Latest news with #SiddharthVaradarajan
The Star
11-05-2025
- Politics
- The Star
India wages information war to show it has the upper hand against Pakistan
NEW DELHI: While news programmes are broadcast on many Indian television channels, sirens can be heard blaring in the background, forcing anchors to raise their voices as they discuss the latest developments in the conflict between India and Pakistan. This prompted the Home Ministry on Saturday (May 10) to issue an advisory to TV channels to stop using civil defence air raid sirens – meant to capture the viewer's attention – on their programmes. 'The routine use of sirens may likely reduce the sensitivity of civilians towards the air raid sirens,' the advisory cautioned. Behind all the noise, which includes blanket coverage of the conflict steeped in jingoistic and nationalistic rhetoric, is one message: India has the upper hand against Pakistan. This message remains in place even as US President Donald Trump announced on May 10 that India and Pakistan had agreed to a 'full and immediate' ceasefire. In tandem with the strikes and counterstrikes, an information war has been waged within and outside India and Pakistan, not just to show their respective domestic audiences that their governments are taking strong action, but also to win support from those following the hostilities from overseas. In India, this has ranged from pro-government coverage to media bans and advisories, as the government has sought to control the narrative. Social media platform X, on the orders of the Indian government, had started blocking 8,000 accounts in India, leading to accusations of censorship. These include accounts of senior journalists from Kashmir and media websites like Maktoob Media – an independent media outlet that said it focused on human rights and minorities – as well as weekly publications Free Press Kashmir and The Kashmiriyat. 'Blocking entire accounts is not only unnecessary, it (also) amounts to censorship of existing and future content, and is contrary to the fundamental right of free speech,' said X in a statement on May 9. The platform acknowledged the difficult position it faces, stating: 'This is not an easy decision; however, keeping the platform accessible in India is vital to Indians' ability to access information.' Those whose accounts were banned said they had no prior intimation. Maktoob Media said in a statement that it had no knowledge of the reason for the government's action, even as it has continued to cover different aspects of the conflict on its website. Separately, The Wire, a news portal that is often critical of the government, also found its website briefly blocked on May 9, leading to accusations of censorship. The site was back online on May 10 with its founding editor, Mr Siddharth Varadarajan, saying in a statement that it had been unblocked after it removed a specific story related to Pakistan's claims of downing an Indian Rafale jet. India has dismissed the downing of jets as 'misinformation'. Tensions between the two nuclear-armed neighbours have risen following the killing of 26 people in a terror attack on April 22 in Pahalgam in Kashmir. India has blamed Pakistan for the attack, and launched strikes across the border in the early hours of May 7. Pakistan responded, and the two countries were locked in a cycle of exchanging missile strikes and shelling each other's territories. Amid all this, public opinion has continued to invest confidence in Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, whose image is that of a strong nationalistic leader. Role of the media The question facing the media now is about the kind of role it has played and will play in the information war. Commentators noted that some sections of the media had pushed the narrative of strong government response by backing it with unverified information, inadvertently muddying the government's messaging. Some mainstream TV channels supportive of the Indian government told viewers that the Indian Navy had attacked Karachi – the largest city in Pakistan – and that the Indian military had advanced right up to Islamabad, Pakistan's capital. This proved to be wrong, with Pakistani residents of the cities mentioned sharing footage and creating memes of how life was going on as usual. A day after these claims were widely shared, the Indian Defence Ministry, without naming any media organisations, on May 9 'advised' TV media, among others, against 'live coverage or real-time reporting of defence operations and movement of security forces'. 'Beyond legal compliance, it is a shared moral responsibility to ensure our collective actions do not compromise ongoing operations or the security of our forces,' the advisory said. Analysts noted that keeping the messaging on point amid the information war had remained critical for the Modi government to back up its strong nationalistic stand and possibly even de-escalate tensions with Pakistan. '(News that is wrong) damages India's international reputation. If this was done by social media handles, it would be different. These are mainstream news channels. It could damage the credibility of not just the media, but also the country,' said Chennai-based political analyst Sumanth Raman. 'If the public is told by the media that we have delivered the message to Pakistan, and we have made our point, that is what they will believe. Definitely the media has a role, including in de-escalation,' he added. But this is not the first conflict where sections of the Indian media have waged an information war. In 2019, India launched air strikes against what it said was a terror training camp in Balakot in Pakistan, in retaliation for a suicide bombing in which 40 soldiers were killed in Kashmir. Indian TV channels then, too, whipped up passions, seeking revenge for the killing of the soldiers. The rhetoric has deepened even further this time as India, ahead of the ceasefire on May 10, accused Pakistan of targeting civilians and using high-speed missiles to target its bases. Pakistan, too, accused India of targeting its military airbases, as the two countries continued to exchange claims and counterclaims. Shantanu Gupta, a political analyst and author, maintained this was not the time for critical reportage, saying the media had to put its weight behind the Modi government. 