With the advent of broadcast journalism in the last quarter century and in a more concentrated variety in the past decade, the ‘news’ that Nepal has seen is having controversial effects on its viewers the country over. [break]
The development in technology and a globalized media network has meant that information is available as and when events unfold. While previously one would have to rely on the medium of voice alone (via the radio) or wait till the next morning for print coverage, the situation as it stands now is such that one is able to receive reports of incidents ‘live,’ as they are happening; and this too, with the assistance of voice and graphic mediums concurrently. The combination of such technology has meant that the manipulation of news, whether it be driven by political and economic interests or meager carelessness, is hardly a difficulty.
Such broadcast journalism has come under the scrutiny of media watchdogs for its ‘unreliability,’ ‘deviation from facts,’ and general complacency on the part of these channels who are too often reckless in their approaches. There have been allegations of sensationalized reporting, proving to garner fear towards various factions of society, and creating unease among the masses, which at times have resulted in serious civilian backlash.
The graphic reality
The news that is projected onto television screens all over Nepal is now plastered with images of gruesome violence, blood, immense poverty and the like. Alongside this is the masala reporting and voiceover. The broadcast media we see today, an interchangeable combination of visual and verbal reporting, has “on the one hand provided the public with immediate access to information and news. But, this kind of reporting has been handled in an extremely irresponsible manner,” says P. Kharel, director of the Press Institute Nepal.
Whereas only a decade ago, as Nepal’s media was struggling to free itself from the grasps of censorship, today, images of dead bodies, splattered blood and starving children, hand in hand with sensationalized reporting have become commonplace for the evening news to cover. According to Kharel, “No other South Asian country enjoys the extent of freedom of press that we as Nepali’s do.” However, our “code of ethics is simply not comprehensive.”
It has been a contentious issue of concern among many that “unverified information is constantly being highlighted,” adds Kharel. And this rings true time and again. Unverified information, alongside their visual footage, work in a combination to often “terrorize the masses,” writes Jagat Nepal, in the discussion paper for South Asian Free Media Associan’s (SAFMA) recent seminar on the situation and impacts of Nepali channel’s ‘breaking news’.
The images and footage that is aired is often “uncensored and not socially sensitive,” says Suraj Acharya of Image Television. He refers to the notion that there are many stories which are aired that show no sensitivity to both the viewers and the subjects of the report.
Graphical coverage does not however simply refer to violent and gruesome images. The revealing of identities, both deceased and alive, has been a common cause of concern. This has been made clear through the broadcast media’s coverage of the recent police raid of a disco frequented by students. The students’ faces were made public, without once considering the situation of these victims. Similarly, stories which must allow for cultural and social sensitivity, such as prostitution, also have been mishandled, says Rajneesh Bhandari, a reporter at Kantipur Television.
“There are many cases where identities need to be blurred, close-ups should be avoided, and some degree of responsibility needs to be taken,” argues Acharya, who is a desk editor at Image Television. However, he realizes that not only has this not been implemented, there are those that are intentionally providing close-ups and gruesome images to increase viewing.
Manufacturing consent?
And to increase viewer numbers, it is not just the graphics that are being handled irresponsibly. The actual news content has only assisted in the manipulation of the news. News channels are not “verifying information,” says Bhandari. The news is, to many extents, sensationalized so much that approximations and guesses are ‘manufactured’ as truths. In Shiva Gaunle’s recent commentary in Himal Khabarpatrika, he examines the ways in which the mass media reported this month’s Maoists-called indefinite strike. Accounting for some news coverage on a few television channels, he mentions the ways in which reporters were, instead of reporting on news, “the correspondents started answering (the anchor’s questions) by providing their own takes on what were happening… the TV journalists were making up their own news.”
Furthermore, during the course of the almost weeklong strike while TV channels were airing live coverage on the ground, Gaunle examines the ways in which reporters were manipulating the answers received by the protestors on the ground. One Maoist protestor was asked by a reporter if the andolan would bring down the ‘puppet government,’ to which the protestor replied, “I’m not sure.” The reporter then turned to the camera and explained how the protestors “weren’t going back until the fall of the government.” The reporter in this case simply ignored or exaggerated the reply given by the Maoist supporter.
Alongside the graphic imagery, the unreliable and somewhat made-up reporting, the in-studio interviews with commentators and analysts also are an issue of debate. In one interview, the interviewee questioned, “You can’t heed the Maoists’ demands to change the government, can you?,” making it clear the loyalties of the anchor to the present government’s stance.
Thus, the combination of the alarming graphical imagery, the unreliable reporting and commentaries, a pattern followed by all broadcast media houses propounded all sorts of agendas, differing from station to station. This habit was certainly not contained within the confines of the strike that was called, but has been a characteristic feature of broadcast journalism in Nepal more generally.
Messing with the mind
And this kind of irresponsible journalism has not been without costs. From the outcry and civil disobedience created by the Hritik Roshan episode almost a decade ago to more recently the role the media played in making success of Jana Andolan II, the media, and particularly broadcast media, has a huge hand in shaping political and social thoughts. What CK Lal defines as “agenda-driven reporting”, it has employed graphical imagery when in support of a particular agenda, but ignored when not.
He argues that a “trash addiction” has developed, especially among the urban middle classes of Nepal. “If you go to the villages, it’s apparent to them that only half of what’s seen can be believed” he says. Thus, the argument being that those who do consume TV reporting as truth are being affected in a variety of ways.
