Disclaimer: The
note/s given below is/are a compilation of information taken from various
sources. The references to the sources are provided at the end. The views
expressed in the note/s are those of the concerned student(s)/intern(s). The Blogger
or the compiler will not be responsible in any manner whatsoever regarding the
authenticity of the information provided in the note/s.
Introduction
A live broadcast, also called a live transmission, generally refers to various types of media that are broadcast without a significant delay. This kind of content is usually either produced in a radio or a television studio. It may include broadcasts of politics, sports or a breaking news situation which is considered to be of relevance to the target audience.Other types of live broadcasts include:● Internet television
Live television is a television production broadcast in
real-time, as events happen, in the present. In a secondary meaning, it may
refer to streaming television over the Internet. In
most cases live programming is not being recorded as it is shown on TV, but
rather was not rehearsed or edited and is being shown only as it was recorded
prior to being aired. Shows broadcast live include newscasts, morning shows, awards shows, sports programs,
reality programs and, occasionally, episodes of scripted television series.
Live television was more common until the late 1950s, when videotape technology was invented. Because of the prohibitive cost, adoption was slow, and some television shows remained live until the 1970s, such as soap operas. To prevent unforeseen issues, live television programs may be delayed, which allows censors to edit the program. Some programs may be broadcast live in certain time zones and delayed in others.
Live
broadcasting has traditionally required:
● Specialized infrastructure and
equipment—often in the form of “outside broadcasting” (OB) and
satellite links to cover live events and upload material to the editorial
system. With the emergence of smartphones and internet connections, more or
less the same operations can be performed with an application on a mobile phone
and a mobile data connection.
● Better bandwidth and more stable
signalling means that lightweight and mobile equipment can replace much of the
traditional equipment used in live coverage and can thus have the potential to
change the traditional workflow and work practices of television reporters.
Scannell
argues that the ordinary news routines of live broadcasting shore up “on behalf
of us all, the meaningful character of existence, even when it appears to be
collapsing in ruins before our disbelieving eyes” (Scannell 2004, 582–583; Nyre
2007).
There are
various approaches to thinking about monitoring and control of content and
journalistic ethics. There is a critical need to pay attention to
particular ethical issues which arise for broadcasters, such as the
challenge of ‘breaking news’ and live reporting which may lead journalists to
regret the information they transmit. The continuing introduction of new
technologies also challenges the ethical dimensions of journalistic practice.
Making live
coverage easy and effortless might, for example, reduce the time the reporters
have to do the necessary ethical considerations. This can contribute to moving
the considerations normally done by journalists to other parts of the
organization and put more responsibility on editors and line-control. This can
over time challenge the autonomy and ethical responsibility of the individual
journalist, and the reporting team working together in the field.
Issues arising out of live reporting:
1. The stress
on being the first one to break news
2. flamboyant
and sensational presentation of ‘breaking’ and live news (provocative
questions, statements, graphics)
3. No proper
fact-checking before transmitting information
4. Compromising
source integrity
5. Compromising
work by security agencies or divulging sensitive information
While for live
reporting, it is usually believed that it is unpredicted, unscripted and
spontaneous, the reporting still heavily relies on official sources to frame
and interpret events. Things to figure out before live reporting:
● There is no script, use bullet points to guide
the flow of the information you’re delivering and practice before you go
live.
● Make a game plan for the live shot. Will you be
moving around, showing the audience something or doing something on
camera?
● “It’s OK to say you don’t
know something and to say, ‘Here’s what we’re going to find out.” rather than
speculating or making it up.
Ethical Issues with Live Streaming:
It might seem
beneficial that there is no longer the need to time-consumingly edit
video footage into a report, but this could also be considered as a drawback in
ethical terms. Live streaming takes away the chance to reconsider,
evaluate and journalistically assess news content. Traditional broadcasting,
especially if not live, always operates in conjunction with an editorial board,
researchers, and technical experts, whereas with live streaming the reporter is
on their own. Media ethics largely covers four broad aspects namely – truth;
authenticity, sensationalism, conflict of interest and appropriateness of media
contents. Any compromise on any of these tenets in the garb of freedom of
speech and expression can have extremely detrimental effects on the thought process
of the society. Truth and authenticity are the two prime principles of ethics
that form the basic platter for any kind of media content. It covers not only
the commitment to tell the truth without fear or favor, but also to resist from
spreading half-truth or made-up information specifically intended to deceive
the audience.
Pros
● Unfiltered Video Streaming: There
is no censorship involved. Journalists can provide their audience with first
hand images of live events. Immediacy: Real news, in real time,
delivered directly to the audience.
● Flexibility: All that is
needed is a smartphone and journalists are able to report from anywhere in the
world – as long as there is a stable internet connection.
