Journalism is a gritty profession where enormous learning comes on the job, far more than it does from studying abstract principles in textbooks or how-to manuals. It is a profession that can sometimes hinge on the last-minute decision of an astute editor, enabling a journalist in the field to deliver a poignant story that stands apart from reams of mundane, factual reportage.
Thus it was for me on one wintry morning in January 2013, when I travelled from Washington DC to Chicago to bear witness to an event that mattered to most, if not every Indian citizen: the sentencing of David Headley for his role in the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks.
When I stepped out of the frosty Chicago air and into the District Court premises, there was already a throng of journalists clamouring to get into position for the best possible coverage of the proceedings.
Suddenly a U.S. Marshall announced that there were limited seats available inside the courtroom, but a media holding room had been set up adjacent to the courtroom with a live audio feed. There was one catch: no recording devices would be allowed in the courtroom — telephones, recorders, laptops or any electronic equipment. Only pens and paper would be allowed.
Each journalist had to choose one option, and for almost all of them it was an obvious choice: the media room, where they’d be able to file their copies in the shortest amount of time.
For me, it was a genuine quandary. I reasoned that most mediapersons would be focussed on publishing the basic gist of the proceedings and the number of years in prison awarded to Headley. Their stories would be drops in the ocean of instant news delivery and there would be little to set them apart from each other. However, the alternative, sitting in the courtroom and seeing Headley, in his grey track pants and sweatshirt, face victims’ families and hear their poignant accounts of how the attacks had ripped apart their bodies and their lives seemed to me capable of yielding a far more powerful narrative.
Considering that it was an important decision, I called my editor at the time, Siddharth Varadarajan, who took but a moment to confirm my instinct and advised me to go ahead with the courtroom reportage.
The result? A detailed story on how the mood in the courtroom, the accounts of survivors and families, and the arguments made those 90 minutes so unforgettable. ( https://goo.gl/8FFyML )
