How Press Freedom Has Declined in India
India ranked 157th out of 180 countries on the RSF World Press Freedom Index 2026 — a six-place drop from 151st in 2025 — with a score of 31.96. The country was at 161st in 2024, briefly improved to 151st in 2025 after some methodological recalibration, and has now declined further. RSF's India country profile describes the situation as shaped by a "complex environment where structural constraints are increasingly limiting independent journalism." In 2023, India was at 161st; in 2022, 150th; in 2021, 142nd; in 2019, 140th; in 2014 (when Modi came to power), approximately 140th. The trajectory, across 12 years, is of consistent deterioration.
The mechanisms of press freedom decline in India are multiple and reinforcing. Legal harassment — using colonial-era sedition law (Section 124A of the IPC, now BNS), UAPA, defamation, and contempt of court provisions against journalists — is the most direct.
 |
| Representational Visualisation: How Press Freedom Has Declined in India |
The legal framework has expanded: the
2023 Telecommunications Act, 2023 IT Amendment Rules, and DPDPA (with Section
44(3) amending RTI's personal information exemption) collectively create new
governmental power to control media content. The Sahyog portal — enabling
governments to send takedown requests to platforms requiring compliance within
three hours under 2026 IT Act amendments — is the latest addition.
The Ground Reality
- RSF
2026 India ranking: 157th of 180 countries (score 31.96), down from 151st
in 2025 (score 32.96) and 161st in 2024; the index's theme for 2026
emphasises that "over half of the world's countries now fall into the
'difficult' or 'very serious' categories for press freedom" — India
is in the "difficult" category.
- Operation
Sindoor (May 2025) media crackdown: at least 125 people detained for
"anti-national," "pro-Pakistan," or critical posts;
arrests included Kashmiri journalist Hilal Mir (detained May 7, 2025),
Kerala-based journalist Rejaz M. Sheeba Sydeek (arrested under UAPA, May
7, 2025), and Ashoka University professor Ali Khan Mahmudabad (detained
for questioning India's operation, secured bail only after Supreme Court
intervention); RSF and CPJ condemned the arrests as "deliberate
chilling of critical commentary."
- BBC offices raided February 2023
shortly after airing a banned documentary critical of Modi; ED ordered
investigation on BBC for FEMA violations, fined in 2025; Newslaundry
subjected to income tax surveys twice; editors at The Wire and Scroll
faced FIRs; at least 44 cases involving journalists and media houses in
2018–2023 involving raids, money laundering cases, and summons.
- UAPA
misuse: About 97.5% of people arrested under UAPA in
2016–2020 remained in prison awaiting trial (2% conviction rate); the BJP
government recorded 73 of 154 documented UAPA journalist cases in
2010–2020, all in BJP-ruled states; UAPA is increasingly used against
journalists.
- RSF
2026 report on diversity: "The journalism profession, especially in
managerial positions, remains the prerogative of a bias that has repercussions on the angles and subjects of
articles and reports. For example, on major evening talk shows, women make
up less than 15% of the guests."
How It Works in Practice
1. Legal harassment as chilling mechanism: India's
legal arsenal against journalists includes: sedition (BNS Section 150,
replacing IPC Section 124A, potentially up to life imprisonment for causing
"disaffection" against the government); UAPA (preventive detention
without bail for years, 2% conviction rate); criminal defamation (IPC Section
499–500, now BNS Section 354); NSA (National Security Act, preventive
detention); and new provisions under the 2023 BNS criminalising speech deemed
to "endanger sovereignty." These laws are not uniformly applied; they
are used selectively against journalists whose reporting is politically
inconvenient. The chilling effect of a single FIR — even if withdrawn or
acquitted — produces years of legal expense and distraction.
2. Government advertising withdrawal: Central and
state governments collectively spend thousands of crores annually on media
advertising. A publication that publishes critical investigative journalism
risks losing government advertising contracts — a potentially existential
financial threat for smaller or regional outlets whose advertising mix is less
diversified. The mechanism does not require explicit instruction; editors
understand the financial consequences of sustained critical coverage and
self-censor accordingly.
