Category: MxM JOURNALISM REVIEW

By Ranjona Banerji

 

The morning of November 8, 2015 was one of the most extraordinary in the annals of television news. The event was results day for Bihar state elections. We had whipped ourselves into a frenzy during the whole month of voting. Exit polls, predictions, astrologers, the underground betting market, the Intelligence Bureau were all discussed threadbare on TV, print and social media. Pundits and journeymen all gave us their considered viewpoints or shrieked louder than the rest.

 

The chatter began on November 8 just before 8 am. Most exit polls had predicted a win for the BJP, a few had gone with a close contest. By 8.30 am, all the English news channels and some language ones as well were predicting a massive win for BJP and friends. NDTV has long been the main channel for many to watch for election results, mainly because of Prannoy Roy, the man who introduced the word “psephelogy” or election forecasting to India and NDTV was clear with a BJP win.

 

At 8.30 am, I went on the Election Commission website. It showed no results or trends or leads because it said that counting in Round 1 was not complete. Where were these channels getting their figures from? By now, Shekhar Gupta, one of India’s most experienced journalists, was pontificating on how the anti-incumbency factor had done Nitish Kumar, Bihar chief minister, in. Across channels, various BJP spokespersons were looking smug and happy.

 

On Twitter, a completely different story was emerging. Figures from local reporters, from newspaper Twitter accounts (the Times of India was at complete odds with TimesNow here) and local news channels showed the Grand Alliance of Nitish Kumar, Lalu Yadav and the Congress well ahead and the BJP struggling to catch up. On India Today TV, political economist Surjit Bhalla, who had forecast a clear win for Nitish Kumar in his Indian Express column the week before (in spite of being a clear Narendra Modi supporter so far), told Rajdeep Sardesai to check his figures of a BJP win because social media and the Election Commission was saying something else altogether. Sardesai looked flummoxed.

 

This story was repeated between 8 and 9 am on all channels. I went to the Election Commission website just after 9 am. It showed the BJP leading in 5 constituencies and the Grand Alliance or Mahagathbandhan in 12. Soon after CNN-IBN made the first course correction and changed its figures around. However, it was the same CNN-IBN which decided not to carry the exit poll it had commissioned after the last round of voting. This was because Axis had given a huge majority to the Grand Alliance and CNN-IBN felt that this result went against the journalistic work it had done on the field.

 

NDTV sadly was the last English news channel to see the light and this has cost it considerable goodwill amongst its ardent followers who trusted it to be the most professional. NDTV has said that the information it got from Nielson was wrong and hence the errors.

 

There are some basic journalism problems here though. The first votes that are counted are the postal ballots. These are usually not representative of voting trends on the ground. Why then did all these news channels extrapolate such massive victory margins from postal ballots? Some had given the BJP a lead of about 30 seats and had reached the 100 mark for the party when counting in Round 1 had not even been declared. When you consider that the BJP by itself ultimately got only 53 seats overall, it shows journalistic sense at its worst.

 

It is also hard to understand why no one in those TV newsrooms had even opened the Election Commission website. Where were the reporters on the ground picking up information from the EC itself? It is the only counting authority. Why ask outside agencies for information that anyone with a smart phone could have accessed?

 

This was about the worst display of journalism that I have seen in recent times, mainly because the basics were ignored and no checks were carried out. It is tragic how TV news makes these mistakes over and over again in its desperate race for be first at everything. People come to the media for information and opinion not Bollywood extravaganzas. Social media is now a better weathervane and predictor. Like TV threatened and wounded the print media, TV news is getting a bashing from social media. A seasoned journalist told me that he only followed the results on Twitter and got an excellent sense of what was going on.

 

As they say in social media terms, TV was an “#EpicFail”.

 

**

 

And then we have exit polls. More often than not, they get it wrong. If one of six gets it right, that’s about the worst statistics of believability. That’s not an inexact science, that’s just wishing on the air. And then when one does get it right, the commissioning newsroom does not carry it. Go figure.

