A Rs 11,300-crore scandal broke out last week, and leading English channels immediately scrambled to find a way to protect the government and blame the previous government in a variety of inventive ways. This tactic is hardly a surprise to anyone who has had the misfortune of watching television news regularly. Every time the government faces criticism, the debate gets framed not through the government’s actions, but through what the opposition is doing wrong. Even the polls being run are absurdly one-sided. For example, a recent poll by an English news channel in the wake of the Nirav Modi scandal was phrased thus — “Do you support the unsparing nationwide crackdown by Modi government on bank loot and corruption?”

It is true that in the past, other mainstream channels have been accused of being slanted in the favour of the liberal viewpoint. There is more than a little merit in this feeling, and it is true that in general, media in India showed a pronounced tilt. But leaning to one side and being more open to one viewpoint over another is not the same thing as presenting news in a permanently accusatory manner representing only one viewpoint. News can be slanted, but first it has to qualify as news, and this is what is becoming increasingly hard to find, particularly on television. To take the side of the government, to be sympathetic to its perspective is a media outlet’s prerogative, but to become presumptive advocates of anything the government says or does, crosses the line from being biased to not having any view of one’s own at all. And given the aggressively confrontational manner in which this counter-attack is mounted, the channels in question become the rampant and out-of-control enforcers for the government.

The question is, does it work? Up to a point, yes. Today, no one can talk of intolerance any longer — that idea has been effectively silenced. Similarly, the free use of the anti-national label has made it incumbent upon everyone to publicly and repeatedly signal their undying love for all things connected with the military. Pakistan has become a pariah idea that cannot be spoken of except in rabid terms and showing any empathy for anything Kashmiri has become an act of treason.

But as the mood turns, and public support for PM Modi and his government starts cooling, the propaganda machine faces a real test. Increasingly, the attempts by these channels to twist reality into shapes that only contortionists can achieve are looking pathetic. They invite derision instead of shock and awe. For propaganda to succeed, it needs a willingness to suspend disbelief, and an ability to become the dominant voice in the room. Neither is true today. Even among the supporters of the government, there are some doubts, and the hysterical and contrived defence offered by these channels serves to alienate rather than persuade those with questions.

Some years ago, this column had argued that news was beginning to become indistinguishable from advertising, in that both were trying to say whatever they thought their consumers wanted to hear. But advertising needs to take note of the viewer’s frame of mind, and tries to overcome their scepticism by a variety of techniques. Today, what we see is not advertising but hectoring propaganda. A particular version of reality gets aggressively broadcast, without taking any notice of viewer doubt. The attempt is to crowd out any other version by outshouting it and using emotively resonant labels to delegitimise it.

The commercial argument that these channels are cynically offering viewers what they want to hear continues to have some truth in it, but it is a selfdefeating argument. Essentially, these channels are driving anyone who is not a staunch supporter of the government away from themselves and indeed from watching any news whatsoever. The viewer’s anger with the state of the news on television is palpable, and these channels are in effect helping the category dismantle itself. By attempting to mirror the rabid line taken successfully by one anchor, virtually the entire category is ending up catering to a small section of the audience, with each channel trying to outdo the other in toeing a particular line. As a result, news is slowly going over a cliff, with the rivals locked in a death embrace.

More importantly, they are beginning to fail in their chosen mission — to act as propagandists for the government. Today they are ending up speaking to those who don’t care what the truth is — they merely want a plausible and aggressive espousal of their position. In a functioning democracy, being intelligently biased has greater propaganda value than being an indiscriminate advocate. Bias can be infuriating but it draws in people from both sides, for there is room that has been given to both perspectives, even if that room is not equal. Outright propaganda ceases to be annoying or even interesting, for it becomes a caricature of itself. It can be ignored for it never gets under the skin. Also, the ability to spin anything gives a false confidence that allows for absurd defences to be mounted in the belief that the propaganda machine will make them stick. Nirmala Sitharaman’s attempted defence in the Nirav Modi matter is a case in point — to try and contrive a link based on Nirav Modi’s company being a tenant of a property owned by a company in which the wife of a Congress leader is a director is not the kind of outlandish charge that a mature politician like her would usually make.

The government has its side of the story and it must be told. But the belief that people can be bullied into buying it is misplaced, and on the contrary, counterproductive. The government may have succeeded in bringing significant sections of media to boot-licking heel and in its sweeping success may lay the seeds of defeat. A completely defanged media adds no value to anybody, the government included.