Thoughts from London

As they say Sky’s the limit
Nothing brings foreign newsmen in their droves to a country or region like disaster, tragedy or conflict. Like bears attracted to wild honey they would arrive armed with satellite communication systems, cameras and impedimenta of the latest technology.

Basically there is nothing wrong with that. It is in the nature of the news media to report the news to the world. Critics might say however that the western media are particularly selective in what they report from or of the developing countries. The process of development, how they cope with their problems, their successes hardly make a few column inches on page 20 of a major newspaper or 10 seconds on an international TV channel.

In short 'good' news is not news. It is the disasters and conflicts, emergencies and failures in governance that make the headlines in the electronic or print media.

It is understandable that disasters such as what Asia has experienced since the tsunami struck should make the news and arrest the attention of the world.

What is in dispute is the quality of the reporting from the disaster zones and the manipulative nature of the news channels at base. Are the news channels being suborned or manipulated by those with a political agenda for whom even human tragedy is a tool to be used in the pursuit of their goals?

Previously this column has pointed out how western journalists were sent on paid visits to Sri Lanka by the LTTE and others were used for propaganda purposes.

The task of those who have meticulously cultivated the art of using the media has often been helped by uninformed journalists catapulted into the country or others who came on genuine news assignments with only a cursory knowledge of issues and so were easily influenced.

From Day One when news of the tsunami disaster reached us here, I have been monitoring three international television news channels and other TV channels here on a regular basis on two TV sets. They are BBC News24. ITV and Skynews

Such constant monitoring gives one a fair assessment of the news content and the manner in which it is presented by those in the various affected areas and packaged back at the centre here.

The BBC has previously been accused of an LTTE bias and some of its programmes in the past have clearly shown a certain one-sidedness in presentation.

One programme that particularly comes to mind is a presentation shortly after the A9 roadway was opened and the BBC visited the Wanni. That programme clearly lacked any balance which left the inescapable impression that balance and objectivity was hardly the intention.

This time round the BBC showed much more reticence and care in reporting Sri Lanka's disaster. This was particularly so because as the story unfolded they had experienced and knowledgeable journalists there who were ready to pinpoint shortcomings wherever they were found. They were also prepared to pay tribute where it was due, like George Alagiah's report on the dedication of the doctors at the Galle Hospital, the local story.

But this was not true of the BBC Tamil Service. A Tamil writer who has monitored "Tamil Osai" over the years wrote publicly the other day how the service's Sri Lankan broadcasters particularly it senior producer, "have been accused by the media of airing broadcasts in derogation of the BBC's stated principle of balanced reporting."

He refers in particular to separate broadcasts made on December 29 by two Tamil reporters, one for Tamil Osai and the other for BBC's Sandesaya programme. Both reporting from the same place in Batticaloa on the same issue, gave two sharply differing stories. While the Sandesaya report was rounded and balanced, says the writer, the reporter for Tamil Osai "only aired the accusation of the LTTE area commander berating the Sri Lanka Government."

While ITV too played the story generally straight without political embellishments, the biggest culprit was the Murdoch-owned Skynews. The Thursday after the tsunami disaster, a representative of a Tamil organisation here appeared on Skynews urging the public not to donate relief to the Sri Lanka Government because it will not benefit the Tamil people in the north and east who are not receiving any relief.

Apparently in response to that, Skynews reporter Peter Sharp went to Mullaitivu (how he entered Tiger-controlled areas was not mentioned) from where he told a story of deprivation, of lack of government relief and even made political prognostications. He said there was anger as "there was no sign of government aid." He claimed the area was ignored "unlike the tourists areas in the South," insinuating that help was reaching the South because of foreign tourists.

That story was carried on Skynews from early morning Friday at least 20 times. Then Sky contacted High Commissioner Faisz Musthapha who refuted the allegations and cited LTTE Political-Wing leader Thamilselvan's remarks on BBC that government relief was reaching Tamil areas.

Then came the manipulation of the story. At 4.15pm Skynews carried Musthapha's observations for a brief 3 or 4 minutes. Thereafter his observations rejecting Sharp's claims were dropped completely from subsequent newscasts while the TV network continued to air Sharp's Mullaitivu report several hours after the High Commissioner's comment.

I telephoned Skynews and asked for an official comment on why the story was being aired without the official denial also being cited. Skynews promised to get back to me with a comment. I'm still waiting for it one week later. That, however, is not the end of the story. When the High Commissioner's comment were dropped, Faisz Musthapha had indicated to Skynews that he would like to be heard on these allegations.

Two days later the Sri Lankan High Commissioner along with senior diplomats from other tsunami-affected countries were attending a major event at an Indian Hindu temple in Neasden.

Before the event a Skynews crew that was present interviewed Faisz Musthapha. This time it was expected that Skynews would carry his remarks. Though I monitored Skynews throughout the night and the next day the interview initiated by Skynews was not carried.

Why? Either because it was not consistent with the Sharp's report and so dropped or because Skynews was influenced to keep it out. Once again I telephoned Skynews to ask if the High Commission's interview was carried and if so when. Once again Skynews said it would get back to me in the afternoon. Many afternoons have passed and I'm still waiting for that call.

Peter Sharp quoted a Tamil health worker in Mullaitivu as asking why the government did not send helicopters there. Any sharp reporter would have checked to see how many helicopters the government (Air Force) had now. It would have had more if the Tigers had not shot down a couple. In any case for a couple of years now LTTE leaders have been enjoying free helicopter rides from Katunayake International Airport to their Wanni lairs and even from the Eastern province to Kilinochchi.

Sharp refers to relief to the tourist areas in the South. Had there been no relief at all to western tourists, the Sharp types would have been the first to condemn Sri Lanka for providing no help. Sharp wound up saying he was reporting from Mullaitivu in "Tamil occupied territory." Was that a slip of the tongue or did he really mean it. You know, like Israel's illegal occupation of Arab territory.

His shoddy one-sided journalism was compounded by Skynews manipulative technique and its refusal to carry another point of view, especially when it was the TV network that sought those views. When it comes to partial and deliberately doctored news Sky's the limit.

Back to Columns