Recommendations 

No iron law can be laid down. This would be undesirable and even counter-productive. The present instance of Gujarat itself amply demonstrates the danger of an information vacuum both in time and content as this is likely to be filled by rumours or deliberate disinformation, both of which pose dangers. 

The golden rule in all but the most exceptional cases would probably be to portray the facts honestly and completely while avoiding sensation, gory pictures and details, strong adjectives and provocative display. Narratives must be placed in context and balanced over time with other available material. Observance of such a code will clearly be more onerous for television, especially with regard to on-the-spot coverage with little or virtually no time for editing. Yet we do know that the national channels did hold back what they considered might be inappropriate footage. 

Pictures can excite emotions and inflame passions. Repeated replay of footage of the burning train and the charred remains of the victims or other scenes of arson and violence is one of the problems of 24-hour news channels which may have to be differently addressed. At the same time, photographs can capture the essence of a tragedy and evoke far more compassion than words. Perhaps the most poignant image from Gujarat was not of the many dead, but of one living Indian, his face contorted with fear. It shamed and shocked ordinary people and, hopefully spurred many of them to think and act positively. 

The Editors Guild has initiated debate on existing codes and practices with a view to reviewing these and attempting to develop a new framework for guidance in the future. Other bodies like the Press Institute of India have been engaged in a similar exercise. Television, especially in relation to 24-hour news channels, is still a relatively young medium led by young professionals. Pressures are tremendous and instant decisions have to be taken. Aaj Tak´s Uday Shankar is right in saying that in covering events live, the news story is “built up incrementally” as it happens and gets pieced together, filled in, backgrounded and analysed as events unfold. He told a recent workshop that the channel withheld or heavily edited particularly lurid footage, “war cries” and the destruction of places of worship. 

Disagreements about facts and interpretation are best addressed by the right of reply, with appropriate expressions of regret, corrections and clarifications where necessary. The Express, for example, carried a story on April 9 about the distribution of swords and trishuls under the heading “VHP hand in Gujarat´s weapons of violence”. The VHP Joint General Secretaries, Dr Kaushik Mehta and Mr Jaideep Patel sent a denial. This was published by the paper together with a rebuttal by the Express correspondent who basically stood by his story. (IE, April 24, 2002). 

As the dust settles, the media, jointly and severally, need to review what happened and what lessons there are for the future. Such introspection should be followed by consultations with political leaders, both government and opposition, administrators, police and security officials, and civic and community leaders. Such interaction would be most useful at both national and state levels. Consideration needs to be given alongside to developing norms for live coverage of riots by television and cable networks, naming of communities and such other matters by appropriate media associations. The Editors Guild of India could take an initiative in the matter. 

Many so-called “leaders” of destructive movements and even known criminals have been built-up, even glorified, by the media howsoever inadvertently. There is need for collective reflection on this issue as publicity and image-building makes megalomaniacs and crackpots, often puny figures, appear larger than life and twice as important. Greater circumspection is required in interviewing them and inviting them to chat shows and panel discussions. 

The mischievous role certain Gujarati newspapers cannot be glossed over. Some of them have been named for irresponsible and unethical journalism in the past but have regrettably learnt nothing and forgotten nothing. Wilful incitement to offence, propagation of hate and fuelling disorder are criminal offences. We accordingly suggest that a high judicial officer be appointed by the Government to examine the writings of those sections of the media that are prima facie in flagrant violation of the law and recommend what action, if any, should be taken against them. It is learnt that the Police Commissioner, Vadodara, did in fact seek penal action against a leading Gujarati daily; but his superiors did nothing. 

We further suggest that a similar inquiry be made into the handbills, pamphlets and other offensive material put into circulation, not always by unknown persons. The authorship of some of these has not merely been alleged but admitted. 

We concur with the NHRC´s recommendation that “provocative statements made by persons to the electronic or print media should be examined and acted upon, and the burden of proof shifted to such persons to explain or contradict their statements”. Charlatans of every brand must know that they cannot misuse the media with impunity and get away with it. 

None of these matters falls within the purview of the K.P.Shah Commission of Inquiry. They call for separate scrutiny. 

Official information systems, certainly in Gujarat, need immediate overhaul. Sycophancy and propaganda do not constitute information. They destroy credibility. There is an obligation on the part of the State to enable the media to play its true role. It is in its own highest interest to do so. The media has a constructively adversarial role vis-a-vis the State; but in this information age it is in a sense part of the larger universe of governance. 

According to the Indian Express (April 28), the Ministry of External Affair´s portal meadev.nic.in too has indulged in something of a fantasy that does the country little credit. (See Annexure 24). 

Our broad conclusion is that the national media and sections of the Gujarati media, barring some notable offenders, played an exemplary role in their coverage of Gujarat, despite certain lapses, many of them inadvertent or minor. There were, however, some notable offenders, especially Sandesh and Gujarat Samachar and certain local cable channels. Technology has introduced a new learning curve and there are lessons to be learnt, internalised and developed into codes of best practice. But the notion that the media should shy away from telling the country how it really is must be firmly rejected. The freedom of the media derives from the citizen´s inherent right to expression and information. This freedom carries with it an equally great responsibility that must be honestly and honourably discharged. 

It is not for nothing that the nation´s motto is “Satyameve Jayate”, Truth Shall Triumph. 

Two major negatives 

Much has been said one way or the other about the media´s role in Gujarat. This Report, among others, addresses these issues. However, two glaring negatives stand out. 

