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.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Times
2 hours ago
- Business Times
Asia: Markets extend gains as China-US talks head into second day
[HONG KONG] Asian stocks squeezed out more gains on Tuesday as the latest round of China-US trade talks moved into a second day, with one of Donald Trump's top advisers saying he expected 'a big, strong handshake'. There is optimism the negotiations - which come after the US president spoke to Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping last week - will bring some much-needed calm to markets and ease tensions between the economic superpowers. The advances in Asian equities built on Monday's rally and followed a broadly positive day on Wall Street, where the S&P 500 edged closer to the record high touched earlier in the year. This week's meeting in London will look to smooth relations after Trump accused Beijing of violating an agreement made at a meeting of top officials last month in Geneva that ended with the two sides slashing tit-for-tat tariffs. The key issues on the agenda at the talks are expected to be exports of rare earth minerals used in a wide range of things including smartphones and electric vehicle batteries. 'In Geneva, we had agreed to lower tariffs on them, and they had agreed to release the magnets and rare earths that we need throughout the economy,' Trump's top economic adviser, Kevin Hassett, told CNBC on Monday. BT in your inbox Start and end each day with the latest news stories and analyses delivered straight to your inbox. Sign Up Sign Up But even though Beijing was releasing some supplies, 'it was going a lot slower than some companies believed was optimal', he added. Still, he said he expected 'a big, strong handshake' at the end of the talks. 'Our expectation is that after the handshake, any export controls from the US will be eased, and the rare earths will be released in volume,' Hassett added. He also said the Trump administration might be willing to ease some recent curbs on tech exports. The president told reporters at the White House: 'We are doing well with China. China's not easy. 'I'm only getting good reports.' Tokyo led gains in Asian markets, with Hong Kong, Shanghai, Sydney, Seoul, Singapore, Taipei, Wellington and Jakarta also well up. 'The bulls will layer into risk on any rhetoric that publicly keeps the two sides at the table,' said Pepperstone's Chris Weston. 'And with the meeting spilling over to a second day, the idea of some sort of loose agreement is enough to underpin the grind higher in US equity and risk exposures more broadly.' Investors are also awaiting key US inflation data this week, which could impact the Federal Reserve's monetary policy amid warnings Trump's tariffs will refuel inflation strengthening the argument to keep interest rates on hold. However, it also faces pressure from the president to cut rates, with bank officials due to make a decision at their meeting next week. While recent jobs data has eased concerns about the US economy, analysts remain cautious. 'Tariffs are likely to remain a feature of US trade policy under President Trump,' said Matthias Scheiber and John Hockers at Allspring Global Investments. 'A strong US consumer base was helping buoy the global economy and avoid a global recession.' However, they also warned: 'The current global trade war coupled with big spending cuts by the US government and possibly higher US inflation could derail US consumer spending to the point that the global economy contracts for multiple quarters.' AFP

Straits Times
3 hours ago
- Straits Times
Trump flexes strongman instincts over Los Angeles protests
Mr Trump has talked for years about using the military against protests. PHOTO: EPA-EFE WASHINGTON - Mr Donald Trump likes to show off his strongman credentials at cage fights and military parades – and over the weekend, the US president did it by sending troops into Los Angeles. The move once again showed Mr Trump pushing presidential power to its limits, at the start of a second term that has begun with what critics say is a distinctly authoritarian edge. Mr Trump deployed the National Guard after clashes sparked by immigration raids, marking the first time since 1965 that a president has done so without a request by a state governor. His administration said on June 9 it was also sending 700 active-duty Marines to America's second-largest city. The Republican has warned that troops could be sent 'everywhere' – sparking fears that he will send the military out into the streets across America to crack down on protests and dissent. 'It's a slippery slope,' Dr William Banks, a law professor at Syracuse University, told AFP. 'If the president tries to do more, he's cutting against the grain in the United States of a long history of leaving law enforcement to civilians.' The protests in Los Angeles are in many ways the showdown that Mr Trump has been waiting for. Mr Trump has been spoiling for a fight against California's Democratic governor Gavin Newsom, and he is now doing so on his signature issue of immigration. Mr Newsom has bitterly accused the 'dictatorial' president of manufacturing the crisis for political gain – while Mr Trump suggested the governor, a potential 2028 presidential contender, could be arrested. Democratic California senator Alex Padilla slammed what he called 'the behavior of an authoritarian government.' Rights groups have also opposed it. Ms Hina Shamsi of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) said in a statement that Mr Trump's response was 'unnecessary, inflammatory, and an abuse of power.' 