● Potential positive impact for
developing countries: News content can be produced very easily and cheaply with
live streaming apps. This makes it affordable for smaller media outlets and
freelance journalists, especially in rural areas or developing countries.
● Audience engagement: Periscope
and Facebook Live both provide the feature for direct feedback – useful for
audience questions, especially in interview situations.
● Empowering citizen
journalists: Entirely free from camera teams or editorial boards, citizen
journalists can stream live events to their followers.
Cons
● No
editorial control: Quality journalism rests on a foundation of
journalistic values and ethics. Live streaming the news takes away the
editorial control of reassessing, fact-checking and researching for a deeper
understanding and dedication to the truth.
● No
control over what could happen in live crisis situations: Especially
if the outcome of an emergency situation is unclear, in the case of a terror
attack or a natural disaster for instance, live streaming the events can lead
to unfiltered footage of victims or their families being broadcast.
● Dependency
on internet connections: While wireless internet connection is mostly
stable in western countries, it is hard to secure live streaming in more rural
areas or in developing countries. Also, especially in emergency situations
where large crowds of people are trying to access social media feeds the
internet connection is likely lack of speed and stability.
● In
the case of a natural disaster the infrastructure in a certain region might be
so damaged that the internet goes down all together.
● Potential interference with emergency operations: Following the Paris attacks, the French police had to ask Twitter users to refrain from tweeting or periscoping the events in front of the Bataclan, as the terrorists could have access to the footage as well. In emergency situations it is more important to guarantee that police and other action forces can work without interference from journalists.
CASE STUDIES
At a time, when
the entire media fraternity is regarded as the fourth pillar of a robust and
thriving democracy, it is imperative upon the conscientious section of society
to ponder upon the need for accountability and self-restraint in this arena. In
the last few years, there had been plenty of instances where media overreach
and hyper- activism had caused wilful influence and unwarranted media
goof-ups.
● The live coverage
of 26/11 Mumbai attacks by media houses came under extensive
criticism for prioritizing vested commercial interests over national
security.The undue competition among themselves in showing exclusives on
minute-to-minute basis had nearly jeopardized the strategic planning of the
security forces out there. Coverage of the 67-hour Mumbai terrorist attacks,
brought unprecedented condemnation, especially of 24-hour television news
channels. Critics described it as "TV terror" for showing gory
scenes, being too aggressive, and often reporting incorrect information as
fact. In the following days, critics say, many Indian journalists were overly
dramatic, sensationalist and quick to report live "exclusives" of unconfirmed
rumours. Many said that TV anchors were overwrought and quick to blame Pakistan
for the attacks. “It’s high time we realize and accept that we are at
fault," said Shishir Joshi, the editorial director of Mid-Day, a Mumbai
newspaper. "We did well getting into the line of fire, but from an ethical
point of view we screwed up big-time." Recognizing the missteps in
coverage, National Broadcaster Association revealed a new set of rules for the
industry. The guidelines ban broadcasting of footage that could reveal security
operations and live contact with hostages or attackers. Television coverage of
the attacks showed dead bodies and hostages trapped in rooms, revealed commando
operations and positions and reported the location of hostages at the Taj Mahal
Hotel. Senior news editors are accused of playing martial music between updates
and providing airtime to Bollywood actors and other members of Mumbai's
chatterati. One station even aired a telephone conversation with one of the 10
gunmen.
1. Official
actions taken:
❖ In the immediate aftermath
of the attacks, the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting issued notices to
two Hindi news channels – Aaj Tak and India TV. However, official sources admit
they had no answer when asked if the networks in question had indeed violated
any Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for the media in crisis situations. Why
were there no guidelines created – in consultation, by taking media owners into
confidence on how best to devise a communications strategy in such situations?
While reviewing the failures and addressing new challenges, the absence of a
simple protocol was glaring. In fact, it took an attack like 26/11 for both the
government and the media industry to evolve new frameworks for coverage.
❖ Similarly, after the Mumbai
attacks of November 26, 2008, under a committee headed by the late Justice J.S.
Verma, the News Broadcasters Association, an autonomous industry body for TV
news channels, came up with a new set of guidelines for the coverage of
emergency situations (armed conflict, internal disturbance, communal violence,
public disorder and crime).
2. NBA
GUIDELINES FOR CRISIS AND CONFLICT
❖ Coverage is to be tested on
the ‘touchstone of public interest, and must be factually accurate and
objective
❖ There should be no live
reporting that ‘facilitates publicity of any terrorist or militant outfit, its
ideology or tends to evoke sympathy towards or glamorize their cause.’
❖ During live hostage
situations and rescues, no details of pending rescue operations should be given
or broadcast regarding methods or personnel.
