Shalin Nair
pro@iimj.ac.in
Journalism, once celebrated as the conscience of democracy, has entered an era of profound ethical, structural, and philosophical transformation. The press long regarded as the fourth estate has historically operated as the watchdog of public interest and a mediator between the state and its citizens. It served as a moral and intellectual bulwark against arbitrariness and misinformation. Yet, in the twenty-first century, journalism stands at a critical juncture where credibility and commercialism contest for supremacy. The vocation that once symbolized the pursuit of truth and public enlightenment increasingly faces the risk of being subsumed within the profit-driven logic of the market and the algorithmic demands of digital visibility.
Historically, journalism in India and beyond was an act of public service animated by conviction, not competition. Editors of the nationalist and early postcolonial era such as Bal Gangadhar Tilak, Ganesh Shankar Vidyarthi, and B.G. Horniman conceptualized journalism as a pedagogical enterprise, committed to civic education and the collective good. Newspapers such as Kesari or The Bombay Chronicle served not merely as organs of opinion but as instruments of moral and political awakening. They derived legitimacy from their ethical authority rather than their circulation numbers. In contrast, today’s media ecosystem operates within a hyper-commercialized, attention-driven economy where algorithms, analytics, and monetization models dictate not only what is published but also how truth itself is constructed and consumed.
As articulated by the Press Council of India (PCI) and echoed in UNESCO’s Global Media Ethics Charter, journalism today must navigate a labyrinth of dilemmas arising from the commodification of information, political patronage, technological surveillance, and ideological polarization. What was once regarded as the “fourth pillar of democracy” risks devolving into an echo chamber amplifying existing biases and privileging virality over veracity. The shift from the public sphere to the marketplace of attention represents not just a structural evolution but a civilizational crisis of truth.
The defining feature of the contemporary news economy is immediacy, which privileges speed over substance. The relentless pursuit of “breaking news” has eroded the foundational tenets of journalism: truth, verification, and independence. In an age of algorithmic amplification, the axiom “if it bleeds, it leads” has acquired new dimesions now snow quantified through metrics like impressions, engagement rates, and click-through data. The Oxford-Reuters Institute’s Digital News Report (2024) reveals a disturbing paradox: the proliferation of misinformation now often stems from mainstream media outlets under pressure to sustain relevance in a crowded digital marketplace. The ethical cost of such expediency is profound. Once public trust is eroded, it cannot be algorithmically restored. The rise of paid news, native advertising, and influencer-driven reporting epitomizes the corrosion of professional integrity. When editorial autonomy becomes vulnerable to financial inducement, the boundary between journalism and propaganda collapses. The Election Commission of India has repeatedly warned that paid news distorts democratic processes and manipulates electoral consciousness. As a result, the moral economy of journalism once anchored in public faith stands imperiled by systemic self-interest.
Despite the digital deluge, print journalism continues to command moral gravity and intellectual authority in India. Its permanence confers upon it a unique archival responsibility. A printed falsehood is not ephemeral; it enters the historical record. Therefore, accuracy, verification, and editorial scrutiny are not procedural luxuries but moral imperatives. The permanence of print compels accountability in a way that the fleeting digital interface does not. In India’s diverse linguistic and cultural landscape, regional newspapers often serve as primary knowledge institutions for millions. Yet this power carries peril. Sensational or communalized reportage in vernacular dailies can inflame tensions and distort the social fabric. Here, journalistic ethics intersects with cultural responsibility calling for empathy, pluralism, and inclusivity in both language and representation. Ethical journalism, thus, is not merely a professional code but a cultural duty anchored in the recognition that every story has moral and social consequences.
