When Truth Be Taboo

“Pressure from the powerful is

why mainstream media has

failed. It is solely because their

language marches in step with

that of bankers, war-mongers,

oppressors and executioners...”

— Louis Yako

Jimmy Kimmel’s return to television last week was nothing short of a media spectacle, a triumph for free speech. After a six-day suspension over his remarks on the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk, Kimmel premiered his comeback episode to 6.26 million broadcast viewers, the largest audience the show has seen in over a decade, despite the fact that a quarter of ABC affiliates refused to air it. His usual average had been 1.42 million, making this spike all the more dramatic. On digital platforms, his opening monologue racked up 26 million views, including 17 million on YouTube.

In his return speech, Kimmel cheekily addressed critics who had labelled him ‘talentless’ and predicted that his ratings would collapse, saying: “Those who called me talentless should look at the numbers now.” The audience erupted. Kimmel’s tone was defiant yet self-aware, mixing apology, humour and sharp criticism. The backlash from political quarters—FCC threats, affiliate boycotts and pressure from conservative voices—only amplified his reach. Instead of crushing him, they catalysed his comeback. This was journalism not as stenography, but as resistance. Kimmel and his comeback mocked those in power, defending free speech, harnessing outrage and creating a public reckoning in the US.

Indian Media is a Contrast

In India, the spectacle is different, one of surrender. Dominant media has become a cheerleader for authority, not a watchdog. It disperses praise for the loud, rich and well-connected. Those who have depth and knowledge, and those with moral clarity and independent thought, receive contempt or oblivion. Today, India’s ‘mainline’ media is often shorthand for corporate alignment, access journalism and outright propaganda; rarely exhibiting substance.

The media no longer debates public policy. It debates personalities, performative outrage, moral policing, selective victimhood and culture wars. Real reportage—writing on the economy, institutional failure and human rights violations—gets buried beneath the cacophony of sensationalism. The pen no longer wounds; it only echoes. Even a brief survey of recent years reveals the depth of abdication. Supreme Court judgments on Electoral Bonds, farmers’ agitations and critical constitutional questions get buried or are reinterpreted in ways favourable to a few. If coverage does emerge, it is filtered, truncated or distorted. Or all of these.

Consider Operation Sindoor. In this conflict involving India and Pakistan, news channels ran a barrage of claims—that Pakistan’s ports and bases had been destroyed, Lahore was occupied, Pakistani air forces had been decimated. Many of these were based on doctored videos, old footage or AI-generated content. Fact-checkers debunked dozens of false claims, with the Indian Government itself issuing advisories and blocking 1,400 URLs spreading disinformation. Independent analysts also found that falsehoods (drawing millions of views) had quietly slipped into the mainstream media’s narrative.

In all, 31 verified instances of misinformation were found in media coverage during Operation Sindoor, showing how truth was vilified, victims were erased and propaganda theatre entered the battlefield. While ground battles were being waged, a parallel war unfolded on TV—one of false claims, emotional manipulation and nationalistic spectacle. These were not an oversight. When misreporting becomes routine during intense national crises, when fact-checking is reactive rather than proactive, the media ceases to be a public service; it becomes a polished spin-machine.

Highs in Misreporting

Even when we move beyond war, this listing is bursting with cases. Shah Rukh Khan’s son was accused by media outlets not merely of drug use, but of being a peddler. After investigations revealed that the charges were baseless and the framing was flawed, the story disappeared from the news. No amends, no reckoning. The Sushant Singh Rajput case is the darkest emblem. Anchors screamed about ‘drugs, conspiracies, Delhi Police vs Mumbai Police’, and subjected the late actor’s girlfriend to merciless harassment on live TV. When forensic analysis and judicial processes proved that the sensational theories were nonsense, most media outlets slunk into silence. No retractions, no accountability.

What of the Poonam Pandey ‘death’ hoax? News organizations ran obituaries, tributes and analysis until Lady Poonam reappeared, quite alive. Her re-birth was ignored. In the Bilkis Bano case, the media fêted the release of the convicted, repeatedly airing videos of them being welcomed like heroes, with laddoos, flowers and shawls. When the Supreme Court reverse-ordered their re-incarceration, the landmark development did not make any headlines.

The rot goes on. There was abject misidentification in Bengaluru, when a random woman was dubbed as the wife of a suicide victim. Fake ‘Exclusive’ AI-generated interviews between politicians were run on prime time. Grotesque misreporting was rampant in the RG Kar rape-murder case in Kolkata. False claims about Canada blocking Australian media were flooded by the media. And above all these were Operation Sindoor’s grand lies—that Indian forces had seized Lahore, destroyed airbases and occupied Pakistani territory. Reporters even donned helmets and gear inside civilian parks for effect, claiming to broadcast from the war zone. This was not journalism; it was spectacle masquerading as news.

Real Issues Quietly Vanished

Every single day, a grotesque disparity is evident in what the media covers and what it ignores. For one, garlic is trading at Rs 200 per kg, signalling inflation and a supply-chain crisis—barely a mention. MSMEs are collapsing under the burden of GST, demonetization and a credit crunch—the narrative is reframed as a recovery, a bounce-back even, after GST 2.0. Banks are posting soaring NPAs, there are frequent hunger deaths, land conflicts, mob lynching and rising violence against women—all these get occasional, sanitized coverage, squeezed between ideological flame-wars.

The minds that once engaged deeply—thinkers, academics, public intellectuals—now find themselves dragged into TV debates where no nuance survives. Anchors scream, shout, interrupt and pontificate, but do not question. The powerful are rarely put on the mat, while the powerless are rarely heard. Think hard… if the media itself conspires in the erasure of the underdogs, who will speak for them?

In structure, culture and complicity, the belch is spreading—symptoms of a deeper pathology. The media ecosystem is riddled with compromises. Corporate ownership is tied to those in power, perhaps due to the dependence on advertisements; ‘paid news’ has risen; newsrooms choose sensationalism over depth; and social media algorithms reward outrage over analysis. A recent Cobrapost ‘Operation 136’ claimed that top media houses were taking money to promote polarizing, ideological content. MIT, meanwhile, has found that false news spreads six times faster than truth on social platforms.

Kimmel’s Contrast in Courage

Kimmel’s return proves something that should be obvious but has become rare; that integrity attracts. The more Kimmel was censored and threatened, the more his audience rallied. The more his speech was suppressed, the more it was shared. He didn’t bow; he reclaimed. He didn’t retreat; he amplified. He showed that when the media empowers public judgment rather than pander to the powerful, it endures. In India, no such spectacle of return is likely, if only because there is no equivalent to fall from. There is now an ingrained belief that a journalist will buckle under pressure, that he will not even try. If he does, he will be ostracized, silenced, and forgotten. End of day, almost no one is trying.

Kimmel’s comeback is a reminder that journalism can fight back, and Indians must accept that their media has surrendered. When fact is replaced by spin, when accountability is replaced by alignment, when courage is replaced by access, the media has forfeited its reason to exist. The only way out is that news consumers demand more and demand better, refusing any spectacle. They should question, cross-check and resist. Editors and journalists need to reclaim their vocation. The pen must wound power, not stoke its ego. The newsroom must be a battleground for truth, not a studio for spin.

He can be reached on [email protected]. Views expressed are personal. The writer is a veteran journalist and communications specialist