Himalaya Harbinger, National Bureau.
As India gears up for the upcoming elections amidst soaring temperatures, a notable absence of voter enthusiasm is palpable. Reports indicate a distinct lack of excitement, even among first-time voters, with only committed party supporters and individuals enticed by incentives like free meals showing willingness to brave the scorching heat for election events.
In the realm of information dissemination, traditional mainstream media outlets primarily focus on political speeches by prominent figures such as Prime Minister Narendra Modi and opposition leaders like Rahul Gandhi. However, their coverage often lacks depth and critical analysis, leaving undecided voters devoid of comprehensive insights.
Contrary to mainstream media’s limited scope, the digital landscape, including social media platforms and independent news channels, offers a myriad of voices and opinions. Despite the prevalence of fake news and hate speech, these alternative sources provide a diverse array of perspectives, crucial for informed decision-making.
The emergence of a recent documentary titled “India’s War on Fake News: How Disinformation Became India’s #1 Threat” underscores the gravity of the situation. Exploring the motives behind the proliferation of fake news, the documentary sheds light on the financial and ideological incentives driving misinformation campaigns. Additionally, it features the efforts of fact-checkers striving to combat this growing menace.
However, mainstream media’s failure to delve deeper and question prevailing narratives exacerbates the issue. Instead of rigorous interrogation, exclusive interviews with political leaders often serve as public relations exercises, lacking in-depth scrutiny.
A recent hour-long interview granted by Prime Minister Modi to Smita Prakash, Editor-in-Chief of ANI, exemplifies this trend. Despite the Prime Minister’s historically reticent stance towards the press, the interview lacked substantial questioning and follow-ups, even when factual inaccuracies arose.
Regarding the contentious issue of electoral bonds, the Prime Minister’s assertion that the scheme promotes transparency was left unquestioned, despite the Supreme Court’s declaration of its unconstitutionality. Furthermore, Modi’s claim regarding companies donating predominantly to opposition parties following raids by the Enforcement Directorate warrants scrutiny.
Similarly, an exclusive feature in Newsweek, devoid of probing questions and resembling a series of press releases, highlights the lack of journalistic rigor. This interview, adorned with Modi’s image and the caption “Unstoppable,” fails to challenge the Prime Minister on critical issues.
In contrast, instances of rigorous journalism, such as the Financial Times’ report on Modi, offer glimpses of accountability. However, without persistent questioning and counterpoints, politicians can evade scrutiny, shaping public perception unchallenged.
In conclusion, amidst the election fervor, the inadequacy of mainstream media in providing comprehensive coverage and challenging prevailing narratives raises concerns about the democratic process’s integrity. As the nation approaches the polls, the role of robust and critical journalism becomes increasingly imperative.
