Daily Times

The flashing of acceptance of responsibility as breaking news is an established norm of Pakistani television channels. News channels often act as spokespersons of terrorist outfits. Irresponsible media coverage of the horrific attack on a school in Peshawar necessitates the implementation of a code of ethics. Apart from the execution of their missions, terrorists also carefully knit a sound media strategy and thus spread anxiety. To further this objective they continuously feed the media with hard news. Iron lady Margaret Thatcher aptly pointed out media publicity as the “oxygen” of terrorism. Therefore, blood and ink maintains a rapport between terrorists and the media. Images of destruction and mutilated dead bodies are regularly televised. Undoubtedly, with hardly any effort, the media is instrumental in the glorification of terror acts.

Once, al Zawahiri expressed that “more than half of the ongoing battle is taking place in the battlefield of the media.” Constant publication and the broadcasting of threats and declarations also serve the terrorists. However, the media justifies coverage of terrorism with the argument that it covers the victims and not the terrorists. Truly speaking, terrorists get publicity and the media earns a hefty profit. Terrorists not only destroy the soil but also the soul of a nation. By striking targets, extremists satisfy the appetite of the media for breaking news. Hence, the media and terrorists have reciprocal links. The news of terrorism multiplies the circulation of newspapers and viewership of television channels. Resultantly, it becomes a relationship of dependence.

Terrorists prefer to gain attention at a time when another significant event dominates the headlines. In 1972, Black September targeted Israeli Olympians with the prime objective of attracting the attention of approximately 800 million people who were watching the Olympics. Likewise, on the eve of Benazir Bhutto’s arrival, terrorists attacked her cavalcade in Karachi. The attack was carried out at a time when the media was broadcasting her arrival live. With the big bang of suicide bombing, the focus was shifted from her reception to the incident of terrorism. Therefore, strategy and timing were carefully knit together.

Excessive media coverage helps terrorists become recognised. The media not only informs us about terrorism but also interprets its dynamics. Hence, terrorists not only earn public ire but also the sympathies of likeminded comrades who help them generate finances and attract extremists within their orbits. Excessive coverage portrays non-state actors as legitimate actors and increases public acceptance. The media shows immense curiosity for terrorism. Augmented ratings earn dividends for both terrorists and the media.

Terrorism touches human emotions and therefore the media is inclined to flash blatantly this grim aspect of life. Indisputably, sensationalism makes the media more competitive but its negative, psychological implications cannot be quantified.

In Pakistan, the mushroom growth of television channels and the surge in terrorism are post-9/11 developments. In the present epoch of live journalism, media gatekeepers should not overlook the sensitivities of live coverage. Live coverage of the attack on Manawa Police School endangered human lives. Live coverage facilitates the terrorists to change their strategy. Owing to such risks, television channels should opt for time delay filtration technology. The Indian parliamentary committee on the Mumbai attack observed that Indian channels had failed to self-regulate. Therefore, the committee suggested the establishment of a regulatory authority.

In exceptional circumstances, extremists try to publish periodicals and run illegal FM radio stations. During the insurgency in Malakand, Mullah Fazlullah addressed his followers via live radio broadcast. Due to the increased currency of social media, extremists have reduced their dependence on mass media. Their exclusive websites offer universal access to followers. The following saying rings so true: “These days, if you are not on the web, you do not exist.” By uploading the video clip of the beheading of Daniel Pearl, terrorists won enormous attention. Videos of beheadings and murder are now freely distributed all over the internet.

Anonymous terrorism is the type of terrorism where no one claims responsibility. It motivates the media to speculate and, consequently, spreads panic. Today, psychological warfare is being waged by terrorists on our television screens. From media coverage terrorists want attention and recognition. With excessive coverage they want to multiply dejection and uncertainty. Telecasting dead, mutilated bodies gives psychological strength to the extremists. The government and media should develop a consensus and work out a strategy on how to save viewers from the psychological effects of the excessive coverage of terrorism. Since a majority of the workforce in electronic media has transited from newspapers, most of them do not know of the sensitivities associated with live journalism. A majority of the cameramen and reporters are not aware of the hazards attached with scenes of terrorism. In blind competition for breaking news, a few of them have lost their lives and have become the source of breaking news themselves.

In February 2013, the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA) directed private channels to refrain from airing the news and views by banned outfits. Section 20(c) of the PEMRA Act prohibits the airing of violence and terrorism but reality is vivid on television screens. The assassination of Salmaan Taseer was projected by the media as a heroic act. For repeatedly airing the interview of the assassin, PEMRA imposed a fine of one million rupees each on two television channels. While covering the Bhoja Air plane crash, a number of channels aired unedited live footage of mutilated bodies. In response, PEMRA issued show cause notices to 17 television channels. Merely serving notices will not bring change; it requires self-regulation.

In 2005, six Russian television channels signed a charter. This charter expresses their resolve to prevent damage to public morals. In the UK, since 1922, there has been an established practice to issue a D Notice (defence notice) to the media. Via this D Notice, the department of defence requests the media not to publish or broadcast certain subjects related to national security. Excessive coverage may inform the audience but the media should also educate the masses regarding hidden motives, preventive strategy and the need for public cooperation.

In October 2009, the standing committee of the National Assembly proposed amendments in the PEMRA law under which no channel would be allowed to broadcast live footage of suicide terrorism or the showing of dead bodies of the victims. Self-regulation is the best choice. It is an act of self-accountability, volunteerism and responsibility. It will also protect the autonomy of the media. Depriving or limiting extremists’ publicity will decrease their influence.

The writer is a police officer