Press Pause: Are we unsubscribing to India’s news Channels?

India recently went through a politically significant six-week-long election process. Despite being a third-time winner, PM Modi and his party did not secure as many seats as expected, resulting in losing its parliamentary majority for the first time in three terms. Approximately a billion people participated in this election and the outcome was somewhat surprising. 

Commentary by Azma Khan | Cover Graphic by Asmita Maurya
Summer Research Intern 2024

International media outlets such as Al Jazeera, Deutsche Welle (DW) and France 24 credited news and current affairs YouTubers for their critical coverage of sociopolitical issues in India. They suggested that many Indians are now turning to YouTube as their news source instead of traditional mass media channels. 

In the 19th century, historian Thomas Carlyle referred to the media as the fourth pillar of democracy. He emphasised the importance of the media in holding the ruling establishment accountable and ensuring the transparent functioning of the other three traditional pillars: executive legislative and judiciary.

In parallel to the traditional context, the definition of media has been evolving with the advancement of digital social media platforms. This new form of media has been seen transforming how information is spread and consumed. This has been altering the dynamics of journalism and how that affects the civil discourse of a nation. The role of Facebook in the Myanmar riots famously known as the Rohingya genocide is one such example of what the new age digital media is capable of.

Media Censorship in India

Media censorship is not a new issue in India, it has been in practice since the colonial era. The Vernacular Press Act of 1878 and the Indian Press Act of 1910 by the British government to censor the press, they demanded security deposits from the publishers. This was done to suppress the critiques of colonial rule and the fact that this is still a major issue in the 21st century in a sovereign country shows us what form of government we might be becoming. 

Post-Emergency, despite the reversal of the censorship law, successive governments attempted to introduce new censorship laws, under the guise of national security, facing massive protests. A notable example is the Defamation Bill of 1988, which the Rajiv Gandhi government was forced to withdraw due to media backlash. The 90s liberalisation led to an expansion in private television channels and newspapers. The advent of the internet changed the dynamics of how media freedom was perceived or regulated. The Information Technology Act of 2000 included provisions for online content regulation.

India's industrial and political landscape has also evolved over the years, yet concerns over journalist safety and media freedom persist. The scrutinisation of media outlets that reported on 2009 WikiLeaks Revelations, the alleged media blackout during Anna Hazare’s Protest and the 2015 ban on the BBC documentary "India's Daughter", impacted political dynamics and contributed to the Congress party's massive decline.

In recent years, in his second term, the Modi government came under the same fire because of how they attempted to suppress coverage of the farmers' protests and was also hugely criticised over the handling of the COVID-19 pandemic-related news coverage. The handling of the ongoing conflicts in Manipur reminds us of the frequent internet shutdowns and blanket censorship in Kashmir, especially during the removal of section 370.

Covid 19 Pandemic Coverage: 

During the pandemic lockdown mass media and social media became a quintessential tool in spreading information specially when the world was in a panic state. With that, there was an alarming increase in fake news and propaganda.

The conditions of India resembled the images of old plagues, viral pictures of mass cremations and patients gasping for air outside hospitals, due to shortage of beds shook the world with alarming concerns regarding human safety and rights.

The government was accused of underreporting covid deaths and the health ministry was also criticised for including controversial drugs like hydroxychloroquine in its guidelines. These issues raised a very serious debate on the freedom of speech and expression and the right of information of the public. 

Few of the state governments took an aggressive approach to suppressing any critical take on their management. For example, the state of Uttar Pradesh, the largest state in terms of population directed officials to take action under the National Security Act against individuals spreading rumours about the oxygen crisis. This was indirectly to put pressure on the journalist and the citizens who were reporting ground realities, on social media specifically on social media platforms.

Probably the most appalling action showing the hysterical state of the government was when they started pressurising international media too, with organised troll campaigns aiming to discredit their coverage of India’s COVID-19 situation. Many foreign journalists reported receiving calls from government officials asking them to tone down their reporting.

