Well said !! This is the the BEST post I have read in the past 37 hours reg. this issue.
Singlehoop
· 1 year ago
It's right that if you cut off the publicity this gets them there is no point in them doing it. However, if you let the media decide what is and what isn't reported you are on dangerous ground.
vimoh
· 1 year ago
This is where citizen media comes in.
Besides, I am not letting the media decide. I am tired of letting them decide. I am just asking them to shut up and try to look beyond their immediate interests.
Aditya Sengupta
· 1 year ago
Amen!
Singlehoop
· 1 year ago
In England when the IRA were at the height of their power, our government made it law that the leaders of the IRA political wing were banned from talking on TV. We had the ridiculous situation where the media showed the video of them in interviews but had an actor saying the words they had said, so in effect the IRA weren't actually talking on TV but we still heard what they had said. I would like the forces round the world to take no prisoners in cases like Mumbai. Just shoot them dead and then they dont get their day in court. The SAS tried that once. The IRA were in Gibraltar to bomb Brits. The SAS knew their plans and shot them all dead on the street. The IRA took the British goverment to court claiming their men were killed illegaly. It makes your blood boil.
Singlehoop
· 1 year ago
Oh i should have said our courts said the killings were legal but the European Court of Human Rights ruled the so-called "Death on the Rock" killings breached the European Convention of Human Rights and we had to pay the IRAs legal costs.
Anshul Sushil
· 1 year ago
Right!...we should not pay attention to them and please stop glamorizing terrorists...they are just useless creatures!
harini calamur
· 1 year ago
and lets forget about their rights ... and i mean it.... rights are for citizens ... not those who are not.... and don't want to be !
vimoh
· 1 year ago
My point exactly.
Bored Sub
· 1 year ago
There's one thing the Indian media can't be accused of, and that's not being proactive. I know, some of the reporting is frighteningly bad, but when the administration is asleep on the wheel, it's somewhat comforting to know there's an entity that's going out of its way to make sense of this mess.
vimoh
· 1 year ago
There's an entity going out of it's way alright. But how much sense does broadcasting covert operation on live TV make? Proactivity is one thing. Sheer insensitivity is another.
Sekhar
· 1 year ago
They are not humans. They moment they begin killing innocent people, they are no longer humans. They deserved to be killed. Unfortunately the Human Rights Commission and the government are too dumb to realise this.
vimoh
· 1 year ago
The government does realise this. They just want to play politics.
I say if one is a citizen of the country he better at least respect the law of the land. If they don't, they lose the privileges the country lets them have.
brijesh
· 1 year ago
i am too surprised, too foxed to say anything now -- just can't believe this happened. The bastards, they pulled it off -- easy to criticize but then the fact remains that as far as security/intelligence is concerned, there is total, complete, absolute apathy towards duty -- the fiasco can't get worse than this. and yes, i would wish for all these terrorists to stay alive and suffer like hell and pls don't kill them and give them their whatever fucking jannat
vimoh
· 1 year ago
I couldn't agree more.
meha
· 1 year ago
The Indian Express Posted: Nov 29, 2008 at 0107 hrs IST AddThis Print Email Feedback Discuss
The Mumbai attacks were made-for-TV. Not just because of the sheer drama and spectacle unfolding in real time, but because in a larger sense, modern terrorism is a theatrical event that exploits and depends on the media. The terrorist act is both bang and echo, it is meant to reverberate in our consciousness through constant media attention.
Even as the hostage crisis raged, news reporters and anchors were solving it out loud. Reporters ferreted their way into the scene, giving moment-by-moment updates of security plans, and getting in the way of security operations. The home minister spectacularly put his foot in it, confiding the NSG's plans to the whole country via television channels which thoughtfully provided specific details on the planned movement of the security personnel, giving the terrorists in the hotel enough time and information to prepare for the ambush.
Vying for fresh material, they announced attacks where none had happened, backtracked shoddily, and some even claimed to have "interviewed" a terrorist. They harassed the hostages who had just escaped the gruelling experience, and plied their families with intrusive questions. Later, television channels were set limits, and broadcast was cut off to large parts of Mumbai.
