Kate Newman

By Kate Newman

Press coverage of the recent attacks in Mumbai has raised ethical concerns. Journalists were criticized for showing disturbing footage that risked giving terrorists sensitive information: one view of commandos entering the Nairman House, home to the orthodox Jewish group Chabad Lubavitch, shortly after the attack, depicted facts that could be used to compromise the safety of those still inside. Another journalist was accused of delaying ambulances carrying the wounded in order to get an exclusive shot. Still another Indian news channel was denounced for repeatedly broadcasting the demands of the terrorists.

The Indian Ministry of Information and Broadcasting warned media professionals against glorifying the attacks through incessant coverage. According to a report by Indiantelevision.com, the Ministry stated that “repeated visuals and stories pertaining to the attack, which would make the perpetrators feel their attack was a ‘success’, should, therefore, now be avoided.” Officials specified that showing such graphic images both upsets the dignity of the dead and affects viewers emotionally, leading to public panic.

In cases of terrorism, there appears to be a fine line between conveying necessary information to an anxious and interested public, and further terrifying audiences. This question was addressed by Mariane Pearl, journalist and widow of reporter Daniel Pearl who was murdered by terrorists in Karachi in 2002. Following her husband’s death, Pearl spoke out against the CBS decision to show footage of his beheading. Stating that the sole purpose of the video was to terrify people, Pearl expressed her disappointment and anger over this broadcast that ultimately assisted terrorists in their objective. She pointed out that the footage was not newsworthy, since her husband’s murder had already been made public.

Of course, the public has the right to be informed of such events—how then, can the media convey information to the public without furthering the goals of terrorists, glorifying their actions by broadcasting them to millions of viewers?

The situation in Mumbai following the November 2008 attacks has been a test of professional ethics for the Indian media. While some journalists have responded defensively, others have acknowledged mistakes. Barkha Dutt of New Delhi Television writes on the NDTV website that “in journalism, we know that praise and criticism are twins that travel together. And we welcome both and try to listen to both carefully.”