 

By Ranjona Banerji

 

No sooner had the terrible attack on Paris happened than the faultlines inherent in 24 hour news television exposed themselves. People barely had time to register what had happened, when the panel discussions started on the “why” and the “who”. Obviously the “who” and “why” are vital but the first focus has to be on “what”. Journalists and experts can surely hold their horses for a few hours as facts emerge before they start yelling at each other?

 

There are other stories yet to be done, vital news to be covered. Like the facts on the ground, details of each site of attack, the extent of suffering and damage, the official and personal response to the attacks, the human stories are all waiting to be told. For the viewer to be faced with analysis on a dynamic situation is both confusing and unnecessary.

 

Unfortunately, almost all 24 hour news channels, national and international, succumbed to the urge to try and solve the crime before the facts of the crime were fully known. Indian news channels had even less business starting with analysis than others given their thin presence in Paris but CNN and BBC World were no better.

 

Sadly, it is 24 hour news television that has the edge of all forms of journalism in events like these because it is not static. Twitter can be faster with the news at it happens, but it is still static. You have to engage two steps further to get to a picture or a video and so also with newspaper or journal websites. TV is still our best way of getting news during an event like this. But if TV decides to limit itself to a studio pontificating with one or two experts and no one has a clue as to what’s actually going on, then everyone is short-changed.

 

Given the debacle of the Bihar exit poll and election results just a few days ago, one expected TV news to be a bit more circumspect. But no such luck.

 

**

 

Of the discussions held in the evening of November 14 here in India, NDTV carried a sober, insightful and informative discussion with a range of experts on the Levant and ISIS and geopolitics, moderated by Sreenivasan Jain. Because there were no politicians present, the discussion stayed on course and the viewer came away with the feeling that he or she was better informed at the end of it. Such discussions are however extremely rare on Indian news television. The next day, we were back to the BJP and Congress yelling blue murder at each other, although neither party knew anything at all about the Paris attacks. Newspapers as even became the better bet for analysis, information, observation and expertise.

 

**

 

Just before these terrible attacks of course we in India were treated to quite another kind of journalism which has become all too common in India: the reporter as a cheerleader.

 

There was a time when international trips by Indian prime ministers meant that he or she was accompanied by seasoned and experienced journalists. They reported on the talks held and deals struck and the strategic, national and international impact. With the Prime Minister of India, Narendra Modi, however we see young, callow and star-struck journalists who would be better suited to covering glamour and film events.

 

The basis of Modi’s visit appeared to be, if you watched television, what Indian immigrants to the UK thought of him and why which singer was singing whatever song and the decorations at Wembley stadium, an extravaganza organised by Indian immigrants. Whatever other relevant and significant details there may have been about Modi’s visit to the UK were lost, ignored, deemed insignificant compared to what he ate with the queen of England.

 

This included the massive protests against Modi in the United Kingdom. If it wasn’t for social media, you would have barely known that there were any.

 

And when the Paris attacks happened, the rest of Modi’s trip was easily forgotten. Except for this remarkable story from PTI about where Modi’s official aeroplane was parked in Turkey. I have no further comment on this story except to say that we now need to start a new journal in India called “Parking News”.

 

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/G20-Air-India-One-gets-parking-slot-near-Air-Force-One/articleshow/49791173.cms

By Ranjona Banerji

 

We’re back then to the Sheena Bora murder case. All right, I’ll accept that. The CBI charge-sheet is ready, naming Indrani Mukerjea, Sanjeev Khanna and Shyam Rai for the murder of Bora. And the CBI threw in a whammy by arresting Peter Mukerjea, husband of Indrani and questioning him on his role.

 

Well, whammy because Indian news television broke into such a massive melodrama over this. Did the Mumbai cops favour Peter Mukerjea, how dare you speak when I’m talking, the media has no business in claiming to solve this case, how dare you tell the media what to do… And here we are in TV LaLa Land again.