The censorship had a negative effect on public health information prorogation. In an attempt to curb critical reporting, the public's access to accurate and timely information was hindered. And all of these tactics shadowed India in a bad light, painting the authorities in a megalomaniac picture.

The lack of proper information created panic, resulting in the unfortunate death of many migrant workers during the interstate migration after the lockdown. The lack of comprehensive data collection during a major crisis raises concerns over the priority of the government. It felt like the government instead of spreading crucial information, rushed to suppress any kind of criticism regarding its regime prioritising its politics over the nation's health and safety. 

Coverage of farmers' protests: 

Farmers' protest was probably one of the largest protests that India had witnessed in the past decade. Journalists were detained (Mandeep Punya, being a prominent example), and legal charges were pressed during its coverage. 

Apart from the traditional news outlets, many social media accounts were also suspended during this period. The protest that was started against three domestic bills concerning the agricultural sector very soon became an international issue of human rights and press freedom. 

During these protests, Twitter was condemned for citing a "valid legal request" from Indian authorities as the reason for complying with the order to suspend critical accounts. This raises a huge global concern over how much power these social media platforms have. At the end of the day these platforms are owned by tech giants, mandating a solid regulatory framework, but parallelly also must have freedom from interference of any government entity in reporting essential news and facts creating a complex regulatory grey zone.

The Indian authorities labelled these protests as anti-national and acts of terrorism. This became a major faux pas when a popular American pop singer Rihanna posted a tweet of a CNN report on the protest with the caption "Why no one is talking about this?" She faced massive trolls and was also branded as a terrorist supporter.

After this many public figures such as cricketers and celebrities came out in support of the Indian authority and posted tweets that looked either very similar or exact copy-paste of each other.  This raised another concern over how this might be a part of a broader strategy of the government in an attempt to control the narrative. 

India's press freedom ranking also suffered considerably, dropping to 142nd out of 180 countries in the World Press Freedom Index during the protests. Reporters Without Borders and other watch dogs reported an increase in violence against journalists and pressure on them to align with the government's agendas as major factors for this decline. 

Coverage of Northeast:

It has been a year since the massive violence erupted between Meitei and Kuki communities in Manipur after a court ruling recommending the inclusion of the Meitei community in the Scheduled Tribe category. As this would be affecting the quota system in educational institutions and jobs. 

Located in the far eastern side of the nation, Manipur shares a relatively long and sensitive border with Myanmar. In the past year, 140 deaths and widespread displacement were reported. More than 60,000 people fled their homes raising grave concerns over the situation by many human rights activists.

The Internet was shut down, curfew was imposed, journalists were discouraged from publishing graphic descriptions of the violence and many social media platforms were demanded to remove posts and videos highlighting governments' failure in mitigating the conflict and their alleged inaction. 

Several videos of mob violence or sexual assaults were taken down to avoid public outrage and international scrutiny. The government also went to an extent when officials were publicly denouncing media reports that criticised their actions labelling them as misinformation. 

The lack of transparency in reporting has led to extreme disproportionality in coverage when it comes to critical issues concerning the government's shortcomings. This resulted in wide misinformation and confusion among people. Many international human rights organisations have criticised the government on many accounts and called for more transparency and accountability.

Business move or a hostile takeover: 

The majority of media houses are already being accused of doing jingoism - aggressive nationalism, very infamously being called out as ‘Godi’ media. Very recently a prominent news channel that was known to be critical of the ruling establishment was taken over by the Adani Group. 

Adani’s acquisition of Vishwa Pradhan Commercial Private Limited (VCPL) made them the majority stakeholder of the NDTV promoter entity, RRPR Holding. This move was criticised widely, and many journalists of the media house even resigned in protest. Apart from the concern over the use of this accusation to control media narratives, it also raises concerns that this move might be fostering an environment that favours the ruling party. 