'The narrative is a big part of the conflict. Media is very important because public sentiment is only made by Indian television, however big YouTube or social media has become,' he said. 'Until and unless you find the government is doing something too wrong, this is not the time to create confusion. But yes, sometimes they (television media) go overboard just to justify their argument, or they go wrong,' he acknowledged. In Pakistan, too, the coverage has advanced the government narrative. 'Right now the coverage is all dominated by the government narrative,' said Imtiaz Gul, executive director of the Centre for Research and Security Studies in Islamabad. 'Pakistan has its internal political and economic problems, but the opinion for now has swayed in favour of the government.' Shrinking space for dissent Still, questions remain over whether the media can continue to play its role effectively during times of conflict like this, with critics accusing both governments of permitting little space for criticism in recent years. India and Pakistan have in recent years faced criticism from rights groups for allowing a smaller space for dissent. India has more than 20,000 daily newspapers, about 450 privately owned news channels and around 28 government-owned national and regional channels. Still, it remains to be seen how the ceasefire brokered by the US will be reported, said Delhi-based writer and journalist Nilanjan Mukhopadhyay. 'We have to see how the narrative plays out,' he said, as the media could portray it as 'Modi's victory, even though the US brokered the deal'. - The Straits Times/ANN
The Hindu
10-05-2025
- Politics
- The Hindu
Censorship Surge in India Undermines Independent Journalism
Published : May 10, 2025 16:29 IST - 8 MINS READ On May 8, the prominent social media platform X said it was forced to block more than 8,000 accounts in India following executive orders from the government. Those affected by the ban told Frontline that it 'blatantly violates the law of the land' and that the 'irrational censorship sets a bad precedent for free speech in a democracy'. During heightened tensions between India and Pakistan—the two nuclear neighbours and arch-rivals—several leading web portals, YouTube channels, and individual X handles have been suspended. Among the foremost portals whose X accounts remain withheld include Maktoob Media and BBC Urdu. In the case of the online news portal The Wire, the website was blocked on May 9 on the government's orders. According to an internet service provider, The Wire was 'blocked as per the order of the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology under the IT Act, 2000'. Later in the day, the website was again accessible to readers after over 12 hours had passed. The Wire then issued a statement wherein it said that according to the response they received from the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (I&B), the website had been blocked on the basis of a request regarding a piece citing a CNN report on the ongoing India-Pakistan border tensions. While The Wire stated that it had removed the said piece from public view, it added that it would present its case in front of the designated authority and reserved its right 'to challenge this unconstitutional attack on freedom of press'. Siddharth Varadarajan, founding editor of The Wire, on May 9 said: 'We protest this blatant censorship at a critical time for India when sane, truthful, fair and rational voices and sources of news and information are among the biggest assets that India has.' He accused India's major television news channels of indulging in 'fake news' and 'dangerous reporting' in sensitive times. He added that The Wire has been 'one of the largest Indian news platforms that has been reporting on the emerging situation with responsibility and restraint. The blocking order is unconstitutional. It is an attack on press freedom and on the right of every Indian to access information.' Individual journalists also targeted Besides this, individual accounts of senior journalists such as Anuradha Bhasin and Muzamil Jaleel have been made inoperative with effect from May 9. Anuradha Bhasin, who originally hails from Jammu, is the managing editor of Kashmir Times, an English-language newspaper that was earlier published from both Srinagar and Jammu, and the author of A Dismantled State: The Untold Story of Kashmir After Article 370 (2022). Bhasin, who currently lives in the US, said that the blocking of her X handle in India 'came as a huge surprise'. 'It is shocking. The scale at which the voices are disappearing is distressing. Mostly, those banned are the sane voices and professional journalists who sift fact from fiction. But those who sensationalise and further amplify the fake narratives during sensitive times are enjoying the government's patronage,' Bhasin told Frontline. She articulated that during war hysteria, it is critically important to have voices of reasons and restraint, not sensationalism. Also Read | Operation Sindoor and the war at home According to X, it received executive orders from the Indian government requiring the social media platform to 'block over 8,000 accounts in India, subject to potential penalties including significant fines and imprisonment of the company's local employees. The orders include demands to block access in India to accounts belonging to international news organizations and prominent X users.' It further said that, in most cases, 'the Indian government has not specified which posts from an account have violated India's local laws. For a significant number of accounts, we did not receive any evidence or justification to block the accounts. To comply with the orders, we will withhold the specified accounts in India alone. We have begun that process. However, we disagree with the Indian government's demands.' The Wire is not the only major platform to face suspension. At the time of writing this