When the Watchdog Becomes a Lapdog—Largest Democracy

India proudly calls itself the world’s largest democracy. But the core of any democracy is the free and fearless press, because the press challenges authority, points out injustice and represents those who are helpless and unrepresented by politicians. The media is supposed to be a watchdog, which protects the public interest and keeps the governments on their toes. However, in the past years, a question that has started to arouse some uneasy feelings among the Indians is, “What happens when the watchdog stops barking?”

Through television screens and newspaper headlines, it is increasingly becoming apparent that the mainstream media in many parts of India are not discharging their democratic mandate. They do not seem to challenge power as they defend it. Rather than showing the plight of common people, unemployment, inflation, the plight of the farmers, collapsing services provided by the government, and so on, the media appears to sing more the praises of the government and leadership and disparage the critics. This is something that has not been noticed even among journalists themselves.

Journalists Admit the Prejudice

Media bias is seen as the focus of criticism that is spurned as political propaganda or opposition rhetoric. But an Indian study, Indian Media: Trends and Patterns, by Lokniti, with the Centre of the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS), offers a stinging piece of reality inside the profession. The study shows that 8 out of 10 journalists feel that the Indian media is too biased towards the Modi-led government. This is not a singular view; it is a consensus of the vast majority of people who are in the industry.

Of equal concern is how the Opposition is perceived to be treated; 61% of journalists think that Opposition parties are being covered too negatively, with only 8% thinking that they are being covered positively. The survey also established that 73% of the journalists believe that media houses blatantly give preference to a certain political party. And among them, 82% of the journalists cite the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) as the major beneficiary of the favours.

When even journalists say that neutrality is no longer there, it is a system-wide issue and not a case of isolated bias. 

Reducing Freedom and the Fear to Speak

Another disturbing fact in the same study is that another 72% of journalists feel that news channels are not as free to do their job well today. This is the perception based on the living experiences. During the last ten years, government-critical journalists have been arrested, raided, and subjected to long and expensive court cases, travel bans, surveillance, and constant harassment over the Internet. Sedition, terrorism and information technology laws have been more and more applied not on criminals but on reporters and online critics.

Human rights watch groups, including Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, Reporters Without Borders, and the Committee to Protect Journalists, have repeatedly raised concerns that press freedom in India is seriously under threat. The journalists in Kashmir, as well as journalists of the minority groups and journalists covering human rights abuses, are under even higher threat. Journalism, under these conditions, is a risky occupation and not a service to society. Fear breeds silence. And silence, in due course, becomes conformity.

Self-Censorship: The Unrecognised Enemy

Censorship is not necessarily externally imposed. Often, it comes from within. When journalists witness their friends being taken to prison or harassed, most of them start to consider twice before trying to get sensitive stories. Self-censorship is a survival strategy. Raising difficult questions may lose a career, reputation and liberty. Consequently, most media houses end up taking the less risky route by not reporting critically but rather praising, being patriotic and providing entertainment.

It is in this manner that the watchdog gradually becomes another thing.

The Rise of “Godi Media”

Godi media, which has been made famous by long-time journalist Ravish Kumar, has entered the daily political lexicon of India. It is literally translated as lapdog media, which is news that the critics feel serves the government instead of being an autonomous institution. These sources are said to reflect state propaganda, vilify critics, communalise sensitive matters and publish sensational or misguided information that suits the interests of the ruling party.

The Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) movement, or the farmers' protests, was at times described as an anti-national conspiracy in addition to the actual anger of the people. The demonstrators were demonised, the minorities were demonised, and complicated problems were simplified to screaming matches on prime-time TV. Meanwhile, the voices of people who suffered on the ground were mostly disregarded.

After the Money and the Power

Economic dependence is one of the largest causes of such a change. Government advertising is a significant source of revenue for many media houses. The government, both at the central and state levels, spends huge amounts of money on advertisements, which makes them influential on editorial decisions. This advantage is further enhanced by the fact that traditional television is now dropping in viewership, and the media firms are at a loss in the digital era.

Along with advertising, the means of access to political power, corporate interests, and business favours also provide an additional incentive for favourable coverage. Critical journalism is threatened with losing access, finance, and power. Consequently, many problems, such as unemployment, inflation, rural misery, medical crises, and ecological disaster, become under-represented, and leader-orientated stories are in the spotlight and on the agenda.

The Cost to Democracy

Democracy is harmed when the media ceases to ask power any questions. The citizens do not obtain balanced and accurate information. The process of public debate is polarised, emotional and superficial. Accountability disappears. In the long term, societal confidence in mainstream media is destroyed.

This loss of credibility has driven most Indians into the independent digital platforms, alternativenews websites and YouTube journalists. The Scroll, The Wire, The Quint, Newslaundry and independent creators have become the places where ugly questions can be raised. Their emergence is an indication of an extreme thirst among people in journalism for that which is truthful and not powerful.

What This Means for India

One thing that is clear about the Lokniti-CSDS study is the fact that the crisis of Indian media is real and profound and is a consensus among the journalists themselves. A media that constantly glorifies the government and forgets the plight of the citizens does not execute its democratic mandate. Democracy can never work when authority is unopposed and pain is invisible.

To regain the freedom of the press, there will need to be the protection of journalists, a lessening of the political and economic influence on the newsrooms, as well as the reconstruction of ethical journalism based on the public interest. It is not merely a media problem, but it is a democratic one.

Without a fearless press, a democracy will not exist. And when the watchdog is not shouting, it is the people who end up paying the price.

For more related blogs, visit Liana The Writer and explore further.