Altering the media

In any vibrant democracy, the media is not a luxury; it is a mandate. Functioning as the fourth pillar of the state, its primary duty is to act as a watchdog, holding power to account and ensuring that the public remains informed. Yet, in the contemporary Indian landscape, this pillar is not just swaying-it is being hollowed out from within. When the media fails to interrogate the state, democracy does not merely stumble; it enters a period of existential peril. The post-2014 era has fundamentally altered the DNA of Indian journalism. Today, vast swaths of the country’s electronic and print media are owned by massive conglomerates whose commercial interests are inextricably linked to the goodwill of the ruling BJP-led NDA government. This corporate-political nexus has birthed a predictable, yet devastating, outcome: a media ecosystem split between uncritical propaganda and a more insidious form of self-censorship. The true state of Indian journalism is no longer revealed by what is shouted on prime-time television, but by what remains unsaid-the scandals never investigated and the powerful figures never scrutinized. India’s rank of 151st out of 180 countries in the 2025 World Press Freedom Index reveals a marginal improvement from previous lows but remains firmly in the “very serious” category. This slight statistical climb masks a deeper structural rot. International watchdogs have long warned that a combination of corporate ownership, economic vulnerability, and overt political pressure has decimated editorial independence. In this climate, critical reporting is no longer viewed as a professional duty; it is treated as an act of defiance, often met with legal threats, financial strangulation, and coordinated online harassment. This environment rewards conformity, giving rise to the “godi media” phenomenon. Many high-profile anchors and editors have effectively become de facto surrogates for the ruling party, mirroring government talking points and branding dissent as “anti-national.” When advertising revenue, broadcast licenses, and personal safety are at stake, silence becomes a rational business decision. This collapse of trust was perhaps most visible in 2023, when the opposition INDIA bloc boycotted fourteen prominent news anchors, accusing them of fueling social division. While the move was criticized as intolerant, it was merely a symptom of a deeper disease: the total breakdown of television news as a credible platform for fair debate. In response, a parallel universe of digital outlets and independent YouTube newsrooms has emerged to fill the vacuum. Their growing popularity reflects a public exhaustion with partisan theater. However, these newer voices operate under the shadow of constant pressure, facing legal notices and organized abuse that threaten their very survival. Among democracy’s four pillars-the legislature, executive, judiciary, and press-it is the press that currently appears as the weakest link. While the judiciary continues to fight for its independence, the media is increasingly seen as fragmented, financially fragile, and often complicit in its own marginalization. This is more than a professional failure – it is a constitutional crisis. When the media functions as a megaphone for the powerful, citizens are denied the tools to judge policy or expose wrongdoing. To reclaim its soul, Indian journalism needs more than cosmetic self-regulation. It requires newsrooms willing to break free from corporate-political capture and a collective solidarity that transcends platforms. Journalism is not a party franchise. It is a democratic necessity, and without a radical course correction, India’s press will remain a bitter paradox-freer in statistics, but muffled in reality.