Log has written
MONDAY, NOVEMBER 23, 2009

In the wake of 26/11, television channels have come under attack for their coverage. Last week, the information and broadcasting ministry proposed to amend cable TV rules to impose media curbs during emergencies. Broadcasters are up in arms over this assault on freedom of speech.

Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on Wednesday assured broadcasters that coverage wouldn’t be curbed without the “widest” consultations with all stakeholders, though it’s not clear what “widest” consultations entail or who these stakeholders are. But it’s encouraging to see that the government is thinking this over. Press freedom has served the nation well, and it’s unwise to grant bureaucrats powers they can abuse.

That said, TV channels are no saints. Coverage of Mumbai’s 60-hour siege may have aided terrorists and compromised security operations. In such times, free speech comes with certain responsibilities: self-regulation is a must. Else, news outlets could invite more public wrath.

Tags - Find More Articles On:
 
Mihir Said:


Dear Editor, Coming from a press background, you might have a natural inclination towards defending the freedom of speech and we all should surely be entitled to it in an ideal world. But as you rightly pointed out, TV channels - or any form of media for that matter - need to exercise self-regulation and in the era of Rajat Kapoors, I don't see that happening. I am not in support of compromising on the security of our officers. I'd rather compromise on getting live updates from the Taj or wherever.

Posted On 1/19/2009 11:08:54 AM
vinay Said:


Well here is a call we need to take. What do we really want? Updates (read entertainment) or security of the people who are there fighting these terrorists. I dont think we mind getting delayed telecast but TV channels surely does as it for sure affects the TRP they get through live telecast. What a pity......

Posted On 1/29/2009 1:57:39 PM