Should channels be restricted from live coverage during an emergency??

Yash, i beg to differ from your view because no doubt it is important to show the people that whats happening around them but in events like 26/11 where strategy plays a key role in operation and moreover many lives are at stake, media should be a bit cautious !  Just for more TRP ratings u can put lives of many in danger.  People can be shown the events with some delay also because no one would want to loose our brave soldiers  or civilians just because they want LIVE update of what is happening. !!

The channel will show the weak points to enemy which helps them to study and plan about their future attack.They should be restricted from live coverage an emergency situation.The media people should have some responsibility.It is not acceptable

I believe most of the channel / media try to sell the story linking there name. for them it bring credibility to them regardless what they are showing to public.

They forget how they are presenting, what will the concequences etc. every story can't be treated as chalta hai type, think they should learn to differntiate. 

I believe most of the channel / media try to sell the story linking there name. for them it bring credibility to them regardless what they are showing to public.

They forget how they are presenting, what will the concequences etc. every story can't be treated as chalta hai type, think they should learn to differntiate. 

I believe most of the channel / media try to sell the story linking there name. for them it bring credibility to them regardless what they are showing to public.

They forget how they are presenting, what will the concequences etc. every story can't be treated as chalta hai type, think they should learn to differntiate. 

Today, Media has become one of the most effective, persuasive, and have big network to reach and get first hand information of every activity in the country. Still Media should be restricted to show LIVE COVERAGE of Crucial Situations because they create PANIC among common man. They show single (crucial pictures/videos) number of times which in result affect the people in a negative manner. Today Media is breaking all the barriers and putting lives of common man in a trouble. Before telecasting they should first see which news to be telecasted and in a proper manner – giving all the relevant information; without affecting the common people. During Mumbai attacks, some of the important information was leaked out which helped the terrorists; like the CONVERSATION WITH THE TERRORIST, it was the live telecast. Indirectly, the Media helped the terrorist (s) – To convey the message to the entire country ------  WHAT THEIR MOTIVE WAS. Today each and every Channel is in a rush to cover and telecast the news first. They are not even bothered how it is affecting the country and the common man. They should be restricted or there should be some conditions for broadcasting.

The uncontrolled telecast of the recent Mumbai attacks, which showed all the army and police deployments and positions is a case in point that Media should have some sort of censorship, at least self if not state regulated.

Media should behave in responsible manner under emergency situations like terror attack,riots,earthquake,floods etc.They must have their own code of conduct...to decide what is good for public  .They should not do any thing  just increas the TRPs.It is true that media shows us what they see but there Be a Balance.They should keep in mind the national security.

Yes, Undoubtly Live Coverage must be restricted during emergency for the sake of national security atleast. As we know that all ethics of journalism have taken  a backseat as reporters strived to outdo each other to grab eyeballs and boost ratings. Concerned viewers who tune in to get the updates on the vicious massacre get no choice but hear reporters 'shouting' out the news as the saga unfolded. Breaking all security cordons, and putting not only theirs but also the lives of other security personnel in jeopardy, members of the media bloated in self importance as their reports went on-air. Reporting live, many journalists spice up their coverage by speaking in a panic stricken tone, which became 'the' formula to catch the viewer's attention. In some cases like mumbai terror live coverage, many reporters from the Hindi electronic media resorted to stunts like lying on the ground to relay the news, which was clearly unnecessary as their very own camera crew were standing.

When it was prooved that the live coverage harms the nation's interests, media should impose self regulation and remain responsible

Coverage should be restricted and channels should exclude the inappropriate details. For example: Pictures of maligned bodies, movements of armed forces in case of emergency, etc.

Media should become more responsible.

The media is powerful, resourceful and have big network with capability to have quick first hand information of every happenings across the country. The government agencies do not have such mechanism and therefore, in crisis/disaster situations, it is necessary for the Media to collate the information they collect and channel it to the right agency as quick as possible. Media should act with responsibility, in analyzing the situations impartially, and judiciously handle various information, with right suggestions to mould public opinion in a positive and productive manner. In the 26/11, the perpetuators benefited most with media reports in passing on information to terrorists.