 

CNNIBN was the most circumspect on the day the news broke, with Mumbai bureau chief Smitha Nair Rasquinha doing a proper reporter’s job with fact triumphing over editorialising. Quite admirable when you consider how often TV confuses fact with opinion. That day, NDTV decided to concentrate on the terrorist attack on Radisson Hotel in Mali and is thus out of this reckoning. The most high-decibel were NewsX (perhaps to scrub all memories of earlier connections with the Mukerjeas in the public mind?) and of course Times Now.

 

The target of both news channels appeared to be former Mumbai police commissioner Rakesh Maria. Arnab Goswami was particularly enraged with Maria, although as Rasquinha had pointed out earlier in the day that the CBI charge-sheet was substantially the same as the Mumbai Police’s case.

 

One guest was seen going from news channel to news channel saying that it was the media and the particular channel she was on which had helped solve the murder. Thus one keeps one’s chances of being re-invited alive again! The usual suspects were out in full force after that, each giving us their worthwhile 2-pice bit. I use that old-fashioned phrase deliberately. You can work out for yourself in today’s inflationary terms what 2 paise is worth right now.

 

The funniest was India Today TV which took us back to the life and times of Indrani Mukerjea’s career, full of the reporter’s own ideas of how a life should be lived and plenty of moral judgments. Of course, to be fair it is very easy to make moral judgments about Mukerjea’s past and present.

 

**

 

The other major causes for excitement on TV this week were Robert Vadra, son-in-law of Sonia Gandhi, Mulayam Singh Yadav’s birthday party and how dare Arvind Kejriwal hug LaluYadav.

 

**

 

The rest of the world meanwhile was concentrating on the challenges of terrorism, the Islamic State, the situation in Syria, the search for terrorists in Belgium, the connections between past policies and present problems and so on. Nowhere close to as important as whom Arvind Kejriwal hugs.

 

**

 

While on international news channels, my beef (yes, I used that word) with BBC World’s weather forecast continues. November Rain in Mumbai is an oddity, precipitation not the song which plays for more often! It happens, but it’s an oddity. The monsoon ends by October, although it sometimes rains a bit longer. It needs to be remarked upon. We do not need to be told that Mumbai city has had “drought conditions” this year. You can say that the monsoon was weak this year. As a meteorologist, you need to at least have some idea of the climate of the area you are providing information for. And perhaps, you might also like to comment on climate change…

 

By Ranjona Banerji

 

The extreme head in the sand stupidity of the media, especially the TV variety, was on full display over actor Aamir Khan’s remarks about his wife’s fears about intolerance in India. Immediately, it was as if nothing else that happened either in India or the world was of any consequence or importance. All the usual suspects were out in full force on TV, getting their five minutes of fame or notoriety out of Khan.

 

Khan’s statements became more important than a Russian fighter jet shot down by Turkey, even though both Russia and Turkey are supposed to be fighting the deadly global threat of ISIS. Khan’s remarks were more important than the persistent, incessant rainfall and damage and death in Tamil Nadu. Khan’s comments were more important than the latest in the Sheena Bora murder case, which was our other obsession. In fact, Khan beat prime minister Narendra Modi in Singapore as well – this is terribly surprising because so far all Modi’s foreign sojourns have got wall-to-wall blanket coverage.

 

People discuss, and rightly, the viciousness of trolls on social media. But when you watch party representatives on news television, they are often no better. A gentleman from the BJP (an afternoon spokesperson, not as high up the ladder as a prime time spokesperson) ripped into a Congress spokeswoman over Aamir Khan’s remarks and made several needless personal remarks. If that is how someone speaks on TV, then how is it surprising that anonymous trolls get courage from them. The anchor was unable to control him and so his rants ran on. And every time she asked him a direct question, he claimed the mike wasn’t working.

 

There is an irony here which obviously escapes all pro-BJP journalists in high places in television: by attacking Aamir Khan (as some like Gaurav Sawant of India Today TV did in his tweets) and then having “debates” on his remarks, you actually only prove Khan’s point about intolerance.

