Amid rising concerns over government actions on digital platforms and increasing content restrictions, Molitics convened a press conference at the Press Club of India on Thursday, bringing together politicians, journalists, and media professionals to deliberate on what they described as a growing threat to freedom of expression and democratic discourse.
The event witnessed the participation of MP Sanjay Singh, along with Molitics Editor Neeraj Jha, senior journalist Pankaj Srivastava, National Dastak’s Shambhu Kumar, author and media commentator Ashok Pandey, and satirist Rajeev Nigam, Sandeep Singh and Pooja Pandey of The Janata Live. Speakers expressed concern over rising surveillance in the digital space, lack of transparency in content moderation, and shrinking space for dissent. The press conference was organised by Molitics, an independent media platform.
AAP MP Sanjay Singh launched a critique of what he called “institutional media,” describing it as well-funded, well-connected, and closely aligned with those in power. Rejecting the notion that the government is hostile to media, Singh argued instead that it extends financial support to large media houses through advertisement spending amounting to thousands of crores. According to him, this financial backing has contributed to a media environment where critical questioning of the government is sidelined in favor of amplifying official narratives.
Singh underscored that journalism’s primary duty is to uncover the truth and hold those in power accountable. However, he alleged that this responsibility is being neglected by mainstream outlets. Drawing a contrast, he praised independent and social media platforms for providing space to marginalized voices, including those of the poor, backward classes, minorities, and farmers. At the same time, he claimed that these platforms frequently face harassment, threats, and systemic biases, including caste-based discrimination.
Raising issues such as rising living costs, failing healthcare systems, and the closure of schools, Singh questioned whether media silence resolves pressing public concerns. He described journalists as the “eyes and ears” of the people and emphasized that their role is to act as watchdogs of democracy. Despite the challenges, Singh expressed optimism about the democratizing potential of social media, asserting that independent voices will continue to advocate for public welfare and democratic values.
Ashok Pandey, author and founder of The Credible History, pointed out that while media ownership has historically been concentrated among wealthy individuals, earlier frameworks allowed space for open criticism. He argued that such space has diminished in recent times, with journalists, cartoonists, and opposition voices facing restrictions or exclusion from mainstream platforms.
Pandey noted that this vacuum has led to the rise of alternative media, which has gained public trust. He emphasized that the issue goes beyond political affiliations, framing it as a question of every citizen’s right to free expression. Warning that the silencing of dissent weakens democratic institutions, Pandey called for unity across ideological divides to defend these freedoms.
National Dastak’s Shambhu Kumar reinforced these arguments, stating that “institutional media,” supported by financial resources and legal expertise, has ceded its role as a watchdog. He reiterated that government advertisement spending shows that the issue is not hostility toward media, rather a lack of accountability within it.
Kumar said major media outlets often fail to challenge misinformation or question those in power. In contrast, he highlighted the struggles of independent platforms like National Dastak, which continue to report on issues affecting marginalized communities despite limited resources. He alleged that such platforms face bans, threats, and caste-based discrimination.
He argued that discussing issues like education, livelihoods, and communal harmony should not be seen as controversial. Questioning the effectiveness of media silence, Kumar asked whether ignoring problems such as poverty, unemployment, and failing public services leads to solutions. Reiterating the role of journalists as watchdogs, he defended social media as a space that empowers ordinary citizens.
Molitics Editor Neeraj Jha detailed instances of what he described as arbitrary actions against the platform. Over the past few months, he said Molitics has faced repeated content removals, video restrictions, and suppression of reach without clear explanations. He cited notices issued by X in March 2026 over two cartoons, restrictions on Instagram videos on March 25 and 28, and a legal notice in January 2026 regarding a YouTube video.
Jha said a consistent pattern has emerged across these incidents, where content is removed or restricted without prior notice, explanation, or an opportunity for response. He argued that such practices raise concerns about transparency and accountability in digital governance.
Satirist Rajeev Nigam broadened the discussion by stating that the issue extends beyond one platform or organization. He pointed out that several independent media outlets, including 4PM and National Dastak, have faced similar restrictions. According to him, satirical and critical content is increasingly being targeted, while accounts with large followings face sudden suspensions.
Nigam also referred to Union Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw’s justification that legal measures are necessary to curb deepfake content. While acknowledging the need to tackle misinformation, he questioned how many restricted contents qualify as deepfakes, suggesting lack of clarity in enforcement.
Concluding the press conference, Molitics reiterated its commitment to raising these concerns through evidence-based engagement. The platform called for greater transparency, accountability, and balance in the digital ecosystem, warning that unchecked restrictions undermine democratic values and the right to free expression.
As debates around digital regulation and media freedom intensify, the voices at the Press Club underscored growing unease, linking the future of democratic discourse with the evolving dynamics of the digital space.
