Echo chambers of bias: How media shapes gender justice in India

India’s media industry wields immense influence in shaping public opinion and societal norms, particularly on issues of gender justice. Adding to this is the virality of news and the anonymity afforded by social media platforms. While the journalism’s role in amplifying awareness and advocating for justice is undeniable, its growing tendency toward sensationalism and bias is increasingly impacting the judicial process. This influence extends beyond public opinion to those delivering justice — judges, investigators, and other stakeholders — who are susceptible to the echo chambers created by media narratives.

Research highlights how press reporting can perpetuate discriminatory gender norms, reinforce stereotypes, and normalise violence against women and girls. At its worst, the media diminishes survivors’ voices, oversimplifies complex societal issues, and prejudges accused individuals before investigations conclude. Such portrayals risk trivialising the struggles of survivors while depriving the accused of a fair trial. Conversely, responsible press can spotlight root causes of violence, promote positive gender norms, and provide critical information to victims and their supporters. This duality underscores the urgent need for accountability and responsibility in journalistic practices.

READ | RBI’s rupee policy: Time for a strategic pivot

How media influences the judicial process

High-profile cases have repeatedly shown how unchecked press scrutiny can skew the judicial process. Extensive coverage often creates societal echo chambers where narratives are built on assumptions rather than facts, placing undue pressure on the judiciary. Judges, as part of the society they serve, are not immune to media-fuelled perceptions. This phenomenon compromises the impartiality essential for justice.

The 2018 Kathua rape and murder case serves as a striking example. Press scrutiny intensified public outrage, challenging district officials to investigate the crime while navigating heightened communal tensions. Despite the noise, coordinated efforts among the police, judiciary, and civil servants ensured the perpetrators were convicted. Such cases illustrate the critical role of administrators in managing press narratives to uphold justice.

Perils of media-driven judgments

Cases like the 2012 Nirbhaya gang rape demonstrated the potential of press to drive systemic reforms. However, the intense scrutiny accompanying similar cases has also led to hasty conclusions, intimidation of witnesses, and distorted investigations. Media-amplified public sentiment can compel the judiciary to align with popular opinion, often at the expense of legal principles.

Sensational headlines, intrusive reporting, and victim-blaming narratives retraumatise survivors and discourage others from coming forward. This is particularly evident in rural and marginalised communities, which receive scant media attention. A 2022 Centre for Media Studies report revealed that over 70% of press coverage on gender issues focuses on urban cases, side-lining the realities of rural women who face systemic inequality and limited access to justice.

Global lessons in media regulation

Countries like the UK and Australia offer valuable insights. The UK’s Independent Press Standards Organisation (IPSO) enforces stringent guidelines for criminal case reporting, ensuring judicial outcomes remain uninfluenced. In Australia, the judiciary engages proactively with the press to provide accurate, timely information, mitigating misinformation. These practices highlight the importance of structured communication between the judiciary and the press—an approach Indian administrators could adapt.

India’s regulatory mechanisms, such as the Press Council of India’s guidelines, must be rigorously enforced to curb sensationalism and bias. Social media platforms, increasingly shaping public discourse, must also be held accountable. Training journalists in gender-sensitive reporting can ensure their work contributes to justice rather than obstructing it.

Data-driven insights for reform

According to the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB), the average time to resolve rape cases in India exceeds two years. Press coverage often peaks early, fading long before trials conclude, leaving survivors and administrators to grapple with long-term challenges. While cases with high press attention may see expedited judicial outcomes, they risk compromising thorough investigations due to external pressures.

Judicial independence is the cornerstone of democracy, but it remains vulnerable to the dominance of media narratives. Judges and investigators, like the rest of society, are susceptible to the echo chambers created by relentless coverage. Civil servants play a pivotal role in balancing narratives through proactive communication, such as timely press briefings, and countering misinformation to manage public sentiment without compromising judicial processes.

Justice for gender-related issues must rest on facts, fairness, and empathy—not on the loudest voices or the most viral content. The press must decide whether to be a force for equity and understanding or a contributor to bias and polarisation. By adopting a more balanced approach, the fourth estate can fulfil its potential to shape a just and equitable society. Collaboration among civil servants, journalists, and policymakers is essential to ensure that justice is not derailed by the weight of public opinion.