Modi should give interviews to real journalists, not cheerleaders

Prime Minister Narendra Modi, in a recent revelation, attributed his reluctance to engage with press conferences to the lack of neutrality in the Indian media.

This statement offers insight into the evolving dynamics between the government and the press, highlighting a significant shift in the media landscape that poses challenges to democratic principles.

Modi’s observation is partially accurate: the nature of the Indian media has indeed transformed. Historically, the media played a watchdog role, ensuring accountability and transparency within the government.

Today, however, it appears to have become more compliant, often echoing the government’s perspectives rather than scrutinizing them.

This shift aligns with Modi’s preference for a media environment that avoids critical examination of his administration’s actions. The current state of the Indian media, with notable exceptions, reflects a broader trend of diminished scrutiny and increased conformity.

During the Lok Sabha polls, Modi has been on a spree, giving interviews to so-called journalists, especially to TV media where he isn’t asked counter-questions.

The interviews seem too good to be real, and too scripted. Remember the prominent journalist Karan Thapar who interviewed Modi after the 2002 Gujarat riots? Modi infamously left the interview midway.

Fast forward to 2024, and watch interviews with Modi now. All these anchors who call themselves journalists should call themselves PR (public relations) folks; it suits them perfectly.

It’s high time Modi comes out and gives an interview to a real journalist and faces some tough questions rather than fancy, friendly, and sometimes hilarious questions, like “where do you get this much energy from?”

If he’s a decent communicator and ‘excellent’ at taking on questions head-on, he should avoid giving interviews to cheerleaders, or godi-media. The consequences of this transformation are profound.

The symbiotic relationship between the government and a compliant media serves mutual interests: the government benefits from favorable coverage, which enhances its public image despite potential shortcomings, while media organizations gain financial stability through government patronage.

This arrangement, however, comes at a significant cost to democratic integrity and public trust. Public perception of the media has not gone unnoticed. A survey conducted two years ago revealed that nearly half of the respondents recognized the media’s bias towards the government.

This awareness underscores a growing distrust among news consumers, who perceive a stark divergence between reported narratives and on-the-ground realities.

The erosion of media credibility is a critical issue, as it diminishes the public’s ability to make informed decisions and weakens the democratic process. Modi’s comments highlight an important question: what defines media neutrality?

Genuine neutrality in journalism is not about being non-partisan to the point of failing to hold power accountable. Instead, it requires a steadfast commitment to ethical standards and the relentless pursuit of truth.

To restore the media’s role as the fourth estate, a recommitment to journalistic principles is essential. Media organizations must strive to regain credibility by prioritizing truthful reporting over appeasement.

Journalists should embrace their role as watchdogs of democracy, dedicated to uncovering the truth and holding power accountable. Only then can the media fulfill its dharma and contribute to a robust and healthy democracy in India.

The path forward requires a collective effort to rebuild trust and ensure that the media remains a pillar of democracy, dedicated to the principles of truth, accountability, and integrity. And for all this to happen, you need to change, yes, you the reader!