20th National Meeting Keynote Address by KR Meera on Media at the Crossroads: Independence vs Influence

I am so happy to be here with you on this occasion. I remember clearly when we started the first network of women journalists in Kerala in 2002. And in 2004, we all assembled in Thattekkad Bird Sanctuary. In 2005, I was busy having won the Chevening Scholarship, and in 2006—after an investigative series (which was something of a trend setter) titled “How Safe Is Kerala For Women”, along with my dear friend Vineetha Gopi and four other colleagues, about which Kalpana Sharma was kind enough to write a column—I left the profession. Had I not quit, I would have spent these past 24 years by your side. I cannot express how much I miss the rumble of the newsroom, the ‘neonatal’ fragrance of warm newspapers fresh from the press, the reports I planned to write, and the headlines I was meant to create. I even miss waiting for an auto-rickshaw after a night shift, breathing in the scent of the parijatham tree in bloom, in front of our office. You may not have noticed, but I confess that your meeting rooms have long been haunted by the spirit of the journalist I used to be. My soul was roaming amidst you in all the meetings of NWMI. Thank you, Ammu Joseph, Saraswathy Nagarajan, and all the office bearers for inviting me back.

I am here today to speak about the Indian media at a crossroads— Independence vs Influence. But let me be clear: it is not just the media standing at a crossroads. The whole nation is, the whole world is. Every citizen of India, and indeed every citizen of the world, the whole human race, is at this same precipice. This is a crossroads we weren’t trained to navigate—a terrain that wasn’t on the map we inherited from our forerunners. After three decades of technological explosion and scientific leaps, we are facing a vista we barely recognize: an era of ‘too much’. Too much news, too much information, too much unsettling chaos of the post-truth world. In this world, information is everywhere, yet it is fragmented, confusing, and often weaponized. We know that Truth must be the touchstone of our democracy. But what is ‘The Truth’? How do we sieve out ‘The Truth’ from a thousand competing ‘truths’?

Of course, the Father of our Nation had foreseen this crisis. That is why he gave us a talisman — I don’t want to use the word talisman in today’s India anymore. I would rather replace it with ‘touchstone’— for exactly this moment. He told us: ‘Recall the face of the poorest and the weakest person you have ever seen. Ask yourself if the ‘truth’ you are reporting — or the ‘truth’ you are consuming—is helping them, or if it is merely helping their predators’.

Because, democracy is a process, not a trophy. It is a way of life, not a destination. Gandhiji prescribed non-violence as the only path to democracy. He was right. Democracy is just another wave in the ocean of non-violence, not visa-versa. In short, India hasn’t ever realized full democracy, Never. If we had, there wouldn’t have communal or casteist divisions. There wouldn’t be the kind of politics we have right now, there wouldn’t be hunger or violence towards the lesser privileged.

Earlier, I used to think that democracy existed at least in our electoral process. Not anymore. In the 2025–2026 Democracy Indices from the Economist’s Intelligence Unit (EIU) and International IDEA, our nation was classified as a ‘hybrid regime’—a category for ‘flawed’ or ‘deficient’ democracies. Only five nations currently satisfy the gold standard of ‘full democracy’ — Norway, New Zealand, Finland, Sweden, and Denmark. Of them, Norway remains the closest to the ideal. Their government is radically transparent with massive public participation. New Zealand and Finland demonstrate unshakable ‘civic faith’— their citizens have deep trust in their institutions. The Nordic models teach us that social equality is not just a goal, but a prerequisite for political equality.

What about ‘our friend’, the mighty United States? Once a golden democracy, now it finds itself in the ‘flawed democracy’ category. Please note the reasons: one, extreme polarization, two, the influence of ‘big money,’ and three, the collapse of public trust in the news.

Isn’t it ominous that when the rulers of nations become friends the nations too copy each other? India too falls under the ‘hybrid regime’ due the collapse of press freedom. The international observers find the first and foremost challenge that Indian democracy faces is press freedom — the second being the protection of minority voices.

