In recent times, the media has been abuzz about the “War Breaking” between Pakistan and India. Both television and print media reported details of the attacks, and when they ran out, they resorted to FAKE NEWS. News was delivered, and to substantiate it, more bulletins were delivered to dispel myths that were dished out. The way the news was reported clearly showed a decline in investigative journalism. Plus, the live coverage peddling intel during this war-like situation indicated the lack of responsibility at the media’s end.
The question, therefore, is no longer whether the crisis exists but how deep the rot runs.
The media is meant to depict the conscience of the nation. At its best, the media holds up a mirror; at its worst, it contorts this reflection. Once revered as the fourth pillar of Indian democracy, the media was meant to be a relentless seeker of truth, not just as a chronicler of events but a bridge between the governing and the governed.
We have seen a similar pattern of reporting in the Pegasus spyware surveillance scandal and the tragic death of actor Sushant Singh Rajput. While some news was deflected or completely ignored, others were conjecture-filled conclusions or moral policing in the Hippodrome. This reflected a landscape where truth has been compromised, and the only collateral is the public trust—disillusioned, cynical, and sceptical.
As the insatiable hunger for TRP wars and sensationalism grips the newsrooms, the lines between journalism and propaganda steadily blur. What was once celebrated as fearless journalism and spirited diversity is decaying. Reeling under corporate interests and political allegiances, today’s Indian media stands at a dangerous crossroads.
Journalists are under pressure due to immense structural strain. The post-COVID era has seen rampant job cuts, shrinking ad revenues, and bureau downsizing to the extent that some publications have shut shop forever. Amidst these circumstances, even well-meaning journalists are often caught between doing their job and keeping it, eroding editorial autonomy. The need for speed in the current technology era is another reason for media opting for shareability over depth. Algorithms not only fuel preferences but also fortify audiences into echo chambers driven by emotional triggers and bias.
That said, we still have independent news platforms, print publications, and regional media outlets that continue pursuing investigative journalism, often with limited resources and under significant threat. These exceptions, however, are the last line of defence.
Sensationalism sells often at the cost of truth. To blame the media solely is to ignore the silent collaborator, i.e., US. We, as audiences, are not powerless spectators; we are participants in the cycle. Our appetite for drama over depth encourages the sensationalism we detest. It’s no secret that consumer demand drives editorial decisions. In an ecosystem shaped by algorithmic and manufactured news, people are fed what they already believe, not what they need to know. Hence, media, especially those battling for survival, is tailored accordingly, forming the very DNA of a vicious cycle.
A course correction begins with realigning a media’s core values: truth, accountability, and public service. This means actively supporting independent journalism through safeguarding editorial control, subscription models that diminish advertising dependence, and partnerships supporting empowered fact-centric storytelling. Furthermore, media literacy must become part of the public discourse from the earliest stages of education and permeate throughout the workplace and online communities. An informed audience is not just harder to manipulate—it also forms the genesis of better journalism. From a governance perspective, transparency in media ownership and stronger regulatory frameworks can avoid conflicts of interest, ensuring the representation of diverse and underrepresented communities within the federal narrative.
Additionally, as consumers and communication professionals, we have an influence and a responsibility to prevent the further erosion of public trust in the media. Championing ethical storytelling that advocates truth over trend and substance over virality is a starting point. We must encourage clients to speak authentically and choose credible media partners. Internally, advocate for communications that do not weaponise trust-building strategies. The ability to understand the business of news is no longer optional; it is civic armour in an age of manufactured narratives.
If democracy is to endure, a colossal transformation is necessary. This shift requires a collective effort centred around a shared commitment to uphold integrity from all stakeholders—journalists, citizens, and social institutions. Whether the phrase “The Diabolic State of Media” becomes a definitive state or a turning point will depend on what we choose to see, believe, and support.
(Views are personal)
