Hijacking the media

As the “fourth pillar of democracy,” the media plays a pivotal role in holding power to account, disseminating information, and fostering informed public discourse. Since 2014, the Indian media landscape has undergone a marked transformation. Many prominent media houses have been acquired by corporate entities with direct or indirect ties to political power. It’s undeniable that the Indian media landscape has undergone far-reaching changes since 2014, especially concerning its relationship with the ruling government with noticeable shift in how the mainstream media covers political events and narratives. The line between journalism and propaganda has blurred, with some channels openly promoting ruling party leaders and government policies without critique but amplifying the failures of opposition parties. Before 2014, Indian media outlets were bold in scrutinizing political figures and government decisions. Even figures like Arvind Kejriwal (AAP) associated with the anti-corruption movement (IAC), had a field day attacking the Congress and UPA-II faithfully covered on a daily basis by news channels and newspapers. Today Kejriwal finds that the boot is on the other foot. This is a dangerous portent for constitutional democracy. Before 2014, the mainstream media was often critical of the Congress-led UPA government, exposing scams like 2G, Coalgate, and Commonwealth Games corruption. However, the government did not interfere with editorial freedom to the extent seen today. The media played a significant role in shaping public perception against the UPA government, which contributed to its electoral defeat in 2014. After 2014, there has been a decline in critical journalism, especially on television. Investigative stories that expose corruption, governance failures, and misuse of power have become rare in mainstream outlets. The carrot and stick was literally used when the BJP government significantly increased its spending on advertisements in media. This has led to financial dependency on government ads for many media houses. The impact has also led to editorial bias, with major media networks self-censoring to avoid losing government support. The growing corporatization has left journalists navigating an increasingly treacherous environment, where editorial autonomy is often compromised to appease advertisers, shareholders, or the ruling dispensation. Instances of investigative journalism-once the hallmark of India’s robust press-have dwindled as fear looms large over editorial decisions.Another term that was birthed from the Indian mainstream media’s proximity with the ruling establishment is the term Godi Media (lapdog media). This name has gained popularity to describe mainstream news networks that act as mouthpieces for the government. Sensationalism and misinformation have become rampant, with many TV debates focusing on communal narratives, nationalism, and attacking opposition figures rather than addressing pressing public issues like economic distress, unemployment, or farmer protests. Journalists and independent media outlets that question the government face legal harassment, tax raids, and sedition cases. The use of sedition laws and anti-terror laws (UAPA) against journalists has created an atmosphere of fear, leading to self-censorship. Popular independent media figures have either been forced to leave mainstream news or switch to digital platforms. While mainstream TV news and newspapers have largely become pro-government, digital and regional media platforms are filling the gap for independent and critical journalism. Though there has been a coup within mainstream media, the light at the end of the dark tunnel are social media platforms and independent journalists on YouTube who are playing a significant role in countering mainstream narratives.