Regulating fake news without restoring the traditional news ecosystem is treating symptoms while ignoring the disease.
The Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly’s recent debate on fake news reflects a genuine concern, but risks arriving at the wrong solution. Lawmakers, prompted by BJP MLA Ranbir Singh Pathania, have called for a dedicated bill to regulate unregistered portals, mandate platform registration, and establish fact-checking mechanisms. The Speaker has directed the Omar Abdullah government to study comparable laws elsewhere and draft appropriate legislation. The intent is understandable. The approach, however, needs rethinking.
The real problem in Jammu and Kashmir is not an excess of journalism; it is an inadequate flourishing of it.
Over recent years, the region’s news ecosystem has undergone a significant transformation. Where structured, professionally accountable journalism loses ground, something inevitably moves in to fill the space: rumour, unverified claims, and misinformation. This is not a phenomenon unique to Jammu and Kashmir; it is a pattern observed wherever the formal media weakens. The solution, therefore, logically lies in strengthening that formal media rather than layering regulation upon an already fragile foundation.
A restored, well-functioning news ecosystem, one with editorial standards, institutional accountability, and the confidence to report without hesitation, remains the most effective weapon against fake news. Professional journalism, operating robustly, is the most credible fact-checking unit any democratic society can deploy. No government bill, however well-drafted, can fully substitute for it.
The numbers from the current system are telling. The Directorate of Information and Public Relations issued just 28 rebuttals to fake content over nearly ten months, a modest response to what lawmakers themselves describe as a mushrooming problem.
In an earlier case, the Deputy Chief Minister approached the Supreme Court over a reputation-damaging Facebook video. In follow-up to it, law enforcement agencies registered a case, and those summoned were not fake journalists but formal scribes. These are reactive measures. Sustainable solutions must be structural.
One lawmaker made perhaps the most candid observation of the entire House debate: that legislators who perform their duties honestly have little reason to fear misinformation. Another pointed to the need for political accountability in how the media is used and misused by various interests. Both observations point in the same direction: integrity in governance and strength in journalism together create an environment where fake news struggles to gain traction.
Registration requirements, minimum qualification standards, and media regulation bills are not inherently flawed instruments. But their effectiveness depends entirely on the health of the broader news environment they seek to govern. Regulation without revival risks becoming restriction without remedy.
Before drafting a bill to manage the news, the more productive question is: what conditions will allow credible, responsible journalism to truly thrive in Jammu and Kashmir?
Restore the ecosystem first. Fake news withers where real news flourishes.
