Barkha Dutt defends herself in this piece! An analysis:
Not once, were we asked by anyone in authority, to switch our cameras off, or withhold images. When we did so, it was entirely our own assessment that perhaps it was safest to do so. - If that was the case, why did they resort to blanking out news channels (including NDTV) in Mumbai? Btw, didn't we hear her describe 'a secret alley behind the Oberoi' through which people were being rescued? Did she think that these terrorists were so brain dead so as to not be able to guess where this was? Or that they would cools their heels in the lobby of the Taj even as she and her colleagues let it be known that several VIPs were hiding in the Chambers? Great self censorship, I must say!
Allegations that I or any of my colleagues across the industry shoved a microphone in the faces of any waiting relative, are untrue in the extreme. - Maybe she was polished enough not to force a mike into someone's face, but she was dragging people around to make sure they were in the right camera angle. And several of her colleagues did actually thrust mikes into faces!
On this one point, I would concede that perhaps, this was a balance we lost and needed to redress earlier on during the coverage. But, mostly our attention was on the hotels, because they were the sites of the live encounters, and not because of some deliberate socio-economic prejudice. - Hear, hear, she concedes a point! Actually, what she meant was that CST wouldn't have such high TRPs!
But it is important to understand that in the absence of any instructions on site and in the absence of any such framework we broke NO rules. - This really gets my goat! She didn't break any rules, but if she had drawn a line for herself, we wouldn't be having those facebook communities!
When asked in an interview on NDTV, what struck him watching the events unfold on television, Narayan Murthy, said it was the "finest piece of TV journalism in a decade." - I have great regard for Mr. Murthy for having put India on the global map, but with all due respect - who died and made him the expert on media coverage? What Ms Dutt really means is - "I have big rich people praising me, why would I bother about what the regular Joe/Jane says?.
I believe that criticism is what helps us evolve and reinvent ourselves. But when malice and rumour are regarded as feedback, there can be no constructive dialogue. - Right, the common man has nothing better to do than malign her. Does she ever stop to think why her and no one else? Srinivasan Jain belongs to the same channel, it would help if she could learn some basics of journalism from him!
But in journalism, we know that, praise and criticism are twins that travel together. And we welcome both and try and listen to both carefully. - Does she really? The whole article does nothing but defend her stance - we broke no rules, the people wanted to talk, XYZ thanked me, ABC praised me. Grow up Ms Dutt. And shut the h$#% up!
Not once, were we asked by anyone in authority, to switch our cameras off, or withhold images. When we did so, it was entirely our own assessment that perhaps it was safest to do so. - If that was the case, why did they resort to blanking out news channels (including NDTV) in Mumbai? Btw, didn't we hear her describe 'a secret alley behind the Oberoi' through which people were being rescued? Did she think that these terrorists were so brain dead so as to not be able to guess where this was? Or that they would cools their heels in the lobby of the Taj even as she and her colleagues let it be known that several VIPs were hiding in the Chambers? Great self censorship, I must say!
Allegations that I or any of my colleagues across the industry shoved a microphone in the faces of any waiting relative, are untrue in the extreme. - Maybe she was polished enough not to force a mike into someone's face, but she was dragging people around to make sure they were in the right camera angle. And several of her colleagues did actually thrust mikes into faces!
On this one point, I would concede that perhaps, this was a balance we lost and needed to redress earlier on during the coverage. But, mostly our attention was on the hotels, because they were the sites of the live encounters, and not because of some deliberate socio-economic prejudice. - Hear, hear, she concedes a point! Actually, what she meant was that CST wouldn't have such high TRPs!
But it is important to understand that in the absence of any instructions on site and in the absence of any such framework we broke NO rules. - This really gets my goat! She didn't break any rules, but if she had drawn a line for herself, we wouldn't be having those facebook communities!
When asked in an interview on NDTV, what struck him watching the events unfold on television, Narayan Murthy, said it was the "finest piece of TV journalism in a decade." - I have great regard for Mr. Murthy for having put India on the global map, but with all due respect - who died and made him the expert on media coverage? What Ms Dutt really means is - "I have big rich people praising me, why would I bother about what the regular Joe/Jane says?.
I believe that criticism is what helps us evolve and reinvent ourselves. But when malice and rumour are regarded as feedback, there can be no constructive dialogue. - Right, the common man has nothing better to do than malign her. Does she ever stop to think why her and no one else? Srinivasan Jain belongs to the same channel, it would help if she could learn some basics of journalism from him!
But in journalism, we know that, praise and criticism are twins that travel together. And we welcome both and try and listen to both carefully. - Does she really? The whole article does nothing but defend her stance - we broke no rules, the people wanted to talk, XYZ thanked me, ABC praised me. Grow up Ms Dutt. And shut the h$#% up!
2 comments:
that was more or less what I was thinking too.
You do sound angry.
I am. The media created a lot of trouble, especially Ms Dutt.
Post a Comment