piece, BBC Urdu's account on X (@BBCUrdu) was also withheld. Shockingly, even the Global Affairs account of X was temporarily suspended only a day after it became known that the government had ordered the platform to block over 8,000 accounts. When X users tried to access these accounts, they could only see a blank screen that read 'Account Withheld'. X has received executive orders from the Indian government requiring X to block over 8,000 accounts in India, subject to potential penalties including significant fines and imprisonment of the company's local employees. The orders include demands to block access in India to… — Global Government Affairs (@GlobalAffairs) May 8, 2025 'Blocking entire accounts is not only unnecessary, it amounts to censorship of existing and future content, and is contrary to the fundamental right of free speech. This is not an easy decision, however keeping the platform accessible in India is vital to Indians' ability to access information,' X Global Affairs said in a statement, adding it believes that 'making these executive orders public is essential for transparency – lack of disclosure discourages accountability and can contribute to arbitrary decision making. However, due to legal restrictions, we are unable to publish the executive orders at this time. X is exploring all possible legal avenues available to the company.' X encouraged all those adversely impacted by these blocking orders to 'seek appropriate relief from the courts'. Prevailing atmosphere of censorship Another victim of this censorship was Maktoob Media, a news platform that extensively covers stories of the minorities. On May 8, the X account of Maktoob Media was made inoperative. Shaheen Abdullah, the deputy editor of the organisation, told Frontline that the ban 'blatantly violates the law of the land and the whole idea of free media. It is an attempt to muzzle and choke independent media outlets. Moreover, it is a sign how press freedom is deteriorating in India.' In terms of press freedom, India ranks at 151 out of 180 countries as per the 2025 World Press Freedom Index released by the Paris-based organisation Reporters Without Borders (RSF). Similarly, the US-based Freedom House in its 2025 report (titled 'Freedom in the World 2025') said that in terms of Global Freedom and Internet Freedom, India remains 'partly free', scoring 63 and 50 points respectively out of 100. Abdullah was of the view that the government had either already prepared a list of journalists, media outlets, and YouTube channels or used any specific AI tool to get data about major independent and credible media outlets and individuals that it intended to block. 'We did not receive any prior notification explaining the reasons behind the decision. It is a dangerous precedent. Imagine, we are not able to report facts. Everything is controlled,' Abdullah told Frontline, adding 'we are definitely challenging the illegal ban and irrational censorship in the court of law'. 'Anybody who gives accurate analysis of the situation and deals with objective facts is banned. On the other hand, anybody who screams on television screens and disseminates fake news is rewarded and decorated.'Pravin SawhneyEditor, FORCE Furthermore, he said that his news platform has to fight for its existence and for independent journalism to highlight different perspectives so as to amplify the forgotten voices. He argued that, in the prevailing atmosphere of censorship, 'every expression entails a cost'. Internet service providers said the sites are 'blocked as per the order of the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology'. Moreover, the I&B Ministry directed all OTT platforms, digital streaming services, and intermediaries operating in India to 'immediately discontinue all web series, films, songs, podcasts, and any other media content originating from Pakistan'. Earlier, the Instagram accounts of renowned Pakistani film and television actors like Fawad Khan and Mahira Khan were blocked in India. 'One of the worst autocratizers' In yet another development, a recent video on India-Pakistan escalation and aerial strikes uploaded on YouTube by Pravin Sawhney, editor of the defence magazine FORCE, was also blocked. In the video, Sawhney, a defence analyst and a former Indian Army officer, had been critical of the government's recent decision to use air strikes against Pakistan. 'Anybody who gives accurate analysis of the situation and deals with objective facts is banned. On the other hand, anybody who screams on television screens and disseminates fake news is rewarded and decorated,' Sawhney told Frontline, adding 'blocking credible accounts, individuals, and channels shows that the government is in a panic mode.' However, he said there was no point in challenging the ban legally. Also Read | India vs Pakistan: Why 'settling the score' still decides the fight The X accounts of two news portals run by Kashmiris, Free Press Kashmir and The Kashmiriyat, were also suspended 'in response to a legal demand by the government'. Qazi Zaid, who runs Free Press Kashmir, said that he was not aware of any specific post or news story that may have violated the social media platform's policies or local laws. 'Our reportage is consistent with journalistic standards and public interest reporting. Without transparency from the platform regarding the triggering content or legal basis, we are unable to confirm what specifically led to this action.' Global watchdogs and organisations such as the Sweden-based V-Dem (Varieties of Democracy) Institute have been critical of the Indian government. According to V-Dem's 2025 report titled '25 Years of Autocratization – Democracy Trumped?', globally India has been 'one of the worst autocratizers lately'. However, India has rejected these global reports on media freedom, free speech, religious freedom for minorities, and democracy, etc., describing them as 'motivated'. Meanwhile, the Ministry of Defence directed all media channels, digital platforms, and individuals to 'refrain from live coverage or real-time reporting of defence operations and movement of security forces'.