The collapse of traditional gatekeeping in the digital sphere has led to the conflation of news and entertainment, information and spectacle. Algorithms prioritize outrage, novelty, and emotional intensity often at the expense of nuance and depth. The result is a spectacularized public sphere, where virality substitutes for veracity, and where news is consumed as performance rather than deliberation. As Pierre Bourdieu argued in On Television, this transformation trivializes discourse by reducing complex realities to consumable sound bites. The rise of tabloidization has replaced critical inquiry with personality-centric narratives and celebrity scandals. Stories of agrarian distress, environmental degradation, or healthcare inequities struggle for visibility against the noise of celebrity weddings or political theatrics. Consequently, the epistemic function of journalism to inform rational public debate has been supplanted by the economics of distraction. This crisis is not merely editorial but epistemological. When news becomes entertainment, truth becomes relative. In this context, editors face a profound dual challenge: to sustain readership in a hypercompetitive environment while preserving journalism’s civic and moral core. The ethical journalist, therefore, must act not as a performer but as a custodian of collective reason.
Media ethics in India is further complicated by questions of national security, privacy, and public accountability. Coverage during crises such as the 26/11 Mumbai attacks, the Pulwama incident, or the Galwan Valley conflicthas exposed how real-time reporting, though technologically feasible, can endanger lives and compromise strategic operations. Ethical journalism must operate within the framework of “responsible freedom”, balancing the citizen’s right to know with the nation’s right to safety. The Press Council of India’s Norms of Journalistic Conduct (2022) emphasize that press freedom is not absolute; it is a disciplined freedom embedded in responsibility. The reckless dissemination of sensitive visuals or speculative narratives during crises corrodes both public trust and institutional credibility. Likewise, investigative journalism, when untethered from ethical safeguards, risks devolving into voyeurism or trial by media a phenomenon that subverts the judicial process and weaponizes perception. The use of undercover operations or hidden cameras must remain exceptional, justified only when overwhelming public interest is evident and all other avenues of disclosure have been exhausted. As Jürgen Habermas warned, the degeneration of the public sphere into a marketplace of scandal diminishes the deliberative essence of democracy. The media’s moral responsibility, therefore, lies not only in unveiling truth but in protecting the conditions under which truth can be publicly deliberated.
The restoration of credibility demands both institutional reform and ethical introspection. News organizations must internalize accountability through editorial ombudsmen, independent ethics boards, and transparent correction mechanisms. Periodic ethical audits could evaluate newsroom practices against global standards of journalistic conduct. Journalism schools, too, must move beyond technical instruction to emphasize philosophical literacy, moral reasoning, and civic responsibility. The introduction of a “journalist’s oath”, analogous to the Hippocratic Oath, could reaffirm journalism’s ethical covenant with society. Moreover, reader engagement platforms ombudsman columns, public editors, or open feedback forums should institutionalize dialogue between media and citizens, transforming journalism from a mono logic profession into a participatory civic discourse. Reinforcing these mechanisms would also align with India’s broader democratic aspirations under Viksit Bharat@2047, where responsible information ecosystems become as vital as economic growth or technological innovation. The credibility of journalism, in this context, becomes integral to the moral infrastructure of the nation.
The modern media dilemma is not merely technological it is profoundly moral and civilizational. The pursuit of clicks must never eclipse the pursuit of credibility. Journalism’s legitimacy arises not from its reach, but from its ethical depth. The press remains a cornerstone of democratic accountability precisely because it mediates between knowledge and conscience. As India journeys toward becoming a knowledge society, journalism must rediscover its civilizational ethos rooted in satya (truth), dharma (duty), and nyaya (justice). In an age where misinformation travels faster than verified facts and algorithms shape public consciousness more powerfully than reasoned editorials; the journalist’s task extends beyond reporting events it entails preserving the very conditions of truth. Ultimately, journalism’s allegiance must remain to the citizen’s right to know, not the market’s demand to consume. Only through a conscious recommitment to ethical integrity, intellectual humility, and public purpose can the press reclaim its rightful place as the moral conscience of democracy, a vocation defined not by immediacy, but by the timeless discipline of truth.
(The author is Administrative Officer (PR & Admin), IIM Jammu)
Follow our WhatsApp channel