It is depressing that it took this drastic step for sanity to be restored.
Certainly, television reporters can't be blamed for trying to glean as much information as possible, besiege officials with questions and bring their audiences as exhaustive a picture as possible — that's what journalists are meant to do. But these freedoms put on them enormous responsibilities. Television channels can voluntarily hold themselves to certain standards, as the News Broadcasters Association later did, but these are not binding strictures. And the fault lies as much with our enforcement officials, who compulsively over-shared details and made no attempt whatsoever to seal off the area or to collaborate with the media on what was permissible information, and what could compromise the operation.
viju, maybe those of us who still work for news organizations need to take responsiblity and at least bring this up with our colleagues.
i m relieved you are safe.
love.
vimoh
· 1 year ago
That is as sugar-coated an ed piece as ever could be expected. Truth is these people have fucked-up prioroties. You can't be an insensitive ass and then say, "hey, it's just my job!". If you act like a vampire, and talk like a vampire, then you ARE a vampire.
And no Meha. I am not safe.
Brett Legree
· 1 year ago
I agree with you wholeheartedly, as I had said to you on Twitter.
These "people" (more like animals) could have chosen to use words, but they did not.
So as far as I'm concerned, they do not deserve to have a voice anymore.
They gave up that privilege when they chose to murder innocents.
Ankur Dholakia
· 1 year ago
Its high time & as a common man we need to communicate what we expect out of these so called responsible agencies and also we need to live up to our fundamental duties by fulfilling them. First lets do that bcoz without our support its all in vain. Then if these agencies do not work we all will bang them together. Absolutely valid point bro.
All Comments
This is the the BEST post I have read in the past 37 hours reg. this issue.
Besides, I am not letting the media decide. I am tired of letting them decide. I am just asking them to shut up and try to look beyond their immediate interests.
rights are for citizens ... not those who are not.... and don't want to be !
I say if one is a citizen of the country he better at least respect the law of the land. If they don't, they lose the privileges the country lets them have.
and yes, i would wish for all these terrorists to stay alive and suffer like hell and pls don't kill them and give them their whatever fucking jannat
AddThis
Print Email Feedback Discuss
The Mumbai attacks were made-for-TV. Not just because of the sheer
drama and spectacle unfolding in real time, but because in a larger
sense, modern terrorism is a theatrical event that exploits and
depends on the media. The terrorist act is both bang and echo, it is
meant to reverberate in our consciousness through constant media
attention.
Even as the hostage crisis raged, news reporters and anchors were
solving it out loud. Reporters ferreted their way into the scene,
giving moment-by-moment updates of security plans, and getting in the
way of security operations. The home minister spectacularly put his
foot in it, confiding the NSG's plans to the whole country via
television channels which thoughtfully provided specific details on
the planned movement of the security personnel, giving the terrorists
in the hotel enough time and information to prepare for the ambush.
Vying for fresh material, they announced attacks where none had
happened, backtracked shoddily, and some even claimed to have
"interviewed" a terrorist. They harassed the hostages who had just
escaped the gruelling experience, and plied their families with
intrusive questions. Later, television channels were set limits, and
broadcast was cut off to large parts of Mumbai.
It is depressing that it took this drastic step for sanity to be restored.
Certainly, television reporters can't be blamed for trying to glean as
much information as possible, besiege officials with questions and
bring their audiences as exhaustive a picture as possible — that's
what journalists are meant to do. But these freedoms put on them
enormous responsibilities. Television channels can voluntarily hold
themselves to certain standards, as the News Broadcasters Association
later did, but these are not binding strictures. And the fault lies as
much with our enforcement officials, who compulsively over-shared
details and made no attempt whatsoever to seal off the area or to
collaborate with the media on what was permissible information, and
what could compromise the operation.
viju, maybe those of us who still work for news organizations need to take responsiblity and at least bring this up with our colleagues.
i m relieved you are safe.
love.
And no Meha. I am not safe.
These "people" (more like animals) could have chosen to use words, but they did not.
So as far as I'm concerned, they do not deserve to have a voice anymore.
They gave up that privilege when they chose to murder innocents.