Straits Times
10-05-2025
- Politics
- Straits Times
Info war: India leverages media to show it has the upper hand against Pakistan
People watch TV reports of Indian missile strikes on Pakistan in Peshawar, Pakistan, on May 7. PHOTO: EPA-EFE Info war: India leverages media to show it has the upper hand against Pakistan NEW DELHI – While news programmes are broadcast on many Indian television channels, sirens can be heard blaring in the background, forcing anchors to raise their voices as they discuss the latest developments in the conflict between India and Pakistan. This prompted the Home Ministry on May 10 to issue an advisory to TV channels to stop using civil defence air raid sirens – meant to capture the viewer's attention – on their programmes. 'The routine use of sirens may likely reduce the sensitivity of civilians towards the air raid sirens,' the advisory cautioned. Behind all the noise, which includes blanket coverage of the conflict steeped in jingoistic and nationalistic rhetoric, is one message: India has the upper hand against Pakistan. This message remains in place even as US President Donald Trump announced on May 10 that India and Pakistan had agreed to a 'full and immediate' ceasefire. In tandem with the strikes and counterstrikes, an information war has been waged within and outside India and Pakistan, not just to show their respective domestic audiences that their governments are taking strong action, but also to win support from those following the hostilities from overseas. In India, it has ranged from pro-government coverage to media bans and media advisories, as the government has sought to control the narrative. Social media platform X, on the orders of the Indian government, h ad started blocking 8,000 accounts in India, leading to accusations of censorship. This includ es accounts of senior journalists from Kashmir and media websites like Maktoob Media – an independent media outlet that said it focused on human rights and minorities – as well as weekly publications Free Press Kashmir and The Kashmiriyat. 'Blocking entire accounts is not only unnecessary, it (also) amounts to censorship of existing and future content, and is contrary to the fundamental right of free speech,' said X in a statement on May 9. The platform acknowledged the difficult position it faces, stating: 'This is not an easy decision, however keeping the platform accessible in India is vital to Indians' ability to access information.' Those whose accounts were banned said they had no prior intimation. Maktoob Media said in a statement that it had no knowledge of the reason for the government's action, even as it has continued to cover different aspects of the conflict on its website. Separately, The Wire, a news portal that is often critical of the government, also found its website briefly blocked on May 9, leading to accusations of censorship. The site was back online on May 10 with its founding editor, Mr Siddharth Varadarajan, saying in a statement that it had been unblocked after it removed a specific story related to Pakistan's claims of downing an Indian Rafale jet. India has dismissed the downing of jets as 'misinformation'. India has not confirmed the downing of any Indian jets. Tensions between the two nuclear-armed neighbours have risen following the killing of 26 people in a terror attack April 22 in Pahalgam in Kashmir. India has blamed Pakistan for the attack and launched strikes across the border in the early hours of May 7 . Pakistan responded, and the two countries were locked in a cycle of exchanging missile strikes and shelling each other's territories. Amid all this, public opinion has continued to invest confidence in Prime Minister Narendra Modi, whose image is that of a strong nationalistic leader. Role of the media The question facing the media now is about the kind of role it has played and will pla y in the information war. Commentators noted that some sections of the media had pushed the narrative of strong government response by backing it with unverified information, inadvertently muddying the government's messaging. Some mainstream television channels supportive of the Indian government told viewers that the Indian Navy had attacked Karachi – the largest city in Pakistan – and that the Indian military had advanced right up to Islamabad, Pakistan's capital. This proved to be wrong, with Pakistani residents of the cities mentioned sharing footage and creating memes of how life was going on as usual. A day after these claims were widely shared, the Indian defence ministry, without naming any media organisations, on May 9 'advised' television media, among others, against 'live coverage or real-time reporting of defence operations and movement of security forces'. 'Beyond legal compliance, it is a shared moral responsibility to ensure our collective actions do not compromise ongoing operations or the security of our forces,' the advisory said. Analysts noted that keeping the messaging on point amid the information war had remained critical for the Modi government to back up its strong nationalistic stand and possibly even de-escalate tensions with Pakistan . '(Wrong news) damages India's international reputation. If this was done by social media handles, it would be different. These are mainstream news channels. It could damage credibility of not just the media, but also the country,' said Chennai-based political analyst Sumanth Raman. 