(from Blithering Bunny)
Criticism of the BBC’s activities in Nepal from Indian paper The Statesman:
BBC’s coverage of Nepal raises questions
Sudeshna Sarkar in Kathmandu
Feb. 6. — British Broadcasting Corporation’s coverage of the recent developments in Nepal raises questions about ethics.
On 1 February, Nepal’s King Gyanendra dismissed Prime Minister Mr Sher Bahadur Deuba and his Cabinet, announced a new council of ministers under his chairmanship and imposed a state of emergency suspending fundamental rights. Communication lines were cut and flights stopped from Kathmandu. Following the royal action, BBC Radio’s World Service broadcast an interview with Maoist leader Krishna Bahadur Mahara. Speaking from an undisclosed location, the rebel leader, who carries a price on his head, said the King had closed all doors for negotiations with his action. The programme, aired around 11 p.m. in Nepal, was heard by numerous people, including government and army officials.
The anchor mentioned its Nepal stringer, Netra KC, by name. He also mentioned the fact that since telephone lines were disconnected in Nepal, KC was nipping across the border into India and making calls from there. Soon after that, there were unconfirmed reports that Netra KC had either gone into hiding or was missing.
Today, an official intimation came from the International Federation of Journalists who issued a statement saying the president and general secretary of the Federation of Nepalese Journalists had been arrested. It further added that BBC representative Netra KC had also “disappeared” after being called to the army barracks in Nepalgunj. “The IFJ is calling for the international community to support our courageous Nepalese colleagues,” the statement said.
But if the report about KC is true, it raises questions about the BBC’s ethics in disclosing the name and mode of operation of its representative in a country where emergency has been imposed and press freedom curtailed.
Netra KC was earlier reportedly roughed up by the Maoists when he had gone to an outer district. At a time the media should show responsibility in its reportage of a crisis, several foreign correspondents have been relying on hearsay and rumour.
Another BBC correspondent visited the National Human Rights Commission office in Kathmandu to ask about reports that the army had raided a hostel and arrested students.
The new dispensation in Nepal’s gagging the Nepalese media has fuelled exaggerated reports by the foreign media. Dubbed “parachute journalists,” they have been Nepal’s bane last year too when they covered a Maoist blockade of Kathmandu and a period of unrest triggered by the killing of 12 Nepalese workers in Iraq in a sensational, exaggerated and often inaccurate manner.
(via Dissecting Leftism)
Not a very clear report, it has to be said, but worth passing on nonetheless.
At no time over the past year or so have the BBC reported that Nepal is SAFE for tourists. It only reports internal strife. In fact, Nepal is a totally friendly country to tourists, and very safe. Even the Maoists in the hills are courteous. They stop trekkers – but only to seek a “contribution” of 100 rupees, equal to £8. For which they give an explanatory leaflet and a receipt. When trekking around Annapurna for 3 weeks in October there was nil trouble reported by anyone I met, and no tourists have been hurt or killed by Maoists over the past decade. (The BBC are far worse robbers !)
At no time over the past year or so have the BBC reported that Nepal is SAFE for tourists.
“Some feel there is room for optimism. Rajendra Suwal runs nepalnature.com, which promotes environmentally sensitive tourism. […]
He also feels that foreign tourists’ increasing encounters with Maoists, especially on popular trekking routes, are a good thing that he hopes will continue in 2005.
businesses in Kathmandu
“It exposes indoctrinated Maoists to the world, it means they have to say what they want, other than [resort to] bloodshed.”
And although the conflict deters some tourists, “people with a pulse for Nepal will keep coming”, he says.
“Once they phone Kathmandu they know it’s safe for them.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4119145.stm
“While the Maoists are not targeting tourists, the war has started directly hitting the tourism sector – Nepal’s most important industry.
Young foreign visitors I met at the guest house were aware
“Young foreign visitors I met at the guest house were aware of the conflict but had seen nothing at first hand. […]
Across Nepal, the Maoists have even gone out of their way to say tourists are welcome and won’t be harmed.
Tourist arrivals up to July have in fact been well up on last year.
But in some ways the tranquillity is deceptive.
In Kathmandu in mid-August a five-star hotel was bombed, causing no casualties but sending fresh jitters through the tourist trade.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/3703540.stm
Anonymous
You can find virtually anything on the BBC website, it is so massive/overgrown/bloated. But the radio and TV channels do NOT say Nepal is safe for tourists. They therefore deter tourists and damage the incomes of ordinary Nepalese people. As applies to so many other areas and topics, the BBC is often pig-ignorant, no matter how much we pay them.
To recap, JiL. You wrote the BBC have not reported Nepal might be safe. This isn’t true – as a basic search for “Nepal” shows.
Your assertion that TV/radio have never said Nepal may be safe for tourists is unproveable either way. But, given that the same correspondent providing the online content is likely to be giving the radio/news information and also given that you don’t watch/listen to all BBC content all the time, how likely is it you are correct?
At any rate, why bother getting excited about any online news stories when you can conveniently dismiss the stories that disprove your statements with the argument that the online site is bloated and carries all manner of content?
Anonymous
What I have heard and seen on the BBC – quite a few stories – never says that Nepal is safe for tourists.
Never. Out of at least 10 stories over the past year. But the general flavour of the stories is that Nepal is unsafe.
Kids die in poverty in mountain valleys because the BBC and others paint a false picture.
JiL: the situation in Nepal sounds awful.
But even supposing it were true that the BBC and others failed to report it was safe despite the bombings and the extortion of money, this would not make them the cause of poverty.
Media hasn’t brought about dependency on tourism and it hasn’t brought about maoist insurgency.
Furthermore, regardless of reporting accuracy, tourists tend not to appreciate the nuances of rebels bombing tourist hotels, coaches and the US Information Centre, but declaring they are not targeting tourists.
FWIW, the US State Department explicity advised against travel to Nepal in Sept 04. Is the US to blame for Nepalese poverty? Surely if it were, beebazoid rabid leftie groupthink would have meant the BBC had have reported it by now?
Anonymous
You are clearly ignorant of Nepal. There was one hotel incident. Tourist buses are not bombed – the Maoists actually let them through roadblocks. Bepal was attractive to tourists because it has stupendous scenery, superb trekking routes, a wealth of history in the Kathmandu valley. Tourists are SAFE there but tourism has been badly damaged by negative media reports. Ask any Nepali. The BBC reports without proper balance. No change there, then.
“You are clearly ignorant of Nepal”
Before hurling insults, check the facts. I’m sure you’re not being ignorant – perhaps you just can’t be bothered to check the facts.
Soaltee Crowne Plaza – attacked (Aug 04)
Hotel Malla – attacked (Aug 04)
– Two brits on tourist bus which is stoned and torched (March 04)
– 3 Indian tourist buses that break a strike are attacked (May 04)
– Parked tourist bus bombed in Koteswor(June 04)
Anonymous
OK – 2 very very minor hotel incidents. Both large hotels that are used by business people more than tourists – bith with royal connections. Far less serious than events in Spain. Only 2 Brits involved in a bus incident – there are dozens of tourist buses every day. The Maoists state categorically that they welcome tourists, that their argument is with the monarchy not the tourists. BBC TV and radio grossly exaggerate the dangers. I was safer in Nepal, night or day, than I am in parts of London.
It’s hard to blame the media for exaggerating the dangers when the FCO specifically urged extreme caution for visits to Nepal this year and the US State Department has advised US citizens not to go.