India ranks at a dismal 161 out of 180 on the World Press Freedom Index by Reporters Without Borders (RSF). This stark ranking exposes a deepening crisis in the country’s journalistic landscape, where violence against journalists, concentrated media ownership, and political alignment have converged to silence critical voices. Under the leadership of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), India’s vibrant and pluralistic media ecosystem has shifted dangerously toward centralized control, undermining its democratic fabric.
An Expansive but Compromised Media Landscape
India boasts a sprawling media landscape with nearly 900 private TV channels, a government-run radio monopoly, and a massive print presence of around 140,000 publications in over 20 languages. While this diversity might seem to promise a healthy exchange of perspectives, ownership patterns reveal a more troubling picture. The vast majority of Indian media is controlled by a handful of powerful business magnates with strong political affiliations. For instance, Reliance Industries’ Mukesh Ambani, a close ally of Modi, owns a media conglomerate with an estimated 800 million-strong audience. In 2022, another business tycoon, Gautam Adani, acquired NDTV, one of India’s last bastions of independent journalism, signalling the end of significant pluralism in mainstream media.
This concentration of media power has cultivated a pro-government narrative, with many channels labelled as “Godi media,” or “lapdog media,” for their willingness to parrot BJP propaganda. Journalists critical of the government face harassment, intimidation, and in some cases, lethal violence. This hostile environment has forced many journalists to self-censor, creating a chilling effect across the industry.
Legal Assaults on Press Freedom
India’s constitution guarantees freedom of expression, but this right is increasingly curtailed by colonial-era sedition and anti-terrorism laws, which the Modi government has wielded aggressively against journalists and activists. Recent laws like the Telecommunications Act and the Digital Personal Data Protection Act have granted the government sweeping powers to censor online content and surveil citizens under the guise of security. The draft Broadcasting Services (Regulation) Bill also hints at increased state oversight of media outlets, further stifling dissent.
India’s government has used these laws to systematically target dissenting journalists, especially those reporting on sensitive issues in Kashmir. Several journalists from the region face arbitrary detention, forced exile, or harassment, and some, like the award-winning Kashmiri journalist Aasif Sultan, have been imprisoned on spurious terrorism charges. The crackdown on journalists has reached such proportions that the UN has repeatedly urged India to release activists like Khurram Parvez, who was detained on dubious grounds.
Economic Pressures: Advertising Dependency and Government Control
Government funding has long been a significant source of revenue for India’s media outlets, but the Modi administration has strategically used this financial leverage to exert control. Media houses that rely on government advertising face coercion to align their editorial policies with the BJP’s agenda. Smaller outlets, heavily dependent on state ads, are particularly vulnerable to this financial chokehold.
Meanwhile, private media ownership has become concentrated in the hands of conglomerates like the Adani Group, which hold vested interests that align with government policies. This power dynamic has undermined the independence of media organizations and diluted the watchdog role that journalism is meant to play in democratic societies.
A Cultural Tilt: Hindutva’s Influence on News Content
The dominance of Hindu nationalist ideology within Indian media has introduced a disturbing level of bias, particularly against India’s Muslim population. This sectarian bias is evident in the way prime-time television shows often frame Muslims as adversaries of the state, stoking communal tensions. Female representation remains appallingly low, especially in managerial positions and among evening news show guests, highlighting the deep-seated biases that pervade Indian journalism.
However, some resilient exceptions endure. Outlets like Khabar Lahariya, a media group staffed entirely by women from marginalized communities, provide a critical counter-narrative, offering coverage that mainstream media often overlook. Despite such brave efforts, the prevailing culture within Indian journalism remains largely exclusionary and steeped in upper-caste, male-dominated Hindu nationalism.
A Climate of Fear: Safety Concerns for Journalists
India ranks as one of the world’s most dangerous countries for journalists, with several journalists killed each year in connection with their work. The dangers are particularly severe for those who criticize the government, report on crime and corruption, or cover human rights violations. Journalists who do so are regularly subjected to death threats, online harassment, physical attacks, and, increasingly, arbitrary detention.
Kashmiri journalists, already under intense scrutiny, face added hardships, with many barred from travelling abroad to accept international awards or cover stories. The situation is similarly grim across the country, where journalists face coordinated social media attacks, often orchestrated by BJP-linked troll armies. These campaigns, particularly brutal for women journalists, involve doxing, hate speech, and calls for violence, reflecting a climate of fear that is pushing many journalists into silence.
Freedom of Expression at Stake
India’s crackdown on freedom of expression has extended beyond journalists to political opposition leaders, civil rights activists, and comedians. The case of Rahul Gandhi, a prominent opposition figure sentenced to prison in a defamation case, underscores the BJP’s tendency to suppress dissent using legal means. This pattern was evident again in September 2023 when the Editors Guild of India faced sedition charges after publishing a report critical of the government’s role in ethnic violence in Manipur. Other critics, like activist Teesta Setalvad, have faced continuous harassment and raids, with the state apparatus being used to curtail voices of dissent.
Internationally, India’s response to criticism is equally defensive. The government blocked a two-part BBC documentary investigating Modi’s role in the 2002 Gujarat riots, invoking emergency powers to censor content. In a brazen display of hostility toward foreign media, tax raids on BBC’s offices followed, signalling that the Indian government will stop at nothing to silence critical voices, both domestic and foreign.
The Cost of Digital Surveillance
India’s latest data protection law has granted the government unparalleled surveillance powers, enabling it to monitor private citizens under the guise of national security. New amendments to the Information Technology Rules also give the government unchecked authority to determine what online content constitutes “false information” about the state, thereby forcing social media platforms to remove it. This stifles online discourse, leaving Indians with fewer safe spaces to express their views.
India’s status as the world leader in internet shutdowns compounds this suppression. In Kashmir alone, internet blackouts have deprived citizens of basic rights, such as access to information and essential services, deepening their marginalization. The trend of digital authoritarianism threatens the democratic right to information and worsens social inequality, as marginalized communities disproportionately suffer from these measures.
International Silence: Complicity or Ignorance?
Despite the alarming erosion of press freedom in India, Western democracies have largely turned a blind eye. Strategic and economic interests have eclipsed any commitment to human rights or press freedom. The U.S. and European countries, while privately critical, have publicly maintained amicable relations with Modi’s government, driven by a desire to counter China’s influence in Asia.
By choosing realpolitik over principled diplomacy, these democracies are inadvertently endorsing India’s slide into authoritarianism. This silence emboldens Modi’s administration, as evidenced by the international community’s tepid response to the BBC raids and internet shutdowns. India’s allies must recognize that an attack on press freedom anywhere undermines democracy everywhere.
A Cry for Accountability
India’s press freedom is under siege, and the international community must demand accountability. The “world’s largest democracy” must be held to the standards it has historically championed. In a country of 1.4 billion people, compromised media and a fearful press are not just national issues; they are global concerns. To support free and fair media, the world must advocate for India’s journalists, who face increasing risks in bringing truth to light. India stands at a crossroads: it can either continue on this path toward an illiberal, controlled media or renew its commitment to the democratic values that once made it a beacon of press freedom.