'If the public is told by the media that we have delivered the message to Pakistan, and we have made our point, that is what they will believe. Definitely the media has a role including in de-escalation,' he added. But this is not the first conflict where sections of the Indian media have waged an information war. In 2019, India launched air strikes against what it said was a terror training camp in Balakot in Pakistan in retaliation for a suicide bombing in which 40 soldiers were killed in Kashmir. Indian television channels then too whipped up passions, seeking revenge for the killing of the soldiers. The rhetoric has deepened even further this time as India ahead of the ceasefire on May 10 accused Pakistan of targeting civilian s and using high-speed missiles to target its bases. Pakistan too accused India of targeting its military air bases as the two countries have continued to exchange claims and counterclaims. Mr Shantanu Gupta, a political analyst and author, maintained this was not the time for critical reportage, saying the media had to put its weight behind the Modi government. 'The narrative is a big part of the conflict. Media is very important because public sentiment is only made by Indian television, however big YouTube or social media has become,' he said. 'Until and unless you find the government is doing something too wrong, this is not the time to create confusion. But yes, sometimes they (television media) go overboard just to justify their argument, or they go wrong,' he acknowledged . In Pakistan too, the coverage has advanced the government narrative. 'Right now the coverage is all dominated by the government narrative,' said Mr Imtiaz Gul, Executive Director of the Center for Research and Security Studies in Islamabad . 'Pakistan has its internal political and economic problems, but the opinion for now has swayed in favour of the government.' Shrinking space for dissent Still, questions remain over whether the media can continue to play its role effectively during times of conflict like this, with critics accusing the government of permitting little space for criticism in recent years. India and Pakistan have in recent years faced criticism from rights groups of allowing a smaller space for dissent. India has over 20,000 daily newspapers, about 450 privately-owned news channels and around 28 government-owned national and regional channels. Still, it remains to be seen how the ceasefire brokered by the United States will be reported, said Delhi-based writer and journalist Nilanjan Mukhopadhyay. 'We have to see how the narrative plays out on how it is Modi's victory, even though the US brokered the deal,' said Mr Mukhopadhyay. . Nirmala Ganapathy is India bureau chief at The Straits Times. She is based in New Delhi and writes about India's foreign policy and politics. Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
The Hindu
10-05-2025
- Politics
- The Hindu
The Wire says website unblocked after portal removed article
The Wire news portal said that unblocking orders were issued for its website shortly after it reached out to the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting about the censorship of its website, it said in a statement on Saturday (May 10, 2025). As a precondition for removing the site, the site said that the government urged it to take down an article it had put out based on reporting by the U.S. publication CNN. While the site has taken the article down, it noted that the original CNN story remained available, and said it would challenge the decision. The website's blocking had drawn condemnation from multiple journalistic bodies, including the Press Club of India, DIGIPUB Foundation, and the Editors' Guild of India. Follow the Operation Sindoor LIVE updates here 'I am constrained to note that under the IT Act, the procedure your ministry should have followed was to first issue notice about the news story in question, then give The Wire a chance to present its views before the inter departmental committee and only then, in the event that the IDC insists on the story's deletion, could you have taken the extreme step of blocking our website if we remained non-compliant,' the site's founding editor Siddharth Varadarajan wrote to the government. The committee Mr. Varadarajan was referring to is set up by the government, led by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, to adjudicate on blocking orders. Also Read | SC to hear plea challenging blocking of YouTube channel '4PM' on May 13 'The impugned story was published at 0347 on May 8 and the information it reported about was widely available at least 12 hours earlier, from CNN, whose story has remained widely available in India since then. I fail to see why the government wants our story deleted and treated it as such a matter of emergency more than 24 hours after publication that no notice was even served to us and our entire website blocked,' Mr. Varadarajan said in his letter. 'Shortly after we sent this reply, MIB officials informed us that orders had been issued to Internet Service Providers to unblock the site,' Mr. Varadarajan said. 'However, despite the fact that more than 12 hours have passed since then, readers on various networks in different parts of the country are still unable to access The Wire's website.' Most modern websites use a Secure Socket Layer, indicated with https in their web addresses, to prevent interception of their traffic. This technique makes the specific content under a website any individual user is viewing inaccessible, and by extension, unblockable. However, full websites can be blocked instead of individual pages.
