When the Media Died: How Journalism Became the Government’s Shield
When the Media Died: How Journalism
Became the Government’s Shield
The so-called Godi media has
become so shameless that it openly appears to come to the rescue of the
government. When journalists are called out for their hypocrisy, they fizzle
out for a while, only to return with the same narrative. Then they wonder why
people identify them in crowds, confront them, and sometimes ask them to leave.
Even when there is minor physical contact in a crowd, they portray themselves
as victims of public abuse and demand apologies. I never imagined that some
members of the media would become more sensitive to criticism than the
politicians they are supposed to question.
On August 15, the Prime Minister
delivered his Independence Day speech from the Red Fort without the presence of
the Leaders of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha. Whatever the
reasons for their absence, the political symbolism was difficult to ignore.
When the ruling party spends so much of its energy attacking and humiliating
opposition leaders, perhaps the opposition has finally decided that celebrating
Independence Day elsewhere is preferable to sitting through another political
speech. Even the Prime Minister's display of the Indian flag on his jacket
became a subject of criticism. It made me wonder whether the pressure created
by India's younger generation has finally begun to affect the carefully
scripted political presentation surrounding him. Modi's speeches are supported
by prepared material and teleprompters, as is common for major political
addresses, but the larger question is whether the message still connects with a
public increasingly demanding answers.
Modi and Shah appear so focused
on maintaining political control that they may be overlooking an old lesson: a
bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. Other political leaders will
inevitably recalculate their positions as circumstances change. If Rahul Gandhi
continues to become stronger in the public's perception, aligning with the BJP
may no longer appear as politically comfortable as it once did. What is
particularly interesting is that criticism is now coming even from people who
once strongly supported the political movement that brought the BJP to power. Even
Baba Ramdev has publicly criticized the government and warned that if the
country continues moving down the same path, another agitation could emerge,
with him prepared to lead it. Opposition leaders may not take Ramdev or his
threat of another movement particularly seriously, but that is not the
important point. The important point is that a man who played a visible role in
the anti-corruption movement preceding the BJP's rise to power is now publicly
criticizing the very government he once helped bring to power. That political
shift should not simply be dismissed; it should be examined for what it may say
about changing public and political sentiment.
Controversies surrounding the Ram
temple, allegations concerning the treatment of protesting students,
unemployment, and growing public dissatisfaction all have the potential to
weaken the BJP's political position. A government cannot indefinitely depend
upon branding when people are increasingly judging it by what they experience
in their own lives.
I was also listening to former
BJP leader and Finance Minister Yashwant Sinha discussing the condition of the
Indian economy and India's standing in international economic assessments. His
criticism of the Modi government's economic management, combined with concerns
over the declining value of the rupee, raises questions that deserve serious
discussion. These are precisely the issues a responsible media should
investigate: the economy, employment, inflation, government finances,
institutional accountability, and whether ordinary Indians are actually
benefiting from the economic growth being advertised to them.
Unfortunately, instead of
aggressively questioning the government, sections of the media appear
determined to rebuild Modi's political image while searching for anything that
can make the opposition look bad. If something happens in Jharkhand, find a way
to bring Rahul Gandhi into the discussion. If an opposition figure makes a
controversial remark, turn it into a national debate. If someone mentions
Giorgia Meloni in connection with Modi, spend hours discussing that controversy
even though social-media jokes linking the two leaders were already circulating
widely. Meanwhile, questions directly concerning governance struggle to receive
the same sustained attention.
That is where the real problem
lies. It is not the media's job to speak on behalf of the government.
Journalists are supposed to question those who exercise power, investigate
their claims, challenge contradictions, and provide citizens with the
information necessary to judge their government. The media should scrutinize
Rahul Gandhi, Congress, and every opposition party as aggressively as necessary
but it must apply exactly the same standard to Narendra Modi, Amit Shah, and
the BJP government.
When journalism stops questioning
power and starts protecting it, it ceases to function as an independent
watchdog.
Perhaps that is precisely why
people started calling it "Godi Media."
Comments
Post a Comment