'Civil war' Mr Trump said on June 9 that he does not 'want a civil war' – but the situation is a golden opportunity to appear tough to his base. Indeed, Mr Trump has long cultivated a strongman image and has previously expressed admiration for authoritarian leaders like Russia's Vladimir Putin and China's Xi Jinping. This weekend, Mr Trump will spend his 79th birthday watching tanks rumble through Washington at a parade to mark the 250th anniversary of the US army. And the order to send the National Guard into Los Angeles came shortly before Mr Trump attended a UFC fight in New Jersey – a sport he has used frequently to appeal to macho voters. Critics however fear that Mr Trump's actions in Los Angeles are not just for show. Since returning to office, Mr Trump has repeatedly pushed the boundaries of presidential power to target the US bureaucracy, universities, law firms, cultural institutions and anywhere else he believes liberal ideologies linger. Mr Trump seemed to hint at what could come next when he pinned the blame for the Los Angeles unrest – without evidence – on 'insurrectionists.' It appeared to be a clear reference to the Insurrection Act, which would allow the military to be used as a domestic police force. 'Look strong' 'Trump is pretty free and loose when it comes to the use of force,' Dr Todd Belt, a political science professor at George Washington University, told AFP. 'He knows it is popular with his base, and he always likes to look strong in their eyes.' Mr Trump has talked for years about using the military against protests. Although he did not do so during his first term, his former defence secretary Mark Esper said Mr Trump asked why Black Lives Matter protesters could not be shot in the legs. Conversely, Mr Trump made no move to bring in the military when his own supporters attacked the US Capitol in a bid to overturn his 2020 election loss to Joe Biden. Mr Trump would not say if he would invoke the Insurrection Act when asked by reporters on June 9 but he and his advisors have been framing the issue in increasingly apocalyptic terms. His top migration advisor Stephen Miller has explicitly framed the Los Angeles protests as a battle for the future of Western civilisation against an 'invasion' of migrants. 'The 'war' and 'invasion' framing have helped the administration make the case for the domestic use of these laws that are normally used to put down rebellions or invasions,' said Dr Belt. AFP Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.


CNA
3 hours ago
- CNA
Los Angeles protests turn spotlight on California's ambitious governor Gavin Newsom
WASHINGTON: Immigration protests in Los Angeles are proving a stern test of Gavin Newsom's leadership of California, but the unrest also hands the ambitious governor a unique opportunity, say analysts, as he weighs a presidential run in 2028. Rarely a shrinking violet, the 57-year-old chief executive of the country's largest and richest state has eagerly taken up the Democratic Party's cudgel against President Donald Trump's immigration crackdown. Newsom spent the weekend attacking his Republican opponent, accusing him of deliberately stoking tensions by deploying California's National Guard to downtown LA. A presumed frontrunner for the Democratic leadership, Newsom has made no secret of his political ambitions and appears to be relishing his chance for a public showdown with Trump. As the latest front in Trump's immigration crackdown played out on the streets, the Democrat was brawling on social media, vowing to sue Trump over a "serious breach of state sovereignty". "Every political crisis is a political opportunity," Jeff Le, a former senior official in California state politics who negotiated with the first Trump administration, told AFP. "In California, where President Trump polls at 30 per cent, it's a potential gift for the governor to showcase stark differences between the two." Those differences were all too apparent as Trump upbraided the Democrat for a "horrible job", while the president's "border czar", Tom Homan, threatened to arrest Newsom over any interference with deportations. Homan rowed back his comments after the Newsom gave a fiery interview with left-leaning MSNBC mocking his "tough guy" stance and calling his bluff. Le said Newsom's defiant showing would delight a Democratic base "desperate for a fighter". But he warned that a prolonged stand-off in LA - and particularly an escalation of violence or vandalism - could erode public sympathy, especially if Trump seeks to target California's federal funding. "FACE OF DEMOCRACTIC RESISTANCE" A former mayor of San Francisco, Newsom has been at the helm of the Golden State for six years, making it a haven for liberal priorities such as abortion access and anti-deportation "sanctuary cities". He has been talked of as a future Democratic president for years, and has bolstered his national profile with bold overtures beyond his own state, including debating Florida Governor Ron DeSantis on Fox News. But he has courted controversy on his own side for appearing at times too chummy with Republicans, a criticism fueled by the launch in March of a podcast featuring friendly chats with provocative right-wing guests. His reputation also lost some of its sheen among centrists during the pandemic, when he was slammed by business owners for onerous public health restrictions. A lunch that Newsom attended with lobbyists at an opulent Napa Valley restaurant during the partial lockdown became infamous. An Economist/YouGov poll released last week showed Newsom has ground to make up, as his net popularity rating of -13 points is significantly worse than Trump's still underwhelming -7 points. "There's no question Gavin Newsom is trying to use this moment to elevate his national profile, casting himself as the face of Democratic resistance to Donald Trump," said veteran political strategist Charlie Kolean. But the analyst cautioned that Newsom would damage his presidential ambitions if voters thought he was taking the side of criminals over security forces in his drive to be seen as a defender of civil rights. "Voters overwhelmingly want law and order - it's one of the core issues Trump ran on and won big with," Kolean told AFP.