13 Mar 2026·Source: The Hindu

6 min

Anshul Mann|South Asia

Social IssuesPolity & GovernanceInternational RelationsEDITORIAL

Mainstream Media's Credibility Erodes Amidst War Propaganda and Information Gaps

UPSC-Mains●UPSC-Prelims

Photo by Julian Yu

Quick Revision

Mainstream media (MSM) often amplifies state propaganda during wars.

This amplification leads to a loss of MSM credibility.

Social media, independent journalists, and open-source intelligence (OSINT) are filling information gaps.

Information gaps are sometimes deliberately created by state actors.

MSM's selective reporting and framing of events can serve state interests.

The U.S.-Israel conflict against Iran is a current example of this dynamic.

The Iraq war (2003) is cited as a past example of MSM's failure.

A significant portion of younger Americans get news from social media.

Key Dates

2003 (Iraq War)

Key Numbers

@@70 per cent@@ of Americans aged @@18-34@@ get their news from social media.

Visual Insights

Mainstream Media Credibility Erosion: Causes & Impact

This mind map illustrates the core arguments of the news piece, showing how mainstream media's credibility is eroding due to war propaganda and information gaps, and the rise of alternative information sources.

Mainstream Media Credibility Erosion

●Causes of Erosion
●Effects & Consequences
●Emergence of Alternative Sources
●Broader Implications

Mains & Interview Focus

Don't miss it!

The erosion of mainstream media's credibility, particularly during geopolitical conflicts, presents a profound challenge to democratic discourse. When traditional news outlets amplify state narratives and deliberately create information gaps, they betray their fundamental role as the fourth estate. This shift is not merely an academic concern; it directly impacts public perception and the ability of citizens to make informed decisions.

A critical examination reveals that this phenomenon is not new. The Iraq War of 2003 serves as a stark historical precedent, where much of the mainstream media uncritically disseminated government claims about weapons of mass destruction. This historical failure contributed significantly to the current distrust. Today, the rise of Open-Source Intelligence (OSINT) and independent journalism on platforms like social media offers an alternative, often more immediate and diverse, perspective.

Governments frequently leverage national security concerns to control information flow during conflicts. This tactic, while understandable from a strategic standpoint, often crosses into propaganda, stifling dissent and manipulating public opinion. The consequence is a polarized information environment where citizens struggle to discern truth from manufactured consent.

The long-term implications for governance are severe. A populace that distrusts its primary news sources becomes vulnerable to misinformation from all quarters, making consensus-building on critical issues nearly impossible. Policymakers must recognize that a free and credible press is not an adversary but an essential partner in a resilient democracy. Without it, public discourse degrades, and accountability diminishes.

Editorial Analysis

The author contends that mainstream media (MSM) is losing its credibility by acting as a conduit for state propaganda, particularly during conflicts. This selective reporting and deliberate creation of information gaps serve state interests, leading to public distrust and a shift towards alternative information sources like social media and independent journalism.

Main Arguments:

Mainstream media often becomes an amplifier of state propaganda during wars, leading to a loss of credibility among the public.
MSM deliberately creates information gaps through selective reporting and framing of events to serve state interests, rather than providing comprehensive coverage.
Social media, independent journalists, and open-source intelligence (OSINT) are now actively filling the information gaps deliberately created by state actors and amplified by MSM.
There is a significant shift in news consumption, especially among younger demographics, from traditional media to digital platforms like social media.
The failure of MSM to provide objective reporting on conflicts, such as the U.S.-Israel conflict against Iran and the past Iraq war, consistently undermines public trust.

Conclusion

Mainstream media's credibility is eroding rapidly due to its role in propagating state narratives during conflicts. To survive and regain public trust, MSM must return to objective, factual reporting and resist becoming a mere tool for state interests, otherwise, it risks becoming irrelevant.

Policy Implications

Media organizations must adopt internal policies to prioritize journalistic integrity, objectivity, and independent reporting over state narratives, especially during times of conflict. This internal shift is crucial for restoring public trust and ensuring their continued relevance in the evolving information landscape.

Exam Angles

GS-III: Internal Security challenges from deepfakes and misinformation, role of cybersecurity.

GS-III: Impact of deepfakes on the economy, particularly small and medium enterprises, and the need for digital infrastructure for trust.

GS-II: Governance challenges in regulating synthetic media, ensuring public trust in institutions, and protecting individual rights.