In reality, these are not two separate factors; they are inextricable. When you say that press freedom is under siege, the silencing of the minority is implicit. To fail in protecting the minority voice is to fail in the very promise of free speech. It is more than a policy error; it is a fracture in our Fundamental Rights. Without free speech, there can be no freedom of expression or freedom of worship. Without these freedoms, there can be no equality or justice.

The more I reflect on the implications of our Fundamental Rights, the more I am awestruck by the wisdom and foresight of the architects of our Constitution. Remember, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar’s words that “Constitutional morality is not a natural sentiment; it has to be cultivated.” He knew that the document alone cannot save a people. He knew that the it was up to us—the journalists, the citizens, the seekers of truth- to complete the task.

So the crossroads India and its media are at, isn’t just about technology or money—it’s about whether our media wants to help India to move toward ‘full democracy’ or slip further into the ‘Hybrid’ zone or even… autocracy.

I cannot help noticing the parallels between India and the US, at this juncture. I mean, these are the days we find ourselves discussing Donald Trump, Venezuela, Greenland, the Epstein files, the genocide in Gaza, the US announcement of India’s trade contracts and so on.  Let us not forget that the US was in the ‘full democracy’ category ever since the inception of the Democracy Index in 2006. Until 2016. I repeat, until 2016.

When the US was first demoted in the EUI index in 2016, three specific reasons were cited the first of them being ‘erosion of trust’. Trust in what? In their government and newspapers! By 2026, the situation has worsened. While the EIU still classifies the US as a ‘flawed democracy,’ other indices like those calculated by the V-Dem Institute and the Center for Systemic Peace find the US on ‘the cusp of autocracy’. In other words, we are modifying our new friend.

I started my career in 1993. In those days, I remember reading reports on a daily basis, about a person named Rupert Murdoch — that he was purchasing this newspaper or that TV channel. Till then the phrase ‘press barons’ denoted Joseph Pulitzer and William Randolph Hearst in the US and Lord Northcliffe in the UK. During the late 1800s till the 1920s, they bought hundreds of local newspapers and formed national chains commencing the era of the ‘yellow journalism’. They were the first to monopolize information. Then, in 1996, the US government introduced the Telecommunications Act and delimited the number of TV and radio stations a company could own, creating space for the rise of a phenomenon like Rupert Murdoch. He became the owner of the largest number of English newspapers in the world. Then he moved on to become the global broadcaster, purchasing television channels. He owned Fox in the USA, the BskyB (now Sky) in the UK, Star TV in Asia. He purchased Harper & Row and William Collins and merged them to form HarperCollins, one of the top five publishers in the world. In the 1990s, he owned 800 media companies, an empire that sprawled across 50 countries.

What does that mean? A single person owning 800 media companies does not simply mean owning so many companies. It means that he was shaping, controlling and manipulating our conversations, thoughts and perceptions.  Today, we are his products — you and me, our understanding of life, the way we relate to the world are his making.  By controlling our conversations, he influenced our governments’ policies, decided our destinies. Consequently, we got ourselves ‘groomed’ to trust that independence is a myth and subjugation to influence is the reality. If in the 1980s, there were 50 media companies in America, by the 2000s, it was reduced to 5. The Big Five.  As a result, the media became another product for the corporations. Then by 2010s, we had the wave of the ‘big tech algorithm’. Industrial giants were replaced by technology titans.

The variables change everywhere but the equation holds good for every nation. In the US, it is the tech titans; in India, it is the industrial giants. We too have our own Big 5. The Jio Star, Adani, Zee TV, Sun Network. Alongside their primary businesses in energy, retail, or technology, these corporations control the infrastructure of truth in our country. The result is a singular global crisis: the ‘independence’ of the newsroom is being bartered for the ‘influence’ of the boardroom.