3. Online harassment infrastructure: RSF's India
profile notes "terrifying coordinated campaigns of hatred and calls for
murder" on social media against critical journalists, with campaigns
"especially violent when they target women journalists, whose personal
data is divulged." The existence of an organised online harassment
infrastructure — documented in journalism such as The Wire's (flawed) Tek Fog
investigation and other reporting — creates a hostile environment specifically
targeting women, minority, and dissident journalists.
4. Kashmir and the northeastern states: RSF notes
"increasingly severe restrictions on access to reliable information in
Kashmir and several northeastern states." Kashmiri journalism operates
under AFSPA, NSA preventive detention, and documented intimidation of reporters
by police and paramilitary; Irfan Mehraj, freelance journalist and editor of
Wande Magazine, has been in pretrial detention since March 2023 — over three
years as of May 2026. The news blackout in areas is both a
journalism freedom issue and a democratic accountability issue.
5. Self-censorship as the most widespread effect: The
most consequential press freedom dimension is self-censorship that is never
documented because it produces the absence of journalism rather than its
suppression. An editor who decides not to publish an investigation regulatory relationship, or a reporter who softens a story
about police brutality after receiving a phone call, or a TV anchor who avoids
a question in a government press conference — these suppressions leave no record
but produce the most significant journalism deficit.
What People Often Misunderstand
- RSF's
index methodology is contested by the Indian government: The Ministry
of Information and Broadcasting has repeatedly criticised RSF's
methodology as "portraying a bad picture about freedom of press in
India"; some Indian media organisations also question the index.
RSF's methodology — combining expert surveys with documented violations —
is imperfect but represents a genuine attempt at systematic comparative
assessment.
- Press
freedom violations are not only BJP-specific: The Wikipedia India
press freedom article notes that "the main opposition party, the
Indian National Congress, and other regional parties have also used legal
provisions against journalists"; press freedom problems in India
pre-date 2014 and occur across political parties; the BJP era represents
acceleration rather than origin.
- Legal
harassment and physical danger are different threats: The physical
danger to journalists (murders, attacks) is concentrated among journalists
covering local corruption in rural India; the legal harassment via UAPA,
FIRs, and raids is concentrated among journalists covering national
politics; both are genuine threats operating in different contexts.
- Operation
Sindoor's media environment is documented but contested: The Operation
Sindoor period (May 2025) produced documented journalist arrests; some of
those arrested may have posted genuinely problematic content; the concern
is the pattern of arrests targeting critics rather than the existence of
any individual arrest.
- India's
constitutional protection of press freedom is genuine but imperfectly
enforced: Article 19(1)(a) protects freedom of speech and expression
(which courts have extended to press freedom); India has no "Official
Secrets Act" style blanket state security exemption; the problem is
that colonial-era laws (sedition, defamation) and newer laws (UAPA, IT
Act) are constitutionally valid but operationally weaponisable against
journalism.
What Changes Over Time
The 2026 IT Act amendments enabling the government's Sahyog
portal to require platform content removal within three hours — without
judicial oversight — represents the most recent legislative development
restricting online press freedom. The DPDPA's Section 44(3) amendment to RTI
has effectively restricted journalists' access to public officials'
information. The Supreme Court's May 2025 intervention ordering Ashoka
University professor Ali Khan Mahmudabad's bail from Operation Sindoor
detention represents judicial pushback on executive overreach — indicating that
courts retain some independence as a press freedom check.
Sources and Further Reading
- RSF
— India 2026 World Press Freedom Index: https://m.thewire.in/article/media/india-is-157th-out-of-180-countries-on-rsfs-2026-world-press-freedom-index
- RSF
— India country page: https://rsf.org/en/country/india
- Wikipedia
— Freedom of the press in India: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_the_press_in_India
- GIJN — India independent media investigating in 2024: https://gijn.org/stories/india-independent-news-investigating-key-election-year/
- RSF — India press conference May 2025: https://rsf.org/en/india-rsf-calls-press-freedom-world-s-largest-democracy