GS-IV: Ethical implications of AI-generated content, truth, and transparency in the digital age.

View Detailed Summary

Summary

During wars, big news channels often repeat what the government says, which makes people stop trusting them. Because of this, many people now get their news from social media or independent reporters who try to show a different, more complete picture.

The quiet assumption that visual and audio evidence carried weight, a cornerstone for most of modern history, is now breaking down due to the proliferation of AI-generated media, commonly known as deepfakes. Historically, faking reality was expensive, requiring significant skill, access, and time, making large-scale deception difficult. However, convincing images, audio, and video can now be produced quickly and cheaply by anyone with an internet connection, fundamentally shifting incentives.

While deepfakes are often associated with elections or propaganda, the more immediate and practical concern, particularly for small and mid-sized businesses, is reputation-focused. A fabricated video of a business owner making an inflammatory statement or an audio clip authorizing a non-existent wire transfer can circulate rapidly. The speed of distribution means the first version of a story often becomes the believed truth, with corrections rarely catching up, leading to significant damage before the truth emerges.

This erosion of trust leads to two predictable societal reactions: some individuals remain vulnerable by operating under old assumptions, while others become cynical, treating all information as suspect and disengaging. This cynicism makes coordination difficult, increasing friction in markets, contracts, hiring decisions, partnerships, and capital flows, quietly eroding essential infrastructure. Large enterprises may invest in dedicated verification teams, watermarking technologies, and legal response protocols, but smaller firms typically lack these resources, making synthetic media an operational risk.

The permanence of information in modern systems, such as blockchain technology, further complicates matters. If false content is captured and archived in tamper-proof systems, the burden of proof shifts from correcting a rumor to chasing persistence, altering a business's exposure profile. The ecosystem tilts when the cost of producing convincing media collapses, and the reward for rapid, emotionally triggering distribution remains high, leading to a collective thinning of trust.

Business owners must recognize synthetic media as part of the operational landscape. This necessitates tightening financial controls, clarifying internal communication chains, educating teams on verification practices, and developing a crisis response plan. It also means acknowledging that both business and personal brand exposure now extend beyond actual words and actions, requiring intentional reinforcement of credibility. This topic is highly relevant for UPSC Mains, particularly under GS-III (Internal Security, Economy) and GS-II (Governance, Social Justice) due to its implications for digital trust, cybersecurity, and societal stability in India's rapidly digitizing economy.

Background

ऐतिहासिक रूप से, सूचना की प्रामाणिकता का निर्धारण अपेक्षाकृत सीधा था, जिसमें भौतिक साक्ष्य जैसे तस्वीरें, ऑडियो रिकॉर्डिंग और वीडियो को विश्वसनीय माना जाता था। हालांकि, डिजिटल युग के आगमन के साथ, सूचना के निर्माण और प्रसार की प्रक्रिया में क्रांति आ गई है। इंटरनेट और सोशल मीडिया प्लेटफॉर्म ने सूचना के त्वरित और व्यापक साझाकरण को सक्षम किया है, लेकिन साथ ही गलत सूचना और दुष्प्रचार के लिए भी रास्ते खोल दिए हैं। डिजिटल मीडिया के उदय ने सूचना के सत्यापन की पारंपरिक धारणाओं को चुनौती दी है, जिससे व्यक्तियों और संस्थानों के लिए यह पहचानना कठिन हो गया है कि क्या वास्तविक है और क्या नहीं। विश्वास किसी भी समाज और अर्थव्यवस्था का एक मूलभूत स्तंभ है। बाजारों, अनुबंधों, और सामाजिक समन्वय के लिए साझा वास्तविकता और सूचना पर विश्वास आवश्यक है। जब यह विश्वास कमजोर होता है, तो निर्णय लेने की प्रक्रिया धीमी हो जाती है, अतिरिक्त सत्यापन चरणों की आवश्यकता होती है, और समग्र रूप से घर्षण बढ़ता है। यह स्थिति सूचना युद्ध के संदर्भ में विशेष रूप से महत्वपूर्ण हो जाती है, जहां गलत सूचना का उपयोग रणनीतिक उद्देश्यों के लिए किया जा सकता है, जिससे सार्वजनिक धारणा और सामाजिक स्थिरता प्रभावित होती है। कृत्रिम बुद्धिमत्ता (AI) में प्रगति ने सिंथेटिक मीडिया के निर्माण को अभूतपूर्व स्तर पर पहुंचा दिया है। पहले, नकली सामग्री बनाना महंगा और कठिन था, लेकिन अब AI उपकरण किसी को भी कम लागत और उच्च गति पर अत्यधिक विश्वसनीय नकली सामग्री बनाने की अनुमति देते हैं। यह तकनीकी छलांग सूचना के सत्यापन के लिए एक नई चुनौती पेश करती है, क्योंकि अब केवल सामग्री की गुणवत्ता पर भरोसा करना पर्याप्त नहीं है।