In India, we are witnessing the most disturbing immoral version of this crisis —that of the corporate oligarchy. The media, our moral ‘watchdog’ isn’t merely owned by a businessman—it is owned by the same hands that build our roads, light our homes, and own our data. Influence once meant a phone call from a politician’s office, a senior journalist tells me. Today it is daily instructions and monitoring from the ruling party’s media cell. It can also be the subtle manipulation of an algorithm. It can also be the shutting down of the media by the parent company. The carrot and stick policy of the government added to the ‘cancel culture’ of social media makes it possible for the state to manipulate the social media as a PR tool. When we discuss the crossroads, the saddest possibility is that there are not just two roads in opposite directions, but a labyrinth of roads converging at the same point. Indian media, unfortunately, is tethered to the very systems it is supposed to critique.

However, there are definitely, new roads being cleared. For example, there is the ‘The Reporters’ Collective’. They have acted as a power house of deep-dive journalism and are known for covering the ‘forbidden stories’ – the stories about illicit collaborations, uncovering systemic corruption in governance, environmental clearances, and electoral processes. Then there is The Caravan, Scroll and The Wire. In recent years, many independent journalists have moved to YouTube and similar platforms to avoid institutional censorship.  Ravish Kumar continues to command massive audiences by reporting independently on issues of social justice and rural distress.

However, the most world-altering exposés are still driven by the tenacity, patience, and unique perspectives of women journalists. I believe that journalism is meant for women, not men. It was Julie K Brown who pursued the Epstein files, Sucheta Dalal who broke the biggest financial story in India, the Harshad Mehta scam. Anita Pratap and Chitra Subramaniam continue to be my role models. Manini Chatterjee is one of the best political reporters, editors and analysts that Indian media has seen.  Manini’s crowning glory is her interview with the then Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in August 2007. It changed the political landscape of India. Neena Gopal was the last journalist to speak to Rajiv Gandhi minutes before he was assassinated. There is no need to elaborate on the contributions of Teesta Setalvad. Sakshi Singh is one of the most courageous journalists who take on communal forces online. She has withstood physical attacks and verbal abuse to cover stories that she feels must be told. Radhika Ramaseshan, Smita Gupta and Neena Vyas are the outstanding reporters who covered the BJP and Hindutva politics when it was very hard to gain information. The executive editor of Scroll is Supriya Sharma. Manisha Pande of the News Laundry, Poonam Agarwal, Patricia Mukhim, the editor of The Shillong Times, are all living examples of courage and brilliance. Harshita Kalyan, the former deputy editor of The Telegraph is an amazing person and journalist.  We have Rana Ayyub and Faye D’Souza, too, who have redefined the landscape of today’s journalism.

We all should be proud of Vaishna Roy, a dear friend of mine. She is the current editor of The Frontline magazine. I salute her for being the editor who still takes up issues unpalatable to the Sangh Parivar. The magazine commissioned poet and author Meena Kandasamy to interview activist Soni Sori when most of the mainstream media stopped covering Dantewada. Meena produced one of the best interviews in recent memory.

I can speak for days about Neha Dixit. She is one of the most sensitive investigative journalists we have in India. Her outstanding recent book, The Many Lives of Syeda X, was written with the hard work of nine years and after speaking to 900 people — a rare feat accomplished by an individual in India and most of the world. We have Shahina KK, a fire-brand fighter, first on TV and later in print. Our own Ammu Joseph, Saritha Varma and Saraswathy Nagarajan continue their enviable endeavors in journalism. We should all be grateful to Meena Kotwal, the founder of The Mooknayak. Mooknayak was also the name of the first newspaper launched by Dr. BR Ambedkar. Meena’s Mooknayak is the go-to portal to realise how vast sections of the so-called mainstream media is ignoring or burying news concerning the marginalized citizens of India.

