By Paramjit Singh Kakkar
In a democracy, the media is expected to be a watchdog of those in power—not their public-relations arm. Its responsibility is to question governments, investigate failures, expose wrongdoing and provide citizens with a balanced account of public affairs. Yet growing sections of India’s mainstream media, particularly television news, have raised serious questions about their independence.
The issue is not that governments receive favourable coverage when they genuinely achieve something. The concern is the persistent imbalance: extensive coverage of government announcements, campaigns, speeches and personalities, while failures, criticism and opposition viewpoints receive comparatively less attention or are presented through a negative or distorted lens.
Prime-time television has increasingly become political theatre. Loud debates, confrontation and sensationalism often replace serious examination of unemployment, inflation, education, healthcare, environmental degradation, public infrastructure and institutional accountability. Complex issues are reduced to slogans, while criticism of the government can sometimes be portrayed as being “anti-national” or anti-development. Such a narrative is dangerous. A government is not the nation, and questioning the government is not questioning the country. Accountability is a fundamental requirement of democracy.
Advertising, ownership and political influence
The financial dependence of media organisations also deserves scrutiny. Government advertising is legitimate when it informs citizens about public programmes and services. But when governments become major advertisers, questions naturally arise about whether financial dependence can influence editorial choices—what is highlighted, what is ignored and how stories are framed.
Ownership concentration adds another layer of concern. When powerful corporate interests control large media networks, editorial independence requires particularly strong safeguards. The Reuters Institute’s Digital News Report 2025 noted the concentration of Indian media ownership among a small number of wealthy business interests and highlighted concerns about pressure on independent and critical journalism.
International assessments reinforce these concerns. Reporters Without Borders ranked India 151st out of 180 countries in its 2025 World Press Freedom Index, while its 2026 assessment placed India at 157th. These rankings should not be treated as infallible judgments, but they are important warning signals that cannot simply be dismissed.
Print media is not immune
The problem is not confined to television. Much of India’s print media continues to produce credible investigative journalism and independent editorial work, but sections of the industry are also vulnerable to political access, commercial pressures and advertising dependence. The influence can be subtle: the choice of front-page stories, headline language, photograph size, editorial emphasis and the amount of space given to competing political viewpoints.
A new alternative is emerging
At the same time, an important transformation is underway. Increasing numbers of citizens are turning to independent journalists, YouTube channels, podcasts and digital platforms for alternative perspectives. Recent protests and public events have demonstrated the ability of independent digital reporters to provide live coverage and viewpoints that audiences feel are missing from mainstream television.
This does not mean every independent digital outlet is credible. Online platforms can also spread misinformation and propaganda. The answer is therefore not to replace one unquestioned source with another, but to demand evidence, transparency, verification and accountability from all journalists.
Ultimately, the most powerful force remains the public. If citizens lose faith in mainstream media, they will look elsewhere. The migration of audiences towards independent journalism may therefore represent more than a technological change—it could signal a profound shift in the media landscape.
India does not need a media that is permanently hostile to the government, nor one that functions as its cheerleader. It needs a media that is independent, fearless and evidence-based.
Its first loyalty must be to facts, public interest and the citizen’s right to know. A democracy can survive criticism of its government; it cannot remain healthy when its watchdog becomes the government’s megaphone.
(Paramjit Singh Kakkar is associated with ‘Pramukh NGO’ and ‘Nature Science Initiative’ Trust.)