Latest Developments

हाल के वर्षों में, डीपफेक तकनीक में तेजी से सुधार हुआ है, जिससे यथार्थवादी नकली वीडियो और ऑडियो बनाना आसान हो गया है। इसने सरकारों, तकनीकी कंपनियों और नागरिक समाज संगठनों के बीच चिंता बढ़ा दी है। कई देशों में, डीपफेक के दुरुपयोग को रोकने के लिए कानून बनाने या मौजूदा कानूनों को मजबूत करने पर बहस चल रही है। उदाहरण के लिए, चुनावों को प्रभावित करने या व्यक्तियों को बदनाम करने के लिए डीपफेक के उपयोग को रोकने के लिए नियम बनाए जा रहे हैं। भारत में, सरकार साइबर सुरक्षा को मजबूत करने और गलत सूचना के प्रसार से निपटने के लिए सक्रिय रूप से काम कर रही है। सूचना प्रौद्योगिकी (मध्यवर्ती दिशानिर्देश और डिजिटल मीडिया आचार संहिता) नियम, 2021 जैसे कानून ऑनलाइन सामग्री को विनियमित करने और मध्यस्थों की जवाबदेही तय करने का प्रयास करते हैं। इसके अतिरिक्त, विभिन्न सरकारी एजेंसियां और थिंक टैंक डीपफेक के खतरों और उनसे निपटने के लिए तकनीकी समाधानों पर शोध कर रहे हैं, जिसमें सामग्री के स्रोत का पता लगाने और उसकी प्रामाणिकता को सत्यापित करने के तरीके शामिल हैं। भविष्य में, डिजिटल पहचान सत्यापन और सामग्री प्रमाणीकरण प्रौद्योगिकियों, जैसे कि डिजिटल वॉटरमार्किंग और ब्लॉकचेन-आधारित सत्यापन प्रणालियों का महत्व बढ़ने की उम्मीद है। इन तकनीकों का उद्देश्य सामग्री की उत्पत्ति और अखंडता को सुनिश्चित करना है, जिससे गलत सूचना के प्रसार को रोकना और सार्वजनिक विश्वास को बहाल करना संभव हो सके। हालांकि, इन समाधानों को व्यापक रूप से अपनाने और प्रभावी ढंग से लागू करने में चुनौतियां बनी हुई हैं, खासकर छोटे व्यवसायों और व्यक्तियों के लिए।

Sources & Further Reading

Deepfakes and the New Burden of Proof - SteveBizBlog— stevebizblog.com(2026-03-11)

Frequently Asked Questions

1. What is the significance of the '70 per cent' figure mentioned, and how does it relate to the erosion of media credibility?

The '70 per cent' figure highlights that a significant majority of young Americans (18-34) rely on social media for news. This is crucial because social media platforms, while filling information gaps, are also primary vectors for the rapid spread of misinformation, deepfakes, and propaganda, directly contributing to the erosion of mainstream media's credibility.

Exam Tip

Remember this statistic as an indicator of changing news consumption patterns and the vulnerability of younger demographics to online misinformation. UPSC might ask about the implications of social media's rise on traditional media.

2. Why is the breakdown of trust in visual and audio evidence happening 'now' due to deepfakes, when historically faking reality was also possible?

The breakdown of trust is happening now because the proliferation of AI-generated media (deepfakes) has fundamentally shifted the incentives and ease of deception. Historically, faking reality was expensive, required significant skill and time, making large-scale deception difficult. Now, convincing fake images, audio, and video can be produced quickly and cheaply by anyone with an internet connection, making widespread and credible-looking misinformation accessible and pervasive.

Exam Tip

Focus on the 'ease and cost' factor as the key differentiator between historical faking and modern deepfakes. This is a conceptual shift, not just a technological upgrade.