Currently most of the media thrive on speculative journalism propagating their own assumptions.  The un-ethic anti secular and  other such mindless hate messages uttered by one group or other, are given undue coverage in repeatedly broadcasting these, which only help spread and inflame it. Most of themedia bash the readers and viewer with advertisements and repeated meaningless out dated stereotype bickering. Many of the media actions are aimed in money making on advertisements on SMS and voice call based products and in self glorifying floor shows and discussions where often the real basics of the issues are lost sight of or never been discussed.

Some or the other way channels can give idea about the present situation to terrorist where they are making chaos.

Amanda, please read what people are suggesting here. It's not that anyone is saying completely STOP LIVE coverages....what every one is suggesting here i

I recommend that channels should telecast the footage with a time lapse and filter.

Santosh, as rightly pointed out..."truthful investigation" based journalism...LIVE coverage is nothing but sensationalising...where is the "investigation" ? Now every one in India is educated enough to understand and prepare themselves for the responsibility. Edited coverage can help the media to provide better content to make people understand so on and so forth.

No body is opposing media to do LIVE coverage, it's more to understand, where to STOP.

Well Deepak, you are right that billion people should know what's happening in their country, however, do you also see that this creates:

1 Panic all across the country?

2 It also exposes the retailitary strategy to the perpetrators of crime?

3 Is everyone in the country educated enough to take a calculated decision?

4 What if this creates some kind of communal riots somewhere else in the country?

Media should follow some kind of code of ethic in case of National Emergencies.

I strongly support that LIVE telecast of sensitive situations should be stopped. It's very difficult for the reporters to immediately asses the situation and take a stand whether its OK or NOT to show this specific visual. So it becomes essential that beyond a certain location, media should censor and not show all the things.

If they sincerely feel that the coverage that they did wouldn't affect anything, later on, they can show it. However, LIVE coverage brings the viewership and sensation which brings more audience for TV channels and more revenues, so it's difficult for media to accept NOT to show LIVE coverage. That's the call the MEDIA industry should take collectively in the national interest.

I agree with Kavita Shankar's argument.  Being from media, I say that media plays a very important role in disseminating information, but it has to be handled in a more mature way that we did during the terrorist attacks.

Give news, information is imortant....do not sensationalize to get eyeballs for the channel.

Deepak, we are not talking about channels being restricted from live coverage, we are saying that sensitive information,to give an example,  about the camondos landing and their every movement that was being shown live, we were actually giving a blow by blow account of their movements to the terrorists, which enabled them to plan their next moves.

Sensitive information should be restricted and not televised. It is pathetic that we not only televised but sensationalised what was going on in the two hotels and Nariman House, with the result that the terrorists were well informed.  This could have resulted in the death of some of the hostages. 

Thats how the terrorist in mumbai planned what to do knowing the status , which resulted in...U know what..

So Mr.Daniel  you still think that channels shouldn't be restricted from live coverage ??

I think instead of going live, a delay in relay might be helpful.....

The channels should be restricted from live coverage, as this helps terrorists to plan further on. Even if you cut dowm the cables of the respective building, they have their links outside, who can inform them via phones.

Today' technology is very advance and has made world a smaller place like a dot.  I feel media should provide us the news but not the live coverage especially of the movements of our troops and army.

Yes, of course, the channels in India must be restricted to do this as they have a very little sense of media ethics and social responsibility.

As in case of recent mumbai terror attack, Media - more particularly the TV media - played a vital role in creating a panic across the country till the operation black tornado was over and a sense of distrust among people of India on the government, the policing and national security system. Media carried a parallel investigation into various defense related issues that hardly have followed the technicalities required for such investigation and, again, constantly expalined sensitive coast maps, root maps and informations that have a great strategic importance.

Such acts must be declared illegal and anti national.