❖ Respect should be shown to
the dead and no gory visuals should be shown on TV
❖ Reporters should refrain
from being in live, direct contact with victims, security forces, technical
personnel or perpetrators.
❖ Networks should refrain
from continuous/ unnecessary broadcast of archival footage that may agitate the
viewers. (If any such footage is shown, it should clearly indicate ‘file’, with date and time.)
There has also been some attempt at self-regulation by journalists.
Broadcasters have now agreed to do what should always have been done: no future
crisis will be covered in real time. There will be a half-hour delay. Not only
will this deny terrorists the advantage of knowing what is happening as it
occurs, it will also allow the authorities to step in and stop the channels
from telecasting operations that are best left secret.Emergency protocol will
be followed. Under the "emergency protocol", broadcasters in the
country will now delay live coverage of sensitive incidents and withhold
information on security operations. Ministers will still be able to take
channels off air, but it is seen as a "nuclear weapon.” The National
Broadcasters Association also tries to ensure that the line between national
interest and political interests stays clear. When they were announced,
ministers, officials and scholars welcomed the NBA’s guidelines as a ‘step in
the right direction,’ and accepted that both the government and the media had
lessons to learn from the handling of the Mumbai attacks.
● The
Noida murders of teenage girl Aarushi Talwar and middle-aged
Hemraj—live-in domestic help at the Talwars’ home—took place on May 16, 2008.
Media reports, primarily on account of the CBI innuendos, had by now moved into
the realm of certainties, resulting in widespread outrage against the Talwar
couple though the reported, debated, and dramatized obviousness of the Talwars’
guilt had yet failed to produce any evidence. The media routinely insinuated
though that the Talwars had influenced the investigation. The Talwar story
lingered on primetime for a long while live footage dominated the reportage
when the story appeared on prime time, far more disturbing were the
reconstructed enactments, liberally mixed with old footage, to extend the life
of the story beyond primetime. Some of these enactments were used in support of
news stories, such as morphed footage suggesting a fourteen-year-old taking her
clothes off to speculate about what family secrets might have led to Aarushi’s
“honor killing.
● Pathankot
reporting by NDTV- When the operation was on in January this
year, NDTV allegedly revealed information on the ammunition stockpiled in the
airbase, MIGs, fighter-planes, rocket-launchers, mortars, helicopters,
fuel-tanks etc which was likely to be used by the terrorists or their handlers
to cause massive harm, the sources said. Official sources said that as the
content appeared to be violative of the programming norms, a show cause notice
was issued to the channel.The committee observed that the channel “appeared to
give out the exact location of the remaining terrorists with regard to the
sensitive assets in their vicinity” when they telecast in real time.The panel
expressed “grave concern” that this was a matter of national security and that
the channel had revealed sensitive details like location of ammunition depot
viz-a-viz the space where the terrorists were holed up, location of school and
residential areas.High-resolution images of the Pathankot Air Force base,
showing the precise locations where aircraft were parked, were available prior
to the attack on Google Maps, while multiple articles
referring to aircraft types flown from there were available on the internet
making it highly unlikely the terrorists would have had to rely on news
broadcasts for this kind of information.
Live-blogging by Journalists
Positive: For newspapers, this
can be their version of live-reporting. On fast-moving stories, live blogs give
the ability to post significant developments quickly – more quickly than
editing and re-editing a news article. They also allow us to link out to other
coverage, to include comments from Twitter and Facebook, to display multimedia
(pictures, video and audio), and to include our audience in the comments below
the line – all in one place. Neil McIntosh, the online editor of the Wall
Street Journal Europe, says: "It's a form that's charming in its
directness; at its best it generally does away with any writerly conceits, and
demands the author just get on with telling you what's just happened."
Negative: They require careful,
continuous signposting to guide the reader to the story's main points. When
comments run into the hundreds, they need curating and managing. If done badly,
they can descend into a mishmash of tweets and comments without context. They
can be too easily deployed by editors on stories to which the format is not
suited. And the name, live blogging, does not helpfully describe the format and
suggests triviality. Almost everyone involved in live blogging sees the
drawbacks. The potential for confusion, and the difficulty that users can
encounter if they come across a live blog in the middle of a story, is clear.
REFERENCES:
● http://dcac.du.ac.in/documents/E-Resource/2020/Metrial/420AakritiKohli22.pdf
● https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1207/s15506878jobem4502_9
● https://www.slideshare.net/shailmadhur/live-reporting-for-tv-108321536
● https://www.dw.com/en/ridiculous-and-arbitrary-indian-journalists-slam-ndtv-ban/a-36293627
● https://www.google.co.in/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2008/dec/18/mumbai-terror-attacks-india
SUBMITTED BY:
Deepika Saini
Palomi Gupta
Gaurvi Narang
No comments:
Post a Comment