 

**

 

I don’t know if this was part of the new knee-jerk school of journalism or a genuine error, but there was a fair bit of confusion over Congress vice-president Rahul Gandhi’s interaction with students of Mount Carmel College, Bangalore. The Times of India reported that Gandhi was “stumped” by students who were all in favour of the prime minister’s schemes. The BJP bristled with pride and mocked Gandhi. Then the Bangalore Mirror website carried a piece by a student present at the meeting who contradicted the TOI report. She said that the media was not part of the event and that Gandhi in fact charmed the students. There was in fact a mixed reaction to the success of schemes like Swacch Bharat and Make in India.

 

All this makes me wonder if editors have forgotten what their job is, in the race to be there, somewhere, anywhere, regardless of the facts.

 

**

 

Twitter was all a-flutter over a picture of Prime Minister Narendra Modi sleeping in the Lok Sabha or so it appeared. The TV screenshot went viral as did the “hashtags” #ModiSleeps and #PMJetlag.

 

BJP spokespersons and supporters scrambled to correct everyone – even worse, this was during the Union Home Minister Rajnath Singh’s speech – but only demonstrated how very cruel social media can be…

 

By Ranjona Banerji

 

The spectacle of journalists crowding Prime Minister Narendra Modi during his “Diwali Milan” or meeting with journalists in the national capital on November 28 was one of the most unedifying of recent times. Journalists looked like fanboys and fangirls as they mobbed the prime minister in order to get a “selfie” with him. It happened last year too but we knew that after these so-called journalists posted their selfies with the PM and other ministers. This year round, we saw the melee for ourselves. And so did everyone else.

 

I write “so-called” journalists and I can see bristles rising. I had an interesting discussion with a young TV journalist on Twitter. He felt there was nothing wrong with taking selfies with famous people as long as it didn’t interfere with your work. And further, that you should be judged on your work and not on your fan tendencies.

 

Is he right? Am I being too much of a stickler here? It is common sense that a journalist has distance himself or herself from the people and events that are being covered. We have all seen too many colleagues who have strayed from that path with most unfortunate consequences. We are not friends with the people we interview, write about, observe. We may be friendly, they may be friendly. But unless we are aloof, we fail our readers and viewers. This rule is the same regardless of whether you’re a political or a glamour journalist. You become too close, too awe-struck, too star-struck and you lose the ability to criticise or be sceptical. You become the event rather than the observer.

 

This “selfie” craze only takes this perversion of journalism integrity to a newer level of nuttiness. It is not that it has not existed before. We have all known colleagues who were too close to politicians and political parties or business houses or gangsters or film stars. We have all known journalists who had more cars than they should have or took free flats from quotas in return for favourable stories or had shares in companies they shouldn’t have. Some paid the price and lost their jobs. Others were kept on by managements who felt that they could leverage this closeness for their business interests. It was wrong then, it is wrong now.

 

Some years ago, the well-known journalist and author Katherine Boo had told me that this closeness, this loss of journalistic distance is why she avoided “source” journalism and found that it was better to get as much information as possible through “Freedom of information” acts like the RTI. This demonstrates a level of journalistic ethics which we rarely see and even less rarely applaud. Yet it is much-needed – this finely tuned awareness that you have to practise your craft without being compromised.

 

Just how much bad journalism was on display during this “selfie” craze is made clear by this piece by Mayank Mishra who was present at the prime minister’s event. He writes in the Business Standard: “The PM stayed at the venue for nearly 45 minutes. It does not happen often that we get a chance to interact with the PM. But not a single question was asked. We did not get to know the PM’s perspective on important issues of the day. Isn’t it a huge loss of opportunity? Will the selfie brigade please explain?”

http://www.business-standard.com/article/opinion/why-selfie-journalism-is-very-bad-news-115113000093_1.html#.VlvMPGsAexY.twitter
My answer to the young man on Twitter is simple. There is nothing wrong, as a journalist, if you forget your dignity to get a good story or a god quote. But there is everything wrong if we forget that this job is not about our personal collection of experiences. It is about the reader and the viewer. And what did the reader or viewer gain from this “selfie” exhibition except a perfectly justified sense of disgust for our profession?

