For years, the world has witnessed human civilizations struggle, fight, kill, and destroy each other for "power". The word "power" itself has left a negative imprint in the hearts of millions of people who have been bruised, battered, and shattered in this never-ending war. Some choose to stay silent and endure all the exploitation and pain, hoping that someday things will change. But this greedy war has also given rise to another fundamental division of citizens—the Critics.
The Critics are usually treated as outcasts because of their apparent ‘eccentric’ perspectives. They’re not the type of people to take words at face value; they’re the type of people who will question you every step of the way. This tendency of the Critics is both good and bad for society.
Media: The Critic of Governments
Media is also revered as the fourth pillar of democracy. That being said, the rise of journalism was never a pro-government or pro-establishment movement. In fact, it was the complete opposite. In India, for instance, newspapers and journals came into existence precisely to challenge the British government. Visionaries like Dadabhai Naoroji (Rast Goftar), Mahatma Gandhi (Indian Opinion, Young India, etc.), and B. R. Ambedkar (Mooknayak, Bahishkrit Bharat) took up journalism because they yearned for freedom from British oppression. This undeniably proves the point that media was never intended to be a tool for the oppressor. It is meant to be the most powerful critic of political power. However, with the commercialization of media, everything has shifted towards profit maximization. What generates more revenue should get more screen time, more debates should be centered around that topic, and more individuals should be subtly swayed into believing the narratives pushed by the media. This is where the growing mistrust between critics and the general public takes root.
Politics and Critics
Political parties and critics have had a very rocky relationship over the years. A critic who speaks for the government policy has no creative control over his or her content, whereas a critic who speaks against the government is often used as a tool by the opposition. And the critics who do choose to go against either of the external controls have to pay a price, which is usually brutal and heart-shattering. For example, Alexei Navalny, a well-known Russian opposition leader and anti-corruption activist, was framed as a threat to national security by Putin’s regime. They accused him of being funded by Western powers and declared his criticisms baseless. Navalny’s arrest and poisoning were widely seen as an effort to silence a vocal critic, and his role as a critic was exploited by Putin to push the narrative that he was a foreign agent.
This proves that critics are mere tools for both the opposition and the ruling party. If they choose to raise their voice, they will ensure that their voice is never heard again.
To know more about the Alexei Navalny case read this article!
Critics: Tools of Propagation of Political Agendas
Nowadays, critics have an incredible amount of reach among the general public. Social media has made it even easier for their content to reach as many people as possible. This has made political parties seek out these critics to propagate a certain ideology. Louis Althusser’s explanation of ideology says institutions (like education, religion, media) transmit and reinforce dominant ideologies, whereas the ‘dominant ideologies’ are formulated by the people in power. This explanation has certainly come to life in this case.
Time and again, critics have been used as a means of propagating certain agendas. For example, Arnab Goswami, the founder and editor-in-chief of Republic TV, has been a strong supporter of Narendra Modi’s government. Goswami’s aggressive style of journalism has often been accused of using his platform to promote pro-government narratives.
Some people might defend this behavior of media houses by arguing that their political ideology aligns with the current government, and that’s why they’re praising it. However, this perspective overlooks a crucial point: agreeing with a certain political ideology should not mean that the media develops a bias and turns a blind eye to the government's mishaps and mismanagement. The media’s core responsibility is to hold power to account, regardless of political alignment, and to present a balanced view of both successes and failures.
Another such example is Ravish Kumar, one of India’s most respected journalists, who is known for his candid criticism of the BJP government under Narendra Modi. But when it comes to certain opposition parties, Ravish has been accused of being tight-lipped and never criticizing their work, which makes the bias evident according to some people.
Citizens and Critics: The Mistrust
Due to the often conflicting nature of critics, there is a growing mistrust between the public and authentic commentators. One significant reason for this is the public’s unwillingness to entertain opposing viewpoints. People tend to consume content that reinforces their existing beliefs, making them indifferent or even dismissive of perspectives that challenge their views. On the other hand, there is a limited number of genuine critics left in the media landscape that people can trust for thoughtful, objective criticism. Most critics today, whether directly or indirectly, are funded or influenced by political parties and media conglomerates, further complicating their credibility.
The Future of Critics
The future of criticism remains uncertain. The debate over whether a critic should be pro-government, anti-government, or neutral has persisted for years. Some argue that for a nation to flourish and hold its government accountable, there must be a group of people who consistently question and critique the actions of those in power, ensuring that they never forget their responsibilities to the people. On the other hand, others believe that a critic should maintain an unbiased stance, offering criticism only when it is truly warranted and supported by reason. Therefore, critics remain an essential part of any thriving society. They serve as a necessary force to keep both government and public consciousness in check, ensuring that people stay informed, engaged, and aware of their rights and responsibilities in a rapidly changing world.
Members Discussion