Like many others, Tarek Atia found Egyptian TV's coverage of the Taba blasts sorely lacking "I couldn't believe what I was seeing," said Hossam El- Garahi, a stock exchange analyst. Having learned of the incident from the satellite channel, Al-Arabiya, El-Garahi kept flipping back to Egyptian TV, determined to find out more about what was going on in Taba. "All the channels had the regular stuff going on -- a play here, a video clip there -- it was like this thing wasn't happening in Egypt." Millions of other people couldn't believe their eyes as they watched their TV screens late Thursday night. It wasn't just the horrific images emerging from Taba that astounded them, but the seeming oblivion to those events being demonstrated by their local channels. On channel 1, a play continued without interruption. On channel 2, a video clip. Channel 3 was airing an interview, as was channel 4, and so on. Finally, said a flustered and angry El-Garahi, a news ticker appeared that indicated that an explosion, which might have been caused by a gas leak, had occurred in Taba. "That useless ticker remained unchanged for the next several hours," he said. Viewers hungry for information relied more on channels like Al-Jazeera and Al-Arabiya (or CNN, as in El-Garahi's case) that were basically blanketing their coverage with news from Taba, albeit with an annoying lack of new details. In fact, most of that first coverage was basically a continuous reel of an Israeli ambulance leaving the scene, and a wounded blond woman on a stretcher. Those images mainly served to further confound Egyptian viewers, who began wondering what Israeli rescue crews were doing in Egypt. Would state-owned and run Egyptian TV help explain the situation, or at least provide an official spin to the surreal goings on? Not for a while yet. As for those who didn't have satellite TV, they were still under the impression that the whole thing might just be a gas leak. For many, the "farce" of Thursday's coverage was just more of the same. They had gotten used to getting their news from anywhere but here. Samiha Dahroug, head of Nile News, defended her channel's coverage. "I was saddened by the false allegations about Nile News not breaking the news, and then not covering it properly," she told Al-Ahram Weekly. "We scooped Al-Jazeera by three minutes. We interrupted the regularly scheduled programme to broadcast the news. We immediately sent a reporter to the scene." Dahroug's defence not withstanding, viewers have long complained of having a general sense that Egyptian news operations are not quite with the times. Strange that television -- arguably the most popular form of media for the general public -- should be one of the last bastions of an archaic style of presenting information to the public. Viewers of all socioeconomic levels have become increasingly sophisticated, thanks not only to the Internet and satellite TV, but the emergence, as well, of extremely "with it" radio stations broadcasting in both English and Arabic, and encouraging more dynamic interaction with viewers. TV news, meanwhile, has for the most part stuck to anachronisms like announcers with deadpan delivery styles, disjointed footage accompanying reports, and a somewhat suspect prioritising of the day's events. When change does occur, mostly in reaction to intense criticism or rapidly falling ratings, it would seem to be superficial, like new announcers chosen for their looks rather than any particular talent at engaging viewers, or knowledge of current events. One former Nile News producer said that even when the channel's coverage began, it was a bit odd. "The introductory summary of the 12 o'clock news did not even mention Taba, even though it was the first item on the actual news report following it... And since everyone knows that most viewers use the summary to decide whether they're going to watch the news, why wasn't it included?" The source said the channel used to be more daring. "They were confused by the nature of the news, and Israel's involvement. It was the first time this size incident had occurred in Egypt, and they were unable to find a good middle ground that allowed them to cover it without fear." The poor coverage was not surprising, he said, considering that a great many of the channel's more experienced staff members had migrated to greener pastures, leaving the channel with a shortage of talent, and in "a state of fatal inactivity". The channel's top presenters, he said, have all either left, or been marginalised. "When the channel was first established in 1998," he said, "it had the best announcers in Egypt. Today, they have all gone to the Arab satellite channels, many of them disgruntled by their experience with Nile." That was quite ironic, considering the channel was part of a bouquet of specialised satellite channels originally launched by the Information Ministry as a direct reaction to growing competition from Arab satellites. "Even those who are still there, and who are good, have lost their competitive edge and their language skills from being in such a mediocre atmosphere," he said. "The new presenters don't really have much politics experience, they don't even watch the channel, and they don't know who their colleagues at other news agencies are. They only have a couple of good people now... Mohamed Hamdi, the guy they sent [to Taba], is the same guy who went to Sharm when the Flash airplane crashed. What if he's not available? Because there are so few good people, it becomes very difficult to distribute the work properly." But will the Egyptian Radio and Television Union -- and the state that owns and supports it -- be satisfied that even its once fabled news channel may soon, or has already, become just one of those many dozens, or even hundreds, that surfers just zoom by as they head for others offering more relevant substance? Not if it truly understands the importance of getting its act together, or at least giving the impression of doing so. It has become all too clear that impression is everything -- first impressions especially, and especially with an incident like this. And the first impression that emerged was basically from an Israeli point of view, since Israelis were the only ones filming, and Israelis were the only ones speaking. And that impression was the one that stuck. Thus, any subsequent developments, many of which may be crucial to understanding the entire incident, would probably pass most people by, once other news occupied the media's attention. And so the fact that it wasn't just Israelis who died, that nearly half of the victims were non-Israelis, was probably lost in the fray. The former employee said you are not even allowed to discuss the issue of competition between Nile News and Al- Jazeera or Al-Arabiya "because the truth would be too harsh -- for one thing, that there's not enough money to send an adequate team to cover an event like this." While Dahroug was proud of the fact that Nile News was the only Egyptian channel with a licence to interrupt programmes to air breaking news that accomplishment -- quickly breaking the news and then retreating to a neutral corner -- may not be enough these days. Asked if he remembered the channel having a clear-cut plan on how to cover an emergency if one were to occur, the former employee chuckled. "Only if it looked like a war was going to happen in a couple of days, then they'd come up with a plan."
