It's simplest to describe the so-called national media as "metro media" because that is the core of its reporting.
as far as surveys on NE news in the media in Delhi is concerned, I know of a no. of studies by students of journalism (because they always come to me before submission and ask for my views!) although I doubt whether any media group has assigned any such survey. Also it would be good to do a comparative study of how much NE news gets into the metro media and how much news from other parts of the country gets into the NE media. We need to look at how we see others not just how others see us! On Buljit's point: as a journalist who has covered both international as well as India-related events for years, I must say that many journalists, esopecially the "senior" armchair ones, rarely travel outside their state or national headquarters to get a story. Unless you travel you don't get good stories because you don't realiase what is happening in distant pockets or even in those areas neighboring towns.There are many good stories of interesting initiatives across all states, whether it is community-driven eco-tourism/home stays or major initiatives with regard to health and other sectors in the NER which are lightly covered by media. Khanikar's project is an excellent one and deserves support. Another is the Ships of Hope program which we at the Centre for North East Studies and Policy Research initiated on the saporis of Dibrugarh district two years ag and has been running successfuly there for two years reaching thousands who never had access to medical facilities in their lives. We now also have a new ship which is reachnig marginalized groups in Dhemaji and Tinsukia and a Public Private Partenrship with the administrations of all three districts.The President visited our exhibit recently at the India Development Marketplace 2007 and spoke of its success in his remarks (see his website http://www.presidentofindia.nic.in ). One last and as important point: I have always been contesting the large figures of casualties in the conflict in the region bandied about by reporters who have begun writing in recent years for foreign news agencies, both out of the NER and Jammu and Kashmir. The otehr day, a report in Reuters, which I challenegd from Gwuahati and to which I have not had an answer, spoke of more than 20,000 persons have died in violence in Assam since 1979. M question is on what basis do reporters make these assertions? what are the facts? Have they bothered to go through the reports over 28 years and done a simple addition using one primary news source such as the Assam tribune. Yesterday's report by the Asian Centre for Human Rights nails that lie. It, refreshingly, blasts not just the security forces but also groups like Ulfa for their "gross violations of international humanitarian laws, especially by targeting civilians." But it gives the following figures: between May 2001 and May 2006, i.e. five years, a total of 1,214 persons were killed by militant groups in Assam, including 1,031 civilians and 183 security force personnel. And it quotes the Union Home Ministry to say that in 2005, 254 persons died in insurgency-related incidents in Assam while 242 dies in 2006. A simple multiplication of these figures gives us a possible total of 5,080 if we take the figure of 2005 as the base or 4,840 if the 2006 figure is the base. There are, surely, other deaths which are not recorded. Any death is tragic and such a number is a terrible travesty of the rights we espouse. But where does it add up to the tens of thousands that some writers keep harping on in every dispatch? They should have the grace to correct their figures and their news organizations should insist on some responsibility, at the minimum, where background facts are concerned. Sanjoy Hazarika
