sindoor-and-sensationalism-when-media-blurs-the-battle-lines

In the annals of modern military operations, rarely does a nation craft a response that speaks as eloquently through its symbolism as through its firepower. Yet India's recent Operation Sindoor represents exactly this—a masterful confluence of military precision and profound cultural messaging that reveals as much about India's evolution as a power as it does about the stark differences between the two neighbouring nations born from the same soil.

 

In naming this operation "Sindoor," India paid solemn tribute to women who watched their husbands fall to terrorist bullets before their very eyes. When terrorists struck in Pahalgam, they specifically targeted men while sparing women, leaving behind widows who, by tradition, would remove this sindoor—their visual connection to married life. The operation transformed a military strike into a cultural statement: what terrorism takes away, the nation will avenge.

 

The strategic narrative beyond military action

 

The decision to have Colonel Sophia Qureshi and Wing Commander Vyomika Singh—one Muslim, one Hindu, both women—brief the world about this high-stakes military operation that destroyed nine terrorist camps in Pakistan and Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (POK) represents a narrative masterstroke.

 

By having Muslim Colonel Qureshi articulate the nation's defence policy, India effortlessly countered Pakistan's persistent attempts to frame the Kashmir conflict in religious terms. Her presence communicated what statistics already prove—that India's Muslim population has thrived post-independence, with Muslims serving at the highest levels of military, government, and cultural institutions. This stands in stark contrast to Pakistan, where religious minorities have dwindled dramatically since 1947, facing systematic discrimination and marginalisation.

 

Without saying it, events that followed "Operation Sindoor" told how India's women command fighter jets and infantry battalions. One need not overstate India's gender equality—challenges certainly remain—but the contrast with Pakistan's approach to women's advancement is stark and unmistakable.

 

Media's ethical tightrope during conflict

 

Having said that, one cannot overlook the role of the media over the past few days. Words, however strong, are no longer mightier than the sword. But is this of the media's choosing? Wars are indeed planned in leaders' minds before they are fought on the ground. Propaganda is an essential tool that can become more lethal than missiles, but at what cost? In the ongoing conflict between India and Pakistan, disinformation has attained centre stage, eroding the already diminishing image of the media.

 

The media is caught in a catch-22; besides loyalty to the nation, they also need to remain loyal to their profession. When ideological leanings override professional judgement, the line between serious and traditional media and callous social media blurs. Ethical and unbiased journalism becomes the casualty. The lines between fact and fiction blur, and this leads to an intellectual anarchy that feeds on misinformation and disinformation. The result is disbelief and cynicism among those whom the media aims to inform, wherein logical reasoning and human intellect become the first and biggest casualty.

 

The contrast in media approaches

 

India has restricted all access to Pakistani media, lest the 'anti-national' propaganda influence residents, spreading panic and anarchy. The same is, in all likelihood, true across the Radcliffe Line. There would certainly be sane voices on both sides, who think beyond TRP ratings and verify information before putting it in the public domain. Does this amount to compromising national interest? Is toeing the official line, during wartime, a moral obligation to prove one's loyalty to the nation? There would be as many opinions as there are people, a justification based on what each person thinks is right.

  

It is a fact that in less than three days of "misadventures," Pakistan is running out of economic fuel. The Economic Affairs Division, Government of Pakistan, which in other words is the Ministry of Economic Affairs (@eadgop), put out a post on X begging for economic aid, within 48 hours of the open hostilities with India. The public appeal on X read, "Government of Pakistan appeals to International Partners for more loans after heavy losses inflicted by the enemy. Amid escalating war and a stock crash, we urge international partners to help de-escalate. Nation urged to remain steadfast". It was only when the post was mocked that Pakistan stated that the account was hacked. This exposes the false bravado of the Pakistani Government, replicated by its national and local media.

 

When journalism falters: Official responses to media excess

 

At the same time, propaganda and disinformation by the Indian media, adopted in a "more loyal than the king" approach, have boomeranged, forcing the Ministry of Defence, Government of India to issue an advisory to the Indian media saying, "All media channels, digital platforms and individuals are advised to refrain from live coverage or real-time reporting of defence operations and movement of security forces. Disclosure of such sensitive or source-based information may jeopardise operational effectiveness and endanger lives. Past incidents like the #KargilWar, 26/11 attacks, and the #Kandahar hijacking underscore the risks of premature reporting. As per clause 6(1)(p) of the Cable Television Networks (Amendment) Rules, 2021, only periodic briefings by designated officials are permitted during anti-terror operations. All stakeholders are urged to exercise vigilance, sensitivity, and responsibility in coverage, upholding the highest standards in the service of the nation". Though the tone and tenor of the message is cautionary, it stems from growing misadventures by the media.

 

Symbolism vs. falsehood: The path forward

  

There is a difference between symbolic gestures and falsehood. Symbolism strengthens a statement, while falsehood falls flat on its face. The government did very well in showing the world in general and Pakistan in particular what it had to. But the overzealous media, on the other hand, has been putting out falsehoods, "Karachi port completely destroyed" as opposed to an attack on the port or "Gen Asim Munir arrested after a coup" and military takeover by Gen Sahir Shamshad Mirza. These falsehoods may have a momentary impact, but the bluff is soon exposed, leaving the credibility of the media in tatters. Media jingoism cannot be condoned on the ground that the falsehood is being spread in the national interest under the prevailing circumstances.

 

Indian media ought to be telling the world that India's true strength lies not in its strike capability, impressive though it may be. Rather, it lies in the social cohesion and democratic values that allow a Hindu-majority nation to place a Muslim woman colonel before cameras to explain military action against terrorists operating from across the border. Stories about a society where religious differences enrich rather than fracture national identity.