For the average consumer, the fear factor is heightened to all extents when the nation is in a state of crisis because of the irresponsible reports airing out of nearly every media house.
“The media houses are creating violence, and this is reflecting on the reaction of the masses,” says Bhandari. He furthers that, with the nation at such a critical juncture, it is necessary that the viewers “are aware about what news is, what advertising is, and most importantly, what propaganda is.”
However, according to Dr Bishwa B. Sharma, a sociology professor at Kathmandu University, “Such images have different impacts on different people,” and this is something that the media houses must keep in mind.
“While they may not affect some people very much, others are left with a phobia, with fear, and in the worst cases, feelings of aggression, thrill, or curiosity,” he furthers. Sharma argues that the way in which such images are processed in the mind has a “very negative” impact on people.
Similarly, in terms of civil unrest, the impacts are colossal. “A TV journlist at a conference said that for him, choosing news headlines is a ‘gamble.’ However, how important is a man’s career when these headlines may be the cause of civil unrest tomorrow?,” says CK Lal. And that is precisely the case. The choice of news, their corresponding images and footage are having a profound impact on societal behavior and action that, at times, can lead to national content or discontent, based solely on the mediums through which the masses are receiving information. This causes one to question exactly what the motivations behind such irresponsible journalism are.
The causal factors
“The main issue is competition. In the span of one decade, a handful of TV networks have surfaced which has increased competition for news, for advertising, for viewership and profit,” says Kharel, who has spent the past few years analyzing media activity in the country. He goes on to explain that getting hold of licenses for starting up media houses is no longer the challenge it used to be, and thus new channels have been cropping up on a regular basis, increasing competition.
“The advertising pie is not big enough,” says CK Lal, reiterating the fact that with so many channels, so little news, and a limited number of advertisers, the news is being manipulated in order to attract advertising. This is why, according to Kharel’s insight on the matter, carrying critical news of advertisers has always been an issue. But the news does not even have to criticize directly the station’s advertisers in order for the companies to hold advertising.
“Everyone wants to break news first, and this at the expense of reliability and credibility, because the more breaking news, the larger the viewership, and thus the more ads one is likely to get,” says Acharya.
However, it’s not all stations that are doing this. “We realize that this is the case, but we’ll not break news unless verified. We try our best,” he adds. Kharel goes on to explain the ways in which “advertising patronage” is always considered when dealing with news coverage.
And even within the competition, Acharya sees a difference between those channels which run 24-hours news and those that are variety channels.
“For the 24-hour channels, the competition is tougher. There is only so much news, but if news is all they have, then they need to find ways to keep it interesting,” he says.
Whereas the TV channels that air other programs, whether they be for social or entertainment values, only have short news bulletins by the hour while the strictly-news channels have to find news to air 24 hours of the day. “And this means that they are often irresponsible, rushed or sensationalized.”
However, another immense factor that is playing into the kind of reports that are being seen is “the lack of qualifications and training of the journalists,” concedes Bhandari. He argues that many of the broadcast journalists come from a print journalism background and have no real training on what it means to be a broadcast journalist, and not fully aware of the social and political sensitivities involved. He is of the opinion that even colleges in Nepal are not focusing on broadcast journalism as a separate entity to that of their print and radio counterparts.
“Ratna Rajya [RR] Campus, a major national college, does not even offer it as a separate kind of journalism. And even in places where they offer broadcast journalism, it isn’t taken seriously and the resources aren’t sufficient,” he adds.
These journalists are given the benefit of doubt all too often. “If they tell us a certain number of people have died in a certain catastrophe, we work on the basis of trust, and hope their sources are verified,” says Acharya. However, he admits that sometimes, “we do get the wrong information, the sources aren’t always reliable, but we’ve already broadcast the news and have to pull them off air.”
What is also an issue to be raised is the consumerist nature of the viewers. “We have to give the viewers what they want,” says Acharya. As news consumers, an understanding of news as being inextricably linked to violence, plague and poverty means that the demand for such information far outweighs information about peace and progress. And this reality is a common phenomena the world over.
Thus, with competition booming, a scarcity in news and advertising alike, consumer demand for violence, and to top it off, a lacking in trained and professional journalists, the media houses are running in a systematic order of disarray and unreliability.
Back to the future
Having said this, broadcast journalism in Nepal is still in its infant years. “There’s much room for improvement, and it’s not like we haven’t progressed at all,” says Kharel. While there are inherent problems with the ways in which news reports are being broadcast, it is impossible to deny the fact that these channels, as a collective, have made it that much easier for the public to at least know what is happening in the world around them.
“I think that with time, and if we begin to realize our faults, learn social and political sensitivity and develop means through which we can become credible and objective, the positive will soon begin to outweigh the negative,” states Bhandari.
The issues that need to be addressed can be handled through the “reshaping of editorial policies, and insuring their independence and creating a generic style that must be followed by all,” writes Jagat Nepal in his paper. However, if these notions are not incorporated by the media houses in the near future, and without having considered mistakes of the past, the results are “likely to be catastrophic,” says Bhandari.
In the meantime, it is important to “create awareness” about the credibility of the news and how much of it should be taken at face value. On par with the viewpoint of CK Lal, the masses “know when they are being taken for a ride,” and if that much is known, the demand for credibility will follow. For now, ‘breaking news,’ and ‘flash news,’ may not be providing a holistic picture of reality, but what is certain is that society is no longer compelled to wait for the verdict in papers the morning after, either.
Related story
Public Service Broadcasting Bill passed by both houses
