History’s most infamous media blunders remind us that accuracy, not speed, must define journalism—yet Indian television’s fevered descent into misinformation shows we have not learned.
What Indian TV’s Collapse during Conflict Reveals About Media in Crisis
The Price of Being First
In 1948, the Chicago Tribune printed “Dewey Defeats Truman,” an infamous blunder in the rush to set the news cycle. Harry Truman’s victorious grin the next morning remains a reminder that journalism’s first casualty is often patience.
Half a century later, on U.S. election night 2000, the networks faltered again: Florida was called for Al Gore, then for George W. Bush, then “too close to call.” Gore conceded—then withdrew his concession. By dawn, viewers were left bewildered, and the credibility of America’s media in shreds.
In recent history, the failures of media projections have been glaring. In 2016, most U.S. television networks and national polls confidently predicted a Hillary Clinton victory, only to be blindsided by Donald Trump’s upset win. Four years later, while Joe Biden ultimately prevailed, many outlets misread the scale and trajectory of the race, initially underestimating Trump’s performance. Even in 2020, headlines swirled with speculation of a Kamala Harris surge in the Democratic delegates and US electorate that never materialized, evincing how polls and punditry often tell a story that reality refuses to follow.
These episodes are not curiosities of history. They illustrate a deeper hazard: when speed eclipses accuracy, journalism becomes not a stabiliser but a destabiliser.
The Digital Age’s Amplification: India’s Information Meltdown
That hazard re-emerged with ferocity in May 2025, during India’s military escalation with Pakistan. On May 9, a WhatsApp message alleging Pakistan’s army chief had been arrested leapt from phone screens to television tickers. The Washington Post later noted that General Asim Munir was not only free but soon promoted to field marshal.
Mainstream broadcasters—including Zee News, ABP News, NDTV, Times Now Navbharat, and Bharat Samachar—aired ever more fantastical claims: that Islamabad and Lahore had been captured, that Pakistan’s prime minister was cowering in a bunker, that Karachi’s port had been destroyed. One anchor thundered that Karachi was facing “its worst nightmare since 1971... It completely finishes Pakistan.” Others went further, broadcasting combat “footage” lifted from video games, from Gaza, even from a U.S. plane crash.
As Business Standard and the Al Jazeera Institute documented, these were not fringe outlets but prime-time platforms. Millions of viewers were not being informed—they were being immersed in fiction.
Beyond Blame: Understanding the Pressure
It is too easy to dismiss these failures as mere irresponsibility. Newsrooms operate under punishing conditions: a 24-hour cycle, manic competition, and the omnipresence of social media. One Indian journalist told The Washington Post, “Journalism has just become anything that lands on your WhatsApp from whoever.”
That context matters. When governments maintain silence, an information vacuum emerges. Yet context is not absolution. Under pressure, television anchors became accelerants of rumor rather than correctives to it.
Why This Matters
- Escalation risk: False reports of military victories or arrests in a nuclear standoff are not harmless—they inflame nationalism, narrow space for diplomacy, and could tip crises into catastrophe.
- Erosion of trust: Once audiences perceive news as theatre, rebuilding credibility is arduous. Cynicism takes root, corroding democracy itself.
- Spectacle over substance: When ratings reward performance, truth becomes expendable—and news collapses into narrative.
Restoring Anchors in the Storm
- Verification before velocity: Breaking news should not be broadcast until independently confirmed.
- Institutional fact-checking: Every newsroom needs in-house systems to halt rumor before it becomes headline.
- Transparency in error: Corrections must be timely and unequivocal. Even Aaj Tak, after criticism, issued an on-air apology admitting “incomplete” reporting—a small but vital step.
- Resisting structural pressures: Competition and social media speed will not vanish. But journalism’s credibility depends on resisting them, not surrendering to them.
A Somber Lesson
From Truman’s amused grin to the 2000 election’s carnival of confusion & Trump taunts—and now India’s descent into televised fantasy—the warnings have been clear. Journalism that sacrifices truth for immediacy abandons its civic duty.
In times of conflict, the press must serve as tempering hand, not accelerant. Only then can headlines reflect reality, rather than distort it beyond recognition.
