Did the Indian media give away too much info to the bad guys? NDTV (India) responds

One of the many concerns voiced by several Indians ,who watched the almost 3 day attack on Mumbai, which began on Nov. 26th, 2008, was that the "too close to the action" live coverage of Indian news channels of the entire event may have communicated important information about the anti-terrorist operations conducted by the Indian military back to the terrorists. Live coverage of army operations against terrorists holed up in the Taj and the Trident (formerly Oberoi) hotels and the Nariman House apartment building in Mumbai, could have perhaps been a factor in the terrorists being able to successfully hold out against the Indian military for so long. The fact that the terrorists had Blackberrys and satellite phones supports this theory as well.

Now one of the Indian news channels, NDTV, has responded to these concerns via their senior correspondent/reporter Barkha Dutt.

Several statements stand out from her op-ed piece. Here's one:

"Please do note that at all times, the media respected the security cordon- a cordon that was determined by the police and officials on site- and NOT by the media. If, as is now being suggested, the assessment is that the media was allowed too close to the operations, here is what we say: we would have been happy to stand at a distance much further away from the encounter sites, had anyone, anyone at all, asked us to move. In the 72 hours that we stood on reporting duty, not once were we asked to move further away."

It's clear that there really was no coordinated strategy on how to deal with media coverage between the various security agencies involved in the anit-terrorist operations. as she outlines in her piece:

"Across the world, and as happened in the US after 9/11, there are daily, centralized briefings by officials to avoid any inadvertent confusion that media coverage may throw up. Not so in Mumbai. There was no central point of contact or information for journalists who were often left to their own devices to hunt down news that they felt had to be conveyed to their country. No do's and don'ts were provided by officials."

The op-ed piece also has a whole lot of self-congratulatory language in it as well - detailing how several important folks thanked NDTV in particular for their coverage of the whole event. I noticed the same in TV spots on the various other Indian news channels as well - congratulating or self-promoting themselves in some way or the other. Some of the accompanying stunts included: encouraging people to light candles (this is actually clever: the number of candles lit across the country would convey to that particular channel the proportion of people actually watching their channel - so much better than TRP ratings. Besides, lighting of candles is becoming off late a popular response to tragic events. This first began in response to the then fast-going-nowhere investigation on who killed Jessica Lal. The movie "Rang De Basanti", an Aamir Khan starrer earlier in 2006, may have provided the inspiration in the Lal case. I saw candles being lit in a few places across Mumbai), observing a minute of silence in respect, showing 30 second, 1 min and 2 min spots of clippings of the terror attack coverage with accompanying grim music and such, and various others.

Nevertheless, they provided the transparency that such things lacked in previous situations. One hopes that this transparency ensures that officialdom can no longer spin excuses in such situations. These channels, while frequently not reporting with any reasonable levels of journalistic integrity, are providing a medium for the disgruntled populace to express themselves, and ask tough questions, and for millions of others to hear them and sympathize with them, and wait, along with them for a response to those questions.