 

By Ranjona Banerji

 

Why the Press Information Bureau did this boggles the imagination and contravenes every idea of good sense. PIB is the government’s official media wing; we understand and accept that. It is not the most exciting media organisation but it is vital as it chronicles government history and therefore in a sense, the history of contemporary India.

 

But when the prime minister did an aerial survey of the Chennai floods, someone in PIB decided to be dramatic and creative on social media. As a result it made not just a fool of itself but also made the prime minister the butt of jokes on social media.

 

For those who came in late, what happened is this: Narendra Modi went on an aerial survey of Chennai. PIB put out a picture of him on Twitter, on the plane, looking out of the window. As anyone would expect, the scene of the ground below, through the window, was hazy and blurry – rain, clouds, floods. A few hours later, the same picture was re-released on Twitter. This time, the view from Modi’s window was crisp and clear, there were no clouds and no blurring.

 

Twitter was quick to realise that some computer wizardry had been used to manipulate the view from the window. And a whole series of memes crowded the internet.

 

PIB put out an apology: “Out of the seven pictures released, one picture used the technique of merging of two pictures. This is being referred to as “Photoshopping” in sections of media. This happened due to error of judgment and the picture was subsequently deleted. PIB regrets the release of the above mentioned picture. The inconvenience is regretted.”

 

The apology is as is obvious written in the worst sort of bureaucratese. The mention of reactions in “sections of media” (Twitter) and the sort of umbrage to the word “Photoshopping” only demonstrates that this apology was wrung out of PIB because of the ridicule it had to suffer, which clearly stung. The only inconvenience to be regretted is that caused to PIB itself because everyone else had a good laugh.

 

Members and supporters of political parties and the general public are well-known for “using the technique of merging pictures” (since the term “photo-shopping” is seen as offensive!). Stations in China mysteriously show up in Gujarat, bullet trains from Japan arrive on Indian platforms and marooned United Airlines planes, complete with snow machines around them, materialise on the tarmac of Chennai airport.

 

But the Press Information Bureau is not a nutcase on Twitter. Enough said. The inconvenience is regretted.

 

This is from scroll.in:

http://scroll.in/article/773697/government-apologises-for-altered-picture-of-modi-in-chennai-but-twitter-cant-stop-laughing

**

 

Talking of the technique of merging two pictures, here’s a report of how the Tej news channel merged picture of their reporter with rushing flood waters, to demonstrate the technique of sending a reporter to a site without moving out of the studio:

Chennai floods and India media, why social media users are incensed!

 

Now PIB can be “forgiven” for the “inconvenience” because it is part of the government. But media organisations which resort to such outright lies cannot make any excuses at all. This is not an error of judgment. This is a deliberate attempt to mislead.

 

More shame on us.

 

By Ranjona Banerji

 

It’s that time of the year when the calendar takes over. And in the minds of us ever-chasing-the-obvious-cliche journalists, it’s countdown time! Why should I be any different? So how did we do this year, with sixteen calendar days left till we end with 2015 and start on 2016?

 

Politics and the central government continued to dominate the media, with Prime Minister Narendra Modi taking centre stage. But unlike 2014 where traditional media was in full cheer-leading stage, taking several cue from the BJP’s and Modi’s own massive social media army, in 2015 some journalists and media houses discovered some other clichés of their own. That there are two sides to every coin, every story and such self-evident truths.

 

By the first quarter of 2015, the honeymoon period for the Central government was over. The Delhi assembly results, where the Aam Aadmi Party won 67 seats, leaving just three for the BJP and allies and none for the Congress or anyone else, started the process. At the end of 2014, it had become clear that the promises of “good days” to come were a bit of an exaggeration.