3. Given the global erosion of media credibility and rise of deepfakes, what steps is India taking to address these challenges, especially concerning cybersecurity and misinformation?

India is actively working to strengthen its cybersecurity framework and combat misinformation. While specific laws against deepfakes are being debated globally, India's government is focusing on reinforcing cybersecurity measures and addressing the broader issue of misinformation. This includes efforts to regulate digital media and ensure responsible online behavior, reflecting a global trend among governments to counter the misuse of advanced AI technologies.

Exam Tip

For Mains, remember to link India's efforts to broader global concerns about digital trust and information warfare. Mentioning ongoing debates about legislation shows a nuanced understanding.

4. In which GS Paper would the topic of 'Mainstream Media's Credibility Erosion due to Deepfakes and Propaganda' primarily be relevant for UPSC Mains, and what aspects would be covered?

This topic is highly relevant across multiple GS Papers due to its multifaceted nature:

•GS Paper 2 (Governance & Social Justice): Impact on democratic processes, freedom of speech, media ethics, government policies on misinformation, and digital governance.
•GS Paper 3 (Internal Security & Science & Technology): Cybersecurity challenges, information warfare, deepfake technology's misuse, and the role of AI in national security.
•GS Paper 4 (Ethics, Integrity & Aptitude): Ethical dilemmas in media reporting, truth vs. propaganda, public trust, and the moral responsibility of content creators and platforms.

Exam Tip

When a topic has broad relevance, identify specific keywords for each GS paper. For instance, 'governance' for GS2, 'cybersecurity' for GS3, and 'ethics' for GS4.

5. How do 'war propaganda' and 'deliberately created information gaps' contribute to the erosion of mainstream media's credibility, and what role do deepfakes play in this?

War propaganda involves mainstream media amplifying state narratives, often selectively reporting or framing events to serve state interests, as seen during the 2003 Iraq War. Deliberately created information gaps occur when state actors intentionally withhold or manipulate information. Both lead to a loss of credibility as the public perceives a biased or incomplete picture. Deepfakes exacerbate this by providing a powerful new tool to create highly convincing, yet entirely fabricated, visual and audio "evidence" that can be used for propaganda or to fill these information gaps with false narratives, making it even harder for the public to discern truth from fiction.

Exam Tip

Differentiate between the 'why' (propaganda/gaps) and the 'how' (deepfakes as a tool). This shows a deeper analytical understanding of the problem.

6. Beyond elections and propaganda, what are the immediate and practical concerns of deepfakes, especially for businesses, and how does this impact 'digital trust'?

Beyond political contexts, the immediate practical concern of deepfakes, particularly for small and mid-sized businesses, is reputation-focused. A fabricated video of a business owner making an inflammatory statement or an audio clip authorizing a non-existent wire transfer can cause severe financial and reputational damage. This directly erodes 'digital trust' because the reliability of digital evidence (visuals, audio) is compromised, making transactions, communications, and public perception vulnerable to sophisticated digital deception.

Exam Tip

When asked about broader impacts, always consider economic and social dimensions beyond the obvious political ones. This demonstrates a comprehensive understanding.

Practice Questions (MCQs)

1. With reference to 'Deepfakes' and their impact on trust, consider the following statements: 1. The primary difference with AI-generated media is the collapse in cost and speed of production. 2. The article suggests that large enterprises are more vulnerable to deepfake-related reputation risks than small businesses. 3. The permanence of information in systems like blockchain can exacerbate the challenges of correcting false deepfake content. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

A.1 only
B.1 and 2 only
C.1 and 3 only
D.2 and 3 only

Show Answer

Answer: C

Statement 1 is CORRECT: The source explicitly states, "What’s different about AI-generated media isn’t just its quality. It’s the collapse in cost and speed." This makes convincing images, audio, and video producible quickly and cheaply. Statement 2 is INCORRECT: The article argues the opposite. It states, "Large enterprises will eventually build dedicated teams around verification... But most smaller firms won’t." This implies smaller firms are *more* vulnerable due to lack of resources for protection. Statement 3 is CORRECT: The source mentions, "If false content is captured, archived, and redistributed across systems that are difficult to unwind, the burden of proof shifts. You’re no longer just correcting a rumor. You’re chasing persistence." This highlights how permanence, like in blockchain, makes false content harder to correct.