The only thing that distinguishes a human being from an animal is the sense of morality — and the ability to preserve this morality through language and laws. Without this gift, there would be no civilization, no society, no country, no order in the world. But there are some men who are even more dangerous than beasts, for they twist morality, manipulate language, and misuse law to serve their own selfish ends.

This cunning class exists in every society and thrives by spreading false teachings, poisonous ideas, and the fear of slavery and destruction among the people. This exploitative class uses all forms of mass communication — books, media, both electronic and print, and now social platforms — to control not only their own people but also the minds of others across borders. In truth, they have turned the tools of communication into weapons of deception. Their target is to “manufacture consent” — reshaping truth into a narrative that protects power and deceives the people.

After the Pahalgam tragedy on April 22, Narendra Modi’s government and its loyalist “godi media” dangerously distorted the truth, fanned jingoism, stirred religious hatred, and inflamed aggressive nationalism by openly threatening and abusing Pakistan and its army. Indian news channels began urging the government to attack, humiliate, and destroy Pakistan. Without presenting any evidence, on May 7, India launched airstrikes across Pakistan under Operation Sindoor, killing around 40 Pakistani civilians, injuring 121 others, and martyring 11 soldiers while wounding 78. Pakistan responded swiftly, shooting down five Indian jets — including three French-made Rafale fighters — and destroying Indian military positions along the Line of Control. On May 10, India escalated further by launching air-to-ground missile strikes on three Pakistani airbases, Nur Khan, Mushaf and Bholari bases. Pakistan retaliated with Operation Bunyan-um-Marsoos, targeting 26 military positions inside India, including Suratgarh, Sirsa, Bhuj, Naliya, Adampur, Bhatinda, Barnala, Halwara, Awantipura, Srinagar, Jammu, Udhampur, Mamun, Ambala, and Pathankot, as well as BrahMos missile storage facilities at Beas and Nagrota. A ceasefire, achieved through US mediation, came into effect later that day, narrowly preventing a full-scale war between the two nuclear powers.

During the conflict, media outlets on both sides played a role in shaping national narratives — but Indian electronic media descended into a realm of pure theatre, blurring the lines between news and nationalist fantasy. While Pakistani media remained relatively restrained, Indian channels staged film-like dramas on live television, turning war coverage into scripted spectacles. Anchors like Arnab Goswami (Republic TV), Aditi Tyagi (Zee News), and self-styled defence experts such as Major Gaurav Arya and General S.P. Sinha fed viewers a relentless stream of bombastic claims, emotional anti-Pakistan slogans and rebukes. Times Now announced that the Indian Army had “stormed Islamabad” and captured Lahore. Zee News declared that Karachi Port had been “reduced to rubble by over ten blasts.” Republic TV excitedly claimed a Pakistani pilot had been captured, while India Today ran segments suggesting that Pakistan’s Army Chief, General Asim Munir, had been arrested in a coup. In one particularly absurd segment, TV9 Bharatvarsh claimed a Baloch uprising had erupted in Quetta, while animated maps glowed behind anchors “marking” Indian military gains across Pakistani territory. Aaj Tak declared Peshawar “turned to dust,” while Republic reported massive blasts outside the Pakistani prime minister’s residence. The fiction was so extreme that even journalist Barkha Dutt tweeted about the Navy destroying Karachi Port. None of these stories were backed by any evidence and were later proven to be entirely false.

Pakistan Army spokesperson Lt Gen Ahmed Sharif Chaudhry exposed multiple doctored and fake videos aired by Indian media. He showed that Indian channels had broadcast recycled or unrelated footage — including clips from the Gaza conflict, a 2020 explosion in Beirut, and even video game graphics from Battlefield 3 — presenting them as scenes of Indian military victory. The BBC and AFP also debunked these false claims.

This wave of disinformation was not limited to TV — it flooded social media too. Right-wing influencers openly promoted “information warfare” as a patriotic duty. As fact-checker Pratik Sinha noted, this was the first time Indian online communities celebrated falsehoods as a tool of war.

The main job of journalism is to inform, educate, guide, and entertain people — not to mislead them or push a political agenda. At its core, journalism should be fair and honest, reporting facts objectively, without prejudice or twisting the truth. It is the duty of every journalist to present the truth as it is — not as they wish it to be. But, unfortunately, in every country, the ruling elite often weaponises the media to pursue its own agenda. This is not new. Over a century ago, during World War I, US President Woodrow Wilson created the Creel Commission, a propaganda machine that turned a largely pacifist American public into one that demanded war with Germany — all within six months. There are countless examples where mainstream publications have carried unverified, politically charged stories that served as the foundation for war. Zahid Hussain, a prominent columnist, writes that in the early 2000s, the New York Times published reports by Pulitzer Prize-winner Judith Miller alleging Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction — a claim later debunked. Those stories helped justify the U.S. invasion of Iraq, a war that, by some estimates, killed over a million people. In 2004, the New York Times admitted much of its WMD coverage had relied on questionable intelligence, including misleading claims by Iraqi exile Ahmad Chalabi. Similarly, Newsweek’s then-editor Fareed Zakaria endorsed the invasion and later praised Trump’s missile strike on Syria, calling it the moment he “became president.”

These episodes are grim reminders of how powerful media, when aligned with the ruling elite and state interests, can create false public opinion and drag entire nations into disaster. Modi is playing the same game. Even after the ceasefire between India and Pakistan, Prime Minister Narendra Modi continues to issue provocative threats. His government, with the backing of a compliant media, presents this aggression as strength and uses nationalism to stir emotions. This strategy serves to distract people from serious domestic problems such as poverty, unemployment, and social unrest.

Noam Chomsky has long argued that in societies that appear democratic on the surface, the media often does not inform the public — instead, it works to shape public opinion to support those in power. When leaders face difficulties at home, they sometimes create fear of an external enemy to unite the public and silence criticism. Modi’s actions — supported by a media that promotes conflict— clearly follow this pattern. This tactic was also recognised centuries ago by Niccolò Machiavelli, who advised rulers to create external threats in order to unify people under their control and deflect attention from domestic issues.

If such reckless posturing continues, it risks pushing the region into a full-fledged war — one that could spiral into a nuclear confrontation. The consequences of such a catastrophe are unimaginable. Narendra Modi must not pursue a path that endangers millions just to win votes. Instead of being used as weapons to stir hatred, the media in both India and Pakistan must be redirected toward uplifting their people — fighting poverty, illiteracy, and disease, not each other.