 

In February 2015, BJP president Amit Shah told the media that the promise of black money coming back to India within three months of the BJP’s victory and the Rs 15 lakh to be delivered to every bank account was just an election “jumla”. This was a remarkable event not just for introducing the word “jumla” (sentence, claim, meaningless?) to our everyday lexicon but also for the honesty of admitting that all election promises are not meant to be fulfilled.

 

As public resentment against the Centre’s empty promises started rising slowly but surely – as is inevitable for any elected government – a series of events made even a benevolently disposed media sit up and take notice. There was the lacklustre budget, the constant foreign tours by the prime minister which seemed only to benefit Indians who chose not to live in India.

 

The protests by retired armed forces personnel for a better pension system were a massive wake-up call, especially for a media which saw the happy armed forces as singularly pro-BJP. However the anger against the government for half-baked promises and solutions was palpable and could not be ignored. The embarrassing spectacle of veterans sitting in public protests, the horror of watching them being beaten up by the police was a public relations disaster that no country, no society and no government wants.

 

The government was too slow to respond and the results were there for everyone to see. BJP spokespersons appeared on TV with the Manmohan Singh defence: the prime minister cannot comment on everything. But if that defence did not work for Singh, it could not be made to work for Modi either. The iron curtain of media love and protection was getting a tad rusty by now.

 

The monsoon failed, which brought its own miseries and once again, the Central government moved like molasses.

 

But it was the lynching of Mohammed Akhlaq in Dadri, a small town in Uttar Pradesh, on the rumour that he had eaten beef or had beef stored in his refrigerator that set off a course of unstoppable comments. Akhlak was Muslim, the mob was supposedly Hindu, several BJP politicians descended on Dadri to “protect” cows and Hindus, as many objectionable remarks on religious grounds that could be made were made.

 

Media frenzy started building. And then writers and intellectuals began returning old awards and protesting against an atmosphere of “intolerance” caused by proponents of Hindutva. This caused a massive problem for the pro-BJP section of the media. It could not ignore the protests completely, although many journalists had no qualms in admitting that they had never heard of many of the writers – to no one’s surprise. But then the film world also got into the act and all hell broke loose.

 

writers Or, perhaps I should not use my words so loosely. The Bihar state elections were pushed as a referendum for the Central government by the media and by some politicians. TV journalists gushed as they so often do every time the prime minister addressed a rally in Bihar. Other journalists concentrated on the divisive language used by the prime minister, the BJP president and other BJP politicians. But it was a five stage election and mid-way through, the air changed.

 

Yet, on the day the results were announced, our news channels could not believe what was about to happen. They tried to set the agenda by declaring a win for the BJP. Within two hours, the truth that emerged was something else altogether.

 

That loss for the BJP ended that honeymoon with the media effectively. You could see it in the coverage of Modi’s subsequent public interactions. Although people like actor Anupam Kher have tried very hard to blame the evil secular and liberal media for all kinds of crime, it is no longer possible for the media to pretend that cheer-leading for Modi is the only way to practise journalism.

 

By Ranjona Banerji

 

A general consensus on social media at least is that Delhi-based journalists are going soft on Union finance minister Arun Jaitley, in the light of all the allegations against him made by fellow BJP member and former cricketer Kirti Azad. Jaitley is known as “Bureau Chief” in media and gossip circles because of his close proximity to journalists in the national capital. In fact, from the outside, the last politician I saw with such excellent media relations was the late Pramod Mahajan, who was friend and source and more for many.

 

Perhaps this relationship is inevitable in the incestuous world of politicians and political journalists, as we heard in the Radia tapes or as anyone who has heard a political journalist showing off about how well they know whoever they consider important.

 

But as a very senior journalist pointed out to be, as the years go by and TV journalists set the standards, some time-honoured standards (such as they ever were) appear to be slipping. It used to be a cardinal rule that you should never be really good friends with a journalist if you are a source. Because in a moment of conflict of interest, a good journalist would choose the profession over the friend. Which is, unfortunately, how it should be.

