightly delayed, thus reducing their relevance to the terrorists. However, consider a terrorist inside a building, who has no information as to how and from which direction the forces are approaching. Then, consider the same terrorist, a few minutes later, with complete details as to where the forces have entered from, and obviously, the direction of their approach.
It was approximately forty hours after the attacks began, (and I¿m told, on repeated requests from the I & B ministry) that some channels started to point their cameras away from the operations, and started to say things like "without giving away too much detail"! Too little, too late perhaps?
This was obviously a huge mistake. I think it¿s crucial that this blunder not be repeated, and to that effect, a code of conduct be created for the electronic media in times of national crisis.
The electronic media must not be allowed to show a live anti-terrorist operation until it is safely concluded! They must obey when they are told to disperse, and they must respect cordons created by the operating force.
2. Another question I¿d like to ask is whether it¿s correct, both morally and legally, for a TV channel to broadcast to the Nation, an alleged live phone call, purportedly from one of the terrorists. The perpetrators of a colossal crime against our Nation, being allowed to air their vitriolic propaganda on one of our own news channels! Does this seem wrong to anyone else?
3. Some TV channels also had "live-and-direct" phone conversations with guests within the hotels, in which the said guests divulge their locations and room numbers. I can¿t see the point, or the newsworthiness of this. Someone who has managed to get away to a relatively safe place, unknown to the terrorists, is made to give up his location. The guest, of course, assumes it will assist the rescue operation if he tells them where he is, but the TV channels broadcast this information, possibly even to the terrorists themselves. Is this OK by us? I sincerely hope not!
This is a time of great anger for
If we can all make or facilitate one change each, I think it will add up to making a huge difference! I ask all of you to join in and sign the following petition. Hopefully the Courts will take cognizance of our opinion, and help us to make this small change that will keep our Nation and the defenders of this Nation a little safer in any future eventuality of this nature.
PETITION TO THE HIGH COURT OF MUMBAI:
We, the undersigned, citizens of
1. That this Hon¿ble Court call for the complete and unedited footage from all TV News Channels broadcasting the attacks ¿live¿, starting from 9:30pm on Wednesday 26th November 2008 and until the morning of Saturday the 29th November 2008 and examine the same by itself or through any appropriate agency as appointed by it, to investigate and determine the manner in which sensitive information pertaining to the movement of Counter-Insurgency Operations was broadcast ¿live¿.
2. That this Hon¿ble Court take cognizance of the broadcast of inflammatory propaganda (if any), on any such TV News Channels, and an appropriate Writ Order or Direction be passed by the Court against such TV News Channels as this Hon¿ble Court may deem fit and proper.
3. That this Hon¿ble Court make and issue such other Writ, Order and Direction as it may deem appropriate directing the Authorities to formulate a model Code-of-Conduct within a fixed time frame; that be made mandatory to the TV News Channels, to regulate the ¿Live¿ broadcast of such and similar eventualities and operations.
4. That this
Sincerely,
Vishal Dadlani
and
The Undersigned
(25188 signatories)