Study: Mainstream Media’s Coverage of Manipur Violence Biased, Superficial

Excessive Reliance on Government Sources, Coverage Skewed Toward Majority Community Perspectives

January 19, 2025

A displaced Kuki-Zo girl at a relief camp in Manipur’s Churachandpur District. Photo by Vishal Arora

A study featured in the recently published book, “Inclusiveness in Indian Media Coverage,” examined Hindustan Times’ reporting on the Manipur violence in 2023 and found glaring lapses in its coverage. Considering that the Times is regarded as one of the better mainstream newspapers, the study could be alluding to widespread issues in the journalism practiced by traditional Indian media.

Edited by journalist Vinod K. Jose, former executive editor of The Caravan magazine from 2009 to 2023, the study points out that Hindustan Times’ coverage of the Manipur violence shows lack of on-the-ground reporting – the first of at least four major shortcomings in the newspaper’s reportage.

The ongoing violence in Manipur, which started on May 3, 2023, has resulted in extensive destruction of property and places of worship, as well as the loss of over 250 lives. The escalation was sparked by a controversial state high court order proposing to extend special economic benefits and quotas to the majority Meitei population, akin to those afforded to the minority, tribal Kuki-Zo people. The proposal would have permitted Meiteis to purchase land in historically Kuki-Zo territories.

The study, conducted by Elsa Ashish Thomas, head of School of Humanities and Social Sciences At Manipal Academy Higher Education, Dubai Campus, scrutinised 42 news reports, two editorials and three opinion pieces on the Manipur conflict published in Hindustan Times from May 4, 2023, through to June 2, 2023.

Despite being one of Delhi’s most circulated English-language newspapers, Hindustan Times’ reportage on the conflict was predominantly conducted from outside Manipur, with 89 percent of the coverage generated from locations such as New Delhi, Guwahati and Kolkata.

Only a negligible portion, about 1 percent, of the reports came from the state’s border areas, according to the study, which noted that the absence of reporters and photojournalists in conflict zones led to limited local voices and perspectives, with a majority of the photographs used being sourced from agencies rather than the publication’s own team.

The second shortcoming observed was over-reliance of news stories on official narratives.

The reporting heavily depended on statements from government officials, the police and the army, often sidelining the experiences of those directly affected by the conflict, the study said. Of the 42 news reports published, only six included voices from the Kuki-Zo and Meitei communities, with a total of 19 references to individuals from these groups.

“The largest source of information is from other entities (33), which includes ‘officials’ who sought anonymity, ‘people familiar with the matter’ and other experts,” the study noted.

The third shortcoming concerned the perspectives presented in the coverage.

More than half of the stories about Manipur reflected the viewpoint of the state government, which includes the chief minister, the state security advisory and other state representatives. Slightly fewer than half of the stories conveyed the perspective of the state police, with some representing the viewpoint of the Indian Army deployed there.

Further, the stories seldom featured firsthand accounts from Kuki-Zo districts or areas, where much of the violence took place. Moreover, the coverage significantly favoured the representation of Meitei civilians over that of the Kuki-Zos by 71.42 percent, according to the study.

Furthermore, the narrative approach of Hindustan Times frequently depicted state officials’ perspectives in a sympathetic light.

For instance, an article on June 1, 2023 quoted Home Minister Amit Shah’s promises to ensure the return of refugees but failed to examine whether these commitments were being fulfilled. The absence of Kuki-Zo families in Imphal after the violence, despite these assurances, was left unaddressed, the study noted.

The fourth shortcoming was the absence of sociopolitical context in the stories.

The newspaper did not delve into the escalating tensions between the dominant Meitei and marginalised Kuki-Zo communities, or the partisan actions of the state government that allegedly fuelled the conflict, the study pointed out. This superficial reporting ignored critical issues like land and economic interests and disputes, Scheduled Tribe status debates and narratives around poppy cultivation or drugs, leaving readers with an incomplete understanding of the situation, it said.

For example, the first editorial on May 5, 2023, titled “Quota tweaks must be done with caution,” reduced the complex ethnic conflict to a reservation issue, displaying a dispassionate tone towards the loss of lives and property.

The second editorial, published on May 26, 2023, focused on Home Minister Shah’s awaited visit but failed to critique the Union government’s silence and inaction over the preceding weeks, the study said.

Notably, the editorials lacked any substantial engagement with the deeper causes of the violence or the conditions in relief camps, where people were reportedly living in dire circumstances.

“When hundreds of people were killed and religious places destroyed, the editorial pages were not proportionate to the crisis faced by the people on the ground,” remarked the study. “The coverage overall underscores a missed opportunity for conducting a critical and ethical journalistic inquiry.”

A turning point in national coverage occurred only after a graphic video surfaced on social media on July 19, 2023, showing Kuki-Zo women being stripped, molested and paraded by a mob. The incident drew widespread attention and compelled the media, including Hindustan Times, to amplify its coverage of the violence. However, the study found, this focus was short-lived, and the publication’s initial failure to report extensively on such atrocities during the critical early weeks of the conflict remains a glaring lapse.

Among other studies featured in the book is one examining Dainik Jagran’s coverage of the February 2020 communal violence in Delhi, which exposes an “inversion of the truth” by this Hindi language newspaper.