 

The slight problem for political journalists though is that the allegations against Jaitley have to do with cricket, which remains India’s main religion in spite of all challenges. And almost every sports journalist you speak to has absolutely no doubt that the problems in cricket administration and that definitely includes the Delhi unit (cue Jaitley entry stage right) are far worse than have been revealed so far.

 

Eventually one hopes that good sense will prevail and journalistic instinct will kick in. Some journalists may well remain loyal to their friend. Most will decide that eternal fame for a good story beats having a few friends here and there. Since I am in cold and raining England, it is hard to keep track of my colleagues on television but at least Twitter keeps one right in the thick of it!

 

The background of the allegations against Jaitley is also intriguing since it started with a CBI raid on Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal’s office. Then the Delhi CM alleged that he was being targeted by the Narendra Modi government, called the prime minister a few names and this whole intrigue developed. Attention has now been deflected away from the Kejriwal-Modi fight and has segued almost seamlessly into an assault on one of Modi’s most trusted men, the finance minister. And the attack comes from all sides. Former cricket great Bishen Singh Bedi – a man who has never held back – has said that not a leaf moves at Feroz Shah Kotla Stadium without Jaitley’s permission. The loyalty of Delhi’s media therefore is being severely tested here.

 

Kejriwal of course knows firsthand how fickle media love can be. In 2011, he was a man who could do no wrong as far as TV journalists at least were concerned, as he led the India Against Corruption movement. Since then he has fallen considerably from the ladder of love.

 

In fact the Kejriwal story is a lesson to all people who take the love of a journalist seriously. Here’s a tip: it rarely lasts forever.

 

On that happy note, Happy Christmas and see you next week!

 

By Ranjona Banerji

 

Being out of India for a short while brings home how perceptions of the media and how the media actually operates are not that different anywhere. The same arguments over trivialisation, the same expectations of the news as you want to see it not what the news agency, channel, newspaper wants to show you can be heard. But as much, the trivialisation is real and the choices are not always understandable.

 

The localisation of news for instance is still an ongoing argument. As someone who has used it successfully in various publications, I can vouch for its importance. However, there has to be a constant exercise of judgment. Here in the UK where I am, the Christmas season is always a slow one news-wise since most people are on holiday and the general mood leans towards cheer rather than misery.

 

So if you cannot escape the relentless presence of ISIS and what that means for the future of the world, you can perhaps not focus on events in Iraq, Syria, Libya, Turkey, Lebanon and Nigeria as much. But can you get away with that? If there is another event, could you justify playing it down because it’s Christmas closer to home?

 

But the dilemma does not have to be as dire as that. For instance, there has been severe flooding in parts of Scotland and the North of England for the past two weeks. This is local news in one sense but in another, it is part of the whole climate change, extreme weather story that affects the whole planet. The problems and explanations for the wide-scale flooding seem remarkably like what we in India heard during and after the recent floods in Tamil Nadu. That is, development on lake beds and river over-flow areas leaving surging waters nowhere else to go.

 

As it happens, the official and emergency responses were faster here than in India but not all residents thought so as one might expect. Human sympathy and help were as high as in Chennai and I have not yet heard stories about the cheats who tried to make a buck out of someone else’s misery but perhaps one only has to wait. Parts of the southern United States have also seen extreme rain and flooding and some of the pictures out of Texas have been worse than Chennai.

 

So should a news channel focus mainly on flooding, on Christmas fun and spending or on Iraq rebel forces being moved out of ISIS areas through Turkey so that they can go back and fight ISIS? Or as a very local channel here in East Yorkshire did, ignore the flooding and home in on some very local municipal issue and ignore the rest of the county?

 

If it was me, I would have stuck to the flooding and crime: One resident of a senior care home has killed another, I see in snippets. Guns in old age facilities: now that’s a story that shocks, horrifies and amazed everyone.

 

Now how’s that for a perfect Christmas cheer story?

 

On which note, I let you get back to Arvind Kejriwal and Arun Jaitley, which doesn’t appear to have changed since I left India 10 days ago!