Ever since Independence, whenever there has been a national disaster or emergency, natural or manmade, there has always been an appeal for funds – from the Prime Minister, Chief Ministers, Governors, chambers of commerce and industry, Rotarians, NGOs and, above all, the newspapers. Such an appeal serves two purposes. It helps raise sorely needed money for relief and rehabilitation or to meet the emergency in question. More than that, it provides opportunity for thousands and millions of other citizens to reach out to the victims or those in distress in a gesture of fraternal solidarity and sympathy and to mobilise support. Newspapers have often vied with one another to lead the field. 

This time there was not a single appeal from any quarter, anywhere in or for Gujarat, some small local groups excepted. The silence was deafening. On being queried about their strange reticence on this occasion, newspaper editors and others gave the same reply. On further consideration it was felt that few contributions might be forthcoming and if this did indeed happen, that would send out a wrong message. 

Not all will agree. The relief camps in Gujarat, all basically privately run with no more than rations being supplied by the government, need funds. The media has covered the distress but has unfortunately found itself unable or unwilling to help reach out. 

We recommend that that the Guild issues an appeal for a Fund for Gujarat through its members. 

Some in high authority have chastised the Indian media for its role in Gujarat, contrasting this with the manner in which the American media covered the events of September 11. Then two situations are not comparable and the reasoning underlying the homily is specious. What was notable about September 11 was the alacrity with which the US national and state leadership, led by the President and New York Mayor, used the media immediately and repeatedly to offer words of comfort and reassurance and make known their steadfast resolve to deal resolutely with the crisis. Attacks on some individuals by bigots were immediately condemned and prosecuted. 

In India, the Prime Minister did not consider it fit to broadcast to the nation, though he was advised to do so; nor did any senior Government leader. Neither did the Governor of Gujarat. The Chief Minister did certainly broadcast one or more peace appeals and met the press for routine briefings. But none of these functionaries reached out to the bloodied, fearful, tortured people of Gujarat to give them solace and a solemn assurance that all criminal elements and their mentors would be put down with a stern and even hand and the guilty brought to book. 

Two most potent means of rising above the storm, binding India, healing the wounds and rallying the nation to live by the cherished ideals of the Constitution were pointedly ignored. In this, the leadership failed the media and the media failed the people. 

The Prime Minister did, however, speak at a public meeting in Goa on the occasion of a BJP conclave. It was said his remarks were not fully reported and misinterpreted by the media. A clarification followed. The full text of his remarks are with us. It is true that Mr Vajpayee did indeed refer to two facets of Islam, the compassionate and the militant jehadi. But he too spoke of cause (“the Godhra”conspiracy”) and consequence (“the subsequent tragedy”). The latter was “no doubt condemnable but, he asked, who lit the fire? How did the fire spread?” 

At other points, the Prime Minister spoke of “we” and “they”. He said, “India was secular even when Muslims hadn´t come here and Christians hadn´t set foot on this soil”. “They” came with their own modes of worship and “they” too were given a place of honour and respect. No one thought of converting “them” with force, because this is not practised in “our religion; and in “our culture” there is no use for it. (Annexure 25). 

This is not the language of a prime minister and certainly not the language one is accustomed to hearing from Mr Vajpayee, who spoke with genuine anguish at the Shah Alam camp in Ahmedabad some days earlier. The words were possibly inadvertent, but the occasion and the context were certainly misplaced. 

The BJP President spoke of “the provoked and the provoker”, later that same evening when Mr Narendra Modi´s handling of the situation in Gujarat was proudly acclaimed by the ruling Party. He appeared to justify medieval vendetta, placing it above the Rule of Law. 

Happenstance perhaps, but on April 23, the Pioneer carried an article by Prafull Goradia, a BJP notable, suggesting what he thought would be a neat solution – that Indian Muslims migrate to Pakistan. (Annexure 26). 
What now? 

Competition for ratings and circulation can sometimes be negative media drivers with trivia, with titillation and sensation crowding out more studied reportage and analysis. The need for political and economic reform in India has been amply debated, even if action on the ground has been disappointing; but can the same be said of social reform and analysis of deeper societal changes? 

Gujarat has suffered a terrible tragedy. India too. The dead are gone; ravaged homes and work places will be restored even if rehabilitation takes time. What next ? Can one dare accept the partitioning of minds into “we” and “they” and the growing ghettoisation of Gujarat´s cities within fortified “borders” following every one of its periodic bloody riots? With Government and governance losing relevance, are fearful communities (Hindus included) now left with no option than to enthrone new and more ruthless Godfathers? 

How is it that Gujarat´s famed entrepreneurship has spawned upwardly mobile classes so devoid of anything other than gross consumerist values that they turn to loot and acquiesce in arson to “create” real estate? This despite vocalised recognition of the economic interdependence of the two major communities. Where are the liberal voices? The Gandhians have been marginalised. The trade unions have been emasculated with the decline of the textile industry and new cohorts of white collar workers on the take. Religious leaders have been largely silent or afraid, though religiosity is rampant and evident in city skylines. The intellectual and cultural community is isolated. The adivasis are being stirred up by interested groups. Where is the political leadership? This is a portrait of a depraved and intolerant society that has displaced Gandhi and Sardar Patel´s Gujarat. Yet there are many striving to restore lost values. All is not lost. 

The media will and must continue to turn the searchlight on Gujarat. But there is that underlying story waiting to be probed and told -if Gujarat and India are not to burn again.