Similar concerns were raised when Mukesh Ambani's Reliance Industries took control of Network18. These acts of suppression and consolidation of press freedom into the hands of a few large conglomerates threaten the pluralism and diversity of opinions which is critically essential for running a healthy democracy. 

Adding to this the declining press freedom in India, not only affects its internal democratic principles, but it also significantly affects its image on an international level. 

The lack of press freedom can weaken India’s diplomatic standing and its ability to advocate for democratic values internationally. To curb this India must reinforce its credibility as truly the largest democratic nation in the international community as it claims to be. 

References:

1. Johnson, Hawley. “Jurisprudence Relating to COVID-19.” Global Freedom of Expression, 16 Mar. 2021, globalfreedomofexpression.columbia.edu/updates/2021/03/jurisprudence-relating-to-covid-19/. Accessed 24 July 2024.

2. Welle (www.dw.com), Deutsche. “COVID: Why Is India Censoring Media during Public Health Crisis? | DW | 27.04.2021.” DW.COM, 2021, www.dw.com/en/covid-why-is-india-censoring-media-during-public-health-crisis/a-57353096.

3. “Making Waves in India: Media and the COVID-19 Pandemic.” Brookings, www.brookings.edu/articles/making-waves-in-india-media-and-the-covid-19-pandemic/.

4. ‌Iyer, Madhunika. “Migration in India and the Impact of the Lockdown on Migrants.” PRS Legislative Research, 10 June 2020, prsindia.org/theprsblog/migration-in-india-and-the-impact-of-the-lockdown-on-migrants.

5. ‌Censorship, Index on. “How Farmers’ Protests in India Are Being Used to Silence the Media.” Index on Censorship, 4 Feb. 2021, www.indexoncensorship.org/2021/02/how-farmers-protests-in-india-are-being-used-to-silence-the-media/.

6. ‌“Activists, Journalists Face Social Media Crackdown amid Indian Farmer Protests - National | Globalnews.ca.” Global News, globalnews.ca/news/7621907/india-farmers-social-media/.

7. ‌“Indian Farmers Launch Activist Media Outlets as Narrative Wars Continue | al Jazeera Media Institute.” Institute.aljazeera.net, institute.aljazeera.net/en/ajr/article/1423.

8. ‌“India: UN Experts Alarmed by Continuing Abuses in Manipur.” OHCHR, www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2023/09/india-un-experts-alarmed-continuing-abuses-manipur.

9. ‌India: Investigate Police Bias Alleged in Manipur Violence | Human Rights Watch. 30 May 2023, www.hrw.org/news/2023/05/30/india-investigate-police-bias-alleged-manipur-violence. Accessed 24 July 2024.

10. ‌““Shocking Act of Censorship”: Twitter Account of Manipur Tribal Leaders’ Forum Blocked.” India Today, 17 June 2023, www.indiatoday.in/india/story/manipur-violence-twitter-account-of-tribal-leaders-forum-blocked-itlf-kuki-community-2394311-2023-06-17. Accessed 24 July 2024.

11. ‌AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL PUBLIC STATEMENT. 2023.

12. ‌Livemint. “How Adani Group Acquired NDTV: Explained.” Mint, 30 Nov. 2022, www.livemint.com/industry/media/how-adani-group-acquired-ndtv-explained-11669779605088.html.

13. ‌“Adani Takeover of NDTV: Another Blow to India’s Press Freedom?” The Business Standard, 25 Aug. 2022, www.tbsnews.net/features/panorama/adani-takeover-ndtv-another-blow-indias-press-freedom-483438. Accessed 24 July 2024.

14. ‌“Takeover Bid of NDTV Sparks Media Freedom Fears – DW – 08/29/2022.” Dw.com, www.dw.com/en/ndtv-takeover-bid-by-indias-richest-man-sparks-media-freedom-fears/a-62959561. Accessed 24 July 2024.