India Must Drop Its Satellite License Transmission Rule That Hindered Reporting Of Last Week’s Mumbai Attacks -- The World’s Largest Democracy Should Not Prevent International News Media Doing Their Jobs

Philip Stone December 2, 2008

Now that the terror of Mumbai is over the Indian government is conducting a top-to-bottom re-examination of everything that occurred during those awful days, and while security will, of course, be the top priority, it should also look into how government bureaucracy stopped the international television news media transmitting their satellite pictures around the world because of either no transmission license or refusing an extension to an expired license.

Thus it was that CNN International had to explain Friday (after midnight in Mumbai) that it could no longer transmit live satellite pictures from India because its satellite transmission license had expired. So CNN reporters who previously were shown in top quality video were suddenly down to their still picture on screen, a map of India, and awful cell phone audio quality.

This went on for several hours but then CNN was back with what again looked liked satellite quality, so did CNN get its license renewed very quickly through what is usually a very slow Indian bureaucracy? Apparently not. According to CNNI in London. “We are not using the satellite truck which had its license expire,” a spokesman told ftm in an email. “Beyond that, we are not commenting further.”

And a lack of a satellite transmission license must also have been the reason why we were continually treated to Ben Brown anchoring BBC World News from outside the Taj Mahal Hotel with what was obviously broadband quality. One would think the BBC of all news organizations would have connections in the Indian government to quickly get a temporary satellite transmission license, but then one would have been wrong.

And while CNN isn’t saying how it suddenly started putting out satellite quality again some hours later, but not from its own truck, perhaps its relationship with CNN/IBN, a 24-hour news outlet in India may have helped. CNN/IBN, especially in the early hours of the various sieges, served invaluable, if somewhat excitable, transmissions that CNN showed live around the world, and which it also streamed throughout the crisis on cnn.com.

Incidentally, watching that CNN/IBN coverage was enthralling. Their style of journalism seems to be far more excitable than what we may be used to even in the most dire of circumstances (can anyone forget Walter Cronkite biting his lip and  wiping away a tear after announcing President Kennedy was dead?)  but it was fascinating to hear those local Mumbai correspondents tell the story of their city under siege, as it was fascinating to watch the headlines and taglines they threw across their screens. Different coverage for different cultures.

CNN had its satellite transmission license for that week by pure chance – it had scheduled a series of live spots as part of its India Means Business week. So it had the truck, crew, and even Hong Kong anchor Andrew Stevens actually in Mumbai, with also Sara Sidner, its resident correspondent.  And because of that the network had one up on other international agencies, at least with a satellite transmission license that was good through Friday midnight.

Now since most of those India Means Business pieces were, for the most part, great PR pieces explaining and showing first-hand the growing Indian business empire, one might have thought that the Indian government PR folks would have done all they could to be helpful to CNN, if not the rest of the international news broadcasters, but then one would have been wrong. CNN says it asked for an extension of the license and got turned down.

CNNI then did the smart thing and told the world why “in the interests of transparency” as their anchors put it, it could no longer transmit live stand-ups. One might have thought that government PR flaks in India, or their embassy staffs around the world, might have noticed and quickly would have got the message to New Delhi to cut through that bureaucracy, but then once again one would have been wrong.

Without getting into reasons why India requires, under normal circumstances, TV satellite transmission licenses, obviously when there is a major news event going on there should be a system in place that allows the international media to cover that news event via satellite transmission for the outside world. 

By making the BBC, for instance, stay with broadband, and having CNN revert to still pictures of their correspondents on screen did India no public relations good. After all, this is the world’s largest democracy, not some despot nation that needs to control what news flows out of the country. Not that one can control that any more. The number of updates on Twitter by the minute was really unbelievable, and assuming you could believe those 140 character messages – and they really seemed to have the real feel of authenticity about them – then instant dramatic news was continually being transmitted around the world with a lot of information the news organizations didn’t have.

Even CNN often referred to the Twitter and general Internet traffic as citizen journalists by the droves provided news and pictures. It is a different news world out there and unless a country cuts off all forms of communications the story now gets out – it no longer needs a news organization to do it.

But as far as TV international news organizations go, it was heartening this time around to see that CNN had finally remembered its live news roots. This column has often complained in the past that CNNI producers seemed more concerned these days about adhering to set program times starting on the hour and the half-hour and you could almost guarantee when the network left a live news event in mid-stream the timing was some five minutes before the next scheduled program. That was not Ted Turner’s vision for the network and those CNN executives today that think schedules are more important than live news coverage should be taken to the woodshed!

At least this time around CNN was ahead of everyone in staying with this breaking new story. There were times on Thursday when switching to BBC World and Al-Jazeera English, for instance, it was usual programming whereas on CNNI it remained continuing coverage. Sure they had the help from CNN/IBN, and luckily they had on the spot Andrew Stevens and Sara Sidner (a former anchor for KTVU in Oakland, California who joined CNNI this year; she was absolutely great!), but the fact is CNNI stayed with this story 24-hours a day from very early on which is more than can be said of the others.

What was lacking in CNN’s coverage? Well, where was Christiane Amanpour, CNN’s chief international correspondent? We expect her on these really big stories, but being based in New York these days we see very little of her on-site reporting, and while her documentaries are fine, she needs to be on-site for the big ones. Her analysis “from New York” just doesn’t seem to be so authoratative as it was when she was based in London. The fireman’s job these days seems left to Nic Robertson, senior international correspondent. He’s a fine gritty reporter, but CNN needs Amanpour on site anchoring events such as these. She offers the authority that says CNN owns that story.

That’s the one thing that at least the BBC did – it had Ben Brown anchoring some of its news programs, if only with broadband quality, from outside the Taj. That brings  up the question that since CNNI Hong Kong anchor Andrew Stevens was in town why didn’t he anchor , too, from outside the Taj? It all seems just that much more authoritative with the anchor on-site rather than in a London, Atlanta, or Hong Kong studio. Amanpour should have been there, too, and doing PR stateside for her documentary being premiered this week is not an acceptable excuse not to have been there for the big one.

The good news for Amanpour viewers, incidentally, is that she is supposedly going  to have her own daily show on CNNI starting sometime early in the new year.