December 19, 2008	Friday	Zilhaj 20, 1429

NEW DELHI, Dec 18: Indian broadcasters unveiled on Thursday a new set of rules on covering live events after accusations that television news channels might have unintentionally aided militants during the Mumbai attacks.

The guidelines ban broadcasting of footage that could reveal security operations and any live contact with hostages or attackers during terror attacks or similar public order situations.

Such reporting “glamorises” militant outfits and their causes, said a statement by the News Broadcasters Association, an umbrella group of Indian TV channels.

“In live reporting of hostage situations or rescue operations, no details of identity, number and status of hostages should be telecast or information given of pending rescue operations,” the statement said.

The repeated screening of gory images or dead bodies must also be avoided. “Showing corpses is not something which helps,” retired judge J.S. Verma, the chairman of the NBA’s complaints authority, said at a press conference.

“Ultimately no one can ignore public opinion. It’s a question of mutual respect and consideration.”

Verma said the media must show “self-restraint” and be aware of the impact their work has on both public safety and the feelings of viewers.

Indian television news channels were heavily criticised for their coverage of the Mumbai siege, with one station airing a telephone conversation with one of the 10 gunmen.

The stations were also accused of broadcasting information about rescue operations that could have helped the militants as they fought to hold back the security forces.

Verma said the NBA expected all news channels to follow the guidelines as there was a strong degree of “peer pressure” within the industry after experience of broadcasting the Mumbai attacks.“It’s always better to self-regulate than let someone else regulate,” he said.

NBA secretary general Annie Joseph told AFP that its guidelines had previously referred to national security but that “the Mumbai episode was unprecedented.” Similar regulations are already in place in the United States, Britain and Canada.—AFP