Is Journalism Still About Truth or Just Being First? -By-Kumar Bahukhandi

The Myth of Media Neutrality: How Breaking News Culture Is Reshaping Journalism-Kumar

Author’s Note

This is not a research paper. It is a personal reflection based on my observations of journalism, my experience of working with news, and my understanding of how the media has evolved over the years. The views expressed are entirely my own. If this article encourages even one journalism student to think more deeply about the profession, it will have served its purpose.

People often say that the media should be objective and neutral. It is a beautiful ideal, and every journalist should strive towards it. But after observing journalism closely for years, I have often wondered whether complete neutrality really exists. Every journalist has a perspective, every editor makes choices, and every newsroom has its own priorities. Fairness is essential, but absolute objectivity is much harder to achieve than most people imagine.

The biggest change I have witnessed is the race to be first.

Today, newspapers compete with television channels, television competes with digital platforms, and everyone competes with social media. The pressure is no longer just to report the news but to report it before anyone else. In this race, speed has become the biggest priority. Unfortunately, when speed becomes more important than verification, mistakes become inevitable.

What concerns me is that the first version of a story often reaches millions of people, while the correction, if one is issued at all, reaches only a few. A wrong headline may disappear from the screen within hours, but its impact often remains much longer.

Another trend I have noticed is the growing number of public denials. Almost every day someone claims, “I never said that,” “My statement has been taken out of context,” “The video was edited,” or “My account was hacked.” Whether these claims are genuine or not is a different matter. What they clearly show is that information is travelling faster than verification.

I do not believe journalists deliberately publish incorrect information. The reality is that the profession has become more demanding than ever before. Reporters are expected to write stories, update websites, post on social media, shoot videos and sometimes even appear live on television—all within a matter of hours. In such circumstances, the temptation to publish first and verify later is understandable, but it is also dangerous.

There was a time when getting a story wrong was considered a serious matter. Editors would discuss the mistake, corrections would be published, and lessons would be learned. A newspaper’s credibility was its greatest strength. Today, the news cycle moves so quickly that yesterday’s mistake is buried under today’s breaking news. The public moves on, but every inaccurate report weakens trust in journalism.

Another question that often comes to my mind is: Who decides what becomes news?

Is it public interest? Is it editorial judgment? Or is it what generates the highest ratings, the most clicks and the greatest online engagement?

Many important issues affecting ordinary people struggle to receive sustained attention, while stories involving celebrities or prominent political figures dominate headlines for days. This does not mean those stories are unimportant, but it does raise an important question about whether news value is sometimes being replaced by market value.

Media has often been described as the fourth pillar of democracy. That responsibility goes far beyond breaking stories or questioning those in power. Journalism also has a duty to represent people whose voices might otherwise never be heard.

At the same time, I also understand another reality. Media is not only a public service; it is also an industry. Newspapers need readers, television channels need viewers, and digital platforms depend on advertising and audience engagement. There is nothing wrong with running a successful media organisation. The challenge begins when commercial interests start influencing editorial priorities.

Technology has transformed journalism in extraordinary ways. News now reaches people within seconds, and information is more accessible than ever before. Yet technology itself is neither good nor bad. It simply amplifies the choices journalists make. If we value accuracy, technology helps truthful reporting travel faster. If we value sensationalism, it spreads misinformation with equal speed.

In my opinion, the biggest challenge facing journalism today is not technology or artificial intelligence. It is credibility. Readers today have access to more information than any previous generation, yet many find it increasingly difficult to know whom they can trust.

I believe journalism has never been merely about publishing the first headline. It has always been about informing society honestly, fairly and responsibly. Speed may bring attention, but credibility earns respect.

As journalists, we may occasionally make mistakes—that is part of being human. What matters is our willingness to correct them, learn from them and remain accountable to the people we serve.

The future of journalism will not be decided by who reports the news first.

It will be decided by who reports it with honesty, responsibility and integrity.

Because news may last for a day.

Credibility lasts for a lifetime.

— Kumar Bahukhandi