And then there is Meera Jatav, whom I adore. I am waiting for an opportunity to meet Meera and her friends Kavita Devi (also known as Kavita Bundelkhandi), Shalini Joshi and Disha Mullick. They are the force behind Khabar Lahariya, a newspaper published in various rural dialects of Hindi, including Bundeli, Avadhi and Bajjika. The newspaper focuses on gender and education and covers local political news, local crime reports, social issues and entertainment, all reported from a feminist perspective.  It is remarkable how both Khabar Lahariya and The Mooknayak, without any apparent direct communication with each other, play up the very same issues that many legacy media outlets ignore. The outstanding coverage by Khabar Lahariya and The Mooknayak of the recent controversy on the UGC equity rules is a telling example. The Navodayam journalists from Andhra Pradesh are also to be commended for their wonderful achievements. Then we have The News Minute.   I am so proud of Dhanya Rajendran and The News Minute. Dhanya has also explored ways to collaborate and pool resources with like-minded media outlets for the sake of news gathering.

In brief, there are several women editors and reporters who are negotiating the treacherous rapids of newsrooms and newspaper boardrooms. They are the ones who show the way at these crossroads.

What I want to remind you is that even when threats are looming large, there are a group of strong-minded and dedicated journalists who are women to lead the nation. It is not a coincidence that the longest battles are often fought and won by women.

Real democracy requires real independence. To find it, look to our women journalists, their portals, and their platforms. They are fighting the toughest battles in news today, proving that ethics can survive even the heaviest state pressure.

In a world where misogyny is often a way of life, seeing women lead the political discourse is transformative. They have demonstrated, time and again, how to adhere to facts and ethics despite the state and the ‘deep state’’ At this crossroads, let us choose the road less traveled and make a difference. In my view, it is essential to see women writing about politics and making a positive impact on the lives of our citizens—especially today.

You must have heard about the concept of ‘predatory misogyny’ or ‘autocratic masculinity’. Unfortunately, our education systems fail to teach us the dangerous link between social prejudice and political decay. History and civics are taught as a series of dates and laws, ignoring the social psychology that allows autocracy to thrive. When misogyny is normalized, it creates a blueprint for how a society accepts a ‘strongman’ leader. We are not taught how ingrained misogyny acts as a foundation for autocracy, slowly dismantling democracy from within. When we normalize the silencing of women, we sharpen the very tools that autocrats use to silence dissent, erode empathy, and destroy the constitutional fabric of our nation. Autocracy relies on the idea that only a ‘dominant male’ figure can protect the nation. This ideology inherently views civilizational values like empathy, collaboration, and compromise—as ‘weakness’. By devaluing women, autocrats justify the suppression of democratic debate.

Misogyny trains a population to accept the bullying of the “other.” If it is socially acceptable to silence or harass women online, it becomes much easier for a state to apply those same tactics to silence journalists, students, and minorities. Autocracies often seek to control the family unit and reproductive rights. By enforcing patriarchal norms, the state exerts control over the most private parts of a citizen’s life, which is the first step toward total state control. Hence it is imperative that we stand together and form a sisterhood for the voiceless and the silenced.

It is high time that male-dominated newsrooms undergo a rigorous unlearning process. Reporters and editors need mandatory grounding in Constitutional law, gender sensitivity, and minority rights to move beyond their own blind spots.

I wish the NWMI would work to fight these. If the editorial boards don’t understand the lived reality of a minority community or the structural nuances of gender, the reporting often becomes insensitive or, worse, sensationalist. We often see ‘trial by media’ in cases involving gender-based violence. A grounding in gender studies would teach editors that a victim’s “character” is irrelevant to their right to justice.

I wish that NMWI would take up this goal as a priority. There is a massive consolidation of the sexual predators who are protected by the communal forces and supported by the corporates. If you want to live the full democracy, please join together to create more space for ethical and empathetic journalism. We might not live long enough to see and enjoy a full and complete democracy. But it gives a lot of meaning to life to live and work to look forward to that day. At a crossroads, always take the road towards democracy. It will liberate you from influences and empower you to be independent.

Thank you.