Freedom of speech and its consequent dissent-and-control argument just took a whole new turn
“The RWB makes two points about media freedoms, both of them obvious, but which bear repeating. The first, that there is a direct relationship between freedom of speech and democracy. A feisty press flourishes around the cut and thrust of argument between the ruling party and the Opposition and especially revels in a David-Goliath situation, when a small but plucky Opposition won’t let a majoritarian ruling party rest.”
As we all wish each other a joyous new year, 2026, two bits of information cannot have escaped the mind’s eye. The first, that India has overtaken Japan to become the fourth largest economy in the world, a fact that should certainly push each of us towards a self-congratulatory pat on the shoulder even as we sing, in unison, all the stanzas of Vande Mataram — no matter the uneven data glares at you as you look a bit deeper, for example the rising coefficient of inequality.
The second bit of news, somewhat more worrying, is the staggering 14,875 instances of free speech violations recorded through 2025, including nine killings (eight journalists and one social media influencer), 117 arrests, including eight journalists, and 11,385 instances of Internet censorship.
This report, compiled by the Mumbai-based Free Speech Collective, is a sobering description of India’s free speech landscape. I’ve written about this in these columns before — which is, that Article 19, a fundamental right in the Constitution which guarantees freedom of speech and expression, gives with one hand but takes away with the other. So, for example, while Article 19(1)(a) grants citizens the right to freely express their thoughts, opinions and ideas via speech, writing, printing, visual representations or any other means, “reasonable restrictions can be imposed on this right” in the interest of sovereignty and integrity of India, public order, decency or morality etc.
Question is, who is to decide what is “public order”?
We know why these restrictions were placed in 1950 when the Constitution was born, when India was still emerging from the fires of the Partition. Over these past decades, some of those fires have been replaced by others, both real and make-believe. That’s why journalists have always been at the frontlines of courage, pushing establishments to reveal more and more information in the interest of the people. Isn’t that what democracy is about, anyway. Even Napoleon — or especially, Napoleon — knew that information is power.
Closer home, ruling parties have never shied away from controlling the narrative. The BJP is clearly the master of this universe. The Free Speech Collective in its report went on to add that in May 2025, the Centre asked X, the social media giant, to withhold over 8,000 accounts and another 2,354 in July. X also told the Karnataka High Court that it had received 29,118 requests from the government to remove content from January-June 2025 and had complied with 26,641.
Blocking orders from the Union Ministry of Information Technology, shutdowns and bans on apps have been rampant.
Nor are ruling parties in non-BJP-ruled states exempt from the temptation. The Ludhiana police have filed an FIR against 10 persons, of which nine are journalists, for posting “distorted and unverified content” about stories that Punjab Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann’s helicopter was being used when he was on an official visit to Japan and South Korea from December 1-10. It is not known who was using the official chopper. Instead of clarifying what is going on, the sledgehammer has fallen on social media influencers and YouTube news channels.
And then of course there was the unusual threat last year by Telugu Desam MLA Gummanur Jayaram who said he would make reporters sleep on train tracks if they published “false information” on him.
In fact, 2025 began with the news that the body of an independent journalist from Chhattisgarh, Mukesh Chandrakar, 33, was found in a septic tank in Bijapur. Mukesh would often report on the “violence from the Naxal heartland”, the Indian Express said, an indication of the threat from both sides of the fence.
Punjab’s journalists are familiar with that situation, during the terrorism years and after.
The World Press Freedom Index that is put together by the international NGO Reporters Without Borders (RWB) illustrates why India’s press freedoms teeter between the devil and the deep blue sea. The good news is that India’s media freedom rank has fallen from 159 (out of 180 countries) in 2024 to 151 in 2025. In South Asia, only Pakistan and Afghanistan fare worse. India, the world’s largest democracy, finds itself in the company of Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Sudan, Syria and North Korea — as well as Russia. (India’s fast friend, Vladimir Putin, has been in power in one way or another for the last 26 years.)
The RWB makes two points about media freedoms, both of them obvious, but which bear repeating. The first, that there is a direct relationship between freedom of speech and democracy. A feisty press flourishes around the cut and thrust of argument between the ruling party and the Opposition and especially revels in a David-Goliath situation, when a small but plucky Opposition won’t let a majoritarian ruling party rest.
The RWB’s second finding is that there is a direct relationship between media censorship and funding. That “serious funding cuts” are a real blow to the media economy, already grappling with the expansion of influence of tech giants like Facebook and Google — and now AI. It’s a no-brainer that the media is far freer in a market economy, which allows the diversification of its funding.
And then there’s AI. The X handle of the Punjab unit of the Aam Aadmi Party @AAPPunjab has broken new ground with an AI video that mimics — and criticizes — Opposition leaders, ending with Chief Minister Mann’s real persona “speaking for Punjab”. It’s not a cartoon. Congress leaders Charanjit Channi and Amrinder Raja Warring as well as Akali Dal leader Sukhbir Badal — almost — look like the way they do in real life. Worse, there are no disclaimers.
This deepfake mixing of truth with fiction is already familiar in the non-political space — we saw its use in media stories during Op Sindoor last year. But if political parties are also going to start employing AI video in the pursuit of influence, then it’s clear that not just the rules, the nature of the game is being fundamentally changed.
The task to separate truth from fiction in the free speech Lakshman Rekha just became tougher. The freedom of speech and its consequent dissent-and-control argument just took a whole new turn.
(Jyoti Malhotra is Editor-in-Chief of The Tribune group of newspapers. She has worked with India’s top newspapers, across print, TV and digital, both in English and Hindi media, and is a regular contributor on BBC Radio. Her X & Insta handles are @jomalhotra & email is jyoti.malhotra@tribunemail.com)
Be the first to comment