A journalist’s first loyalty is to the public. Not to the ruling party, not to a government department, not to a bureaucrat with influence, and certainly not to the pursuit of personal favour. When a reporter chooses to show only the positive actions of those in power—consistently, deliberately, and without scrutiny—they abandon journalism and slip into the realm of propaganda. This isn’t exaggeration; this is measurable, observable reality.
In India, the term Godi Media—popularised by Ravish Kumar—did not emerge out of thin air. It became mainstream because viewers saw a pattern: anchors and reporters who had turned into cheerleaders for a particular political party, amplifying government narratives while silencing criticism. The term stuck because the behaviour was real. But this phenomenon isn’t limited to national television studios. It’s creeping into regional and hyperlocal journalism as well—sometimes more subtly, sometimes more blatantly.
Across India, hyperlocal digital journalism has brought back a sense of community truth-telling. Small towns and villages now have platforms documenting issues ignored by big media: land disputes, school infrastructure failures, police overreach, local corruption, civic hazards. This layer of journalism often feels like the last surviving watchdog in places where mainstream media has gone soft. Yet, in Jammu and Kashmir, the ecosystem functions differently—and the reasons are structural, political, and psychological.
After 2019: A Shift in Media Dynamics
Following the Abrogation of Article 370 in August 2019 (a major constitutional and administrative event), the media climate in Jammu and Kashmir changed dramatically. Press freedoms came under increased pressure (as documented by multiple national and international press freedom reports). Government communication became more centralised and controlled. The Information Department of the region expanded its outreach efforts significantly—organising frequent coverage of inaugurations, events, and government initiatives. This part is accurate: the department actively invites local journalists to cover even small inaugurations or minor developmental updates. The intention is straightforward—ensure visibility, shape narrative, maintain a positive public-facing image of administration. None of this is illegal. But its side effects on journalism are very real.
The Bitter Truth: PR Masquerading as Journalism
Some journalists use this ecosystem to cultivate favour with officers and bureaucrats. That observation is accurate, but let’s phrase it responsibly: not all, but some local reporters in the region have begun functioning less as journalists and more as personal PR agents for officials. The symptoms are easy to spot. They glorify bureaucrats instead of scrutinising their actions. They cover trivial ribbon-cuttings as if they’re historic achievements. They publish stories that read like government press releases. They avoid critical questions to maintain “good relations.” This isn’t journalism. It’s opportunism dressed as reporting. And it harms the public in quiet but powerful ways.
Democracy relies on an informed citizenry. When journalists hide failures, suppress controversy, or ignore questionable decisions to remain in the good books of officials, the public gets a distorted picture of reality. A journalist who only reports government achievements becomes indistinguishable from state media—except state media doesn’t pretend to be independent. Real journalism needs friction. Without friction, there is no accountability.
But Let’s Be Fair: Not Everyone Has Fallen
Many journalists in Jammu and Kashmir still practice real journalism. That is undeniably true. Despite pressures, politics, and risk, there are reporters who investigate structural failures, question administrative decisions, highlight human rights concerns, document local grievances, and spotlight corruption and negligence. They work quietly, sometimes at personal risk, and often without institutional support. These journalists are still keeping the flame alive in a difficult media environment.
A journalist who reports positive government actions and exposes failures is doing journalism. A journalist who reports only the positive is doing public relations. One serves the public. The other serves power. A journalist who consistently avoids questioning authority is not practicing journalism at all; they are participating in narrative management. The public deserves more than cheerleading. The public deserves truth—uncomfortable, messy, unfiltered truth. And journalism survives only when someone is still brave enough to tell it.
