“To combat sensational and unverified “Facebook journalism,” Jammu and Kashmir is drafting a policy to register and regulate online news platforms and curb misinformation.”
The Jammu and Kashmir Government’s decision to draft a new media policy for regulating online news platforms comes at a time when the distinction between journalism and social-media commentary is becoming increasingly blurred. The issue deserves a serious debate because the digital explosion has undoubtedly widened access to information, but it has also created a space where speed, outrage and views often matter more than facts. Minister Sakina Itoo told the Assembly on September 30 that the proposed New Media Policy, 2026, will include provisions for the registration and regulation of online news platforms and mechanisms to address misleading or fabricated information. A House Committee headed by National Conference legislator Ali Mohammad Sagar has been involved in the process. There is a legitimate problem to address. Today, almost anyone with a smartphone and a Facebook page can present himself as a “journalist”. A video, a dramatic caption and a few hundred shares can create the impression of a news report without the basic elements of journalism: verification, attribution, context and accountability. The obsession with views has changed the nature of online reporting. For many Facebook pages, the first question is not “Is this true?” but “Will this get views?” A rumour can therefore travel faster than a verified report. A provocative headline can attract more attention than a carefully reported story. Personal attacks can generate more engagement than public-interest journalism.This is where the growing culture of “Facebook journalism” deserves criticism. There is nothing inherently wrong with journalists using Facebook, Instagram, YouTube or other platforms. In fact, social media has become an important tool for distributing genuine journalism and reaching audiences that traditional newspapers may not reach. The problem begins when the platform becomes the journalism itself—when opinion is presented as fact, allegations are presented as established truth and personal hostility is disguised as reporting. But regulation must not become an excuse for controlling uncomfortable journalism. The Government must therefore draw a clear line between accountability and censorship. False information, impersonation, deliberate fabrication, defamation and other unlawful conduct can be dealt with under existing laws.
“The deterioration of online discourse is a collective responsibility shared by politicians, media organizations, officials, and audiences, rather than journalists alone. True professional journalism demands accuracy, verification, independence, and accountability over virality, follower counts, and clickbait. While Jammu & Kashmir needs strong journalism, the success of any proposed media policy relies on holding all digital actors—including political and government institutions—to the same ethical standards to build public trust.”
The proposed policy should focus on transparent standards rather than giving authorities excessive discretion to decide what constitutes acceptable journalism. The responsibility also lies with political parties and elected representatives. As the Minister herself pointed out in the Assembly, political actors and legislators also contribute to the digital ecosystem by promoting particular pages, circulating material and using social media for political attacks. It would therefore be unfair to blame journalists alone for the deterioration of online discourse. Politicians, officials, media organisations and audiences all have a role in determining what succeeds in the digital marketplace. The media fraternity too must look inward. Professional journalism cannot be reduced to possessing a Facebook page, uploading videos or gathering thousands of followers. Journalism requires verification, independence, attribution, correction and a willingness to ask difficult questions—even when the answers are inconvenient. The most important test of digital journalism should not be how many people viewed a post. It should be whether the information was accurate, relevant and responsibly reported. J&K needs more journalism, not less. But it needs journalism that values facts over virality, public interest over personal attacks and credibility over clicks. The proposed media policy can become an opportunity to establish these standards. Its success, however, will depend on ensuring that accountability applies equally to everyone—whether a newspaper, television channel, YouTube outlet, Facebook page, political party or government institution. In the digital age, views are easy to manufacture. Trust is much harder to build. Journalism must choose the latter.
