The other war: Fighting fake news

India’s latest four-day border clash with Pakistan, designated ‘Operation Sindoor’ in May, saw more than missiles and drones crossing the Line of Control. It also witnessed a parallel, invisible war playing out in the information sphere, across social media platforms and mainstream news outlets. 

The news media, a powerful tool for discourse, can also be weaponised for propaganda, censorship, and even direct involvement in conflicts. Information warfare involves the use of propaganda or politically slanted half-truths, as governments and military forces attempt to shape public opinion, promote their narratives, and justify their actions. Censorship often accompanies this effort—especially in wartime—when States may restrict media access, suppress critical reporting, or control the flow of information. Equally significant are the ways in which stories are ‘framed’ — through language, visuals, and cited sources — to influence public perception and opinions on the outcome of military operations.

Information warfare undermines the very basis of good journalism: credibility. While the media’s role is to report and analyse current events for the public, including newspapers, television, radio, and online platforms, its relationship with war is complex. It doesn’t merely observe; it influences. It shapes public perception, steers political discourse, and even impacts military strategies. 

US academic and Pakistan Studies specialist Christine Fair states, “The highly polarised and nationalistic nature of the information space on such topics in both countries means that few official statements can be relied on at face value, and disinformation has been used to flood social media on both sides.”

Across platforms like X, Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube, verified accounts played a central role in this information warfare. Information did not simply circulate—it metastasised. On X, of 437 misleading posts, only 73 were flagged. This implies that the vast majority remained unchecked, spreading fake news. The information warfare attempted to mislead and demoralise the citizens on both sides of the South Asian political and ideological divide, using doctored videos and false imagery of supposed enemy air strikes—often borrowed from unrelated conflicts.

While Indian officials were still pondering over their response to the crisis, Pakistan’s political leadership had already reached out to international media. For instance, within 48 hours of the terror attack in Pahalgam, Pakistani cabinet ministers like Ishaq Dar, Khawaja Asif, Attaullah Tarar and PPP chief Bilawal Bhutto had given over 25 interviews to major global channels.      

In a democracy, the principle of ‘right to information’ often clashes with the demands of national interest. Citizens naturally want to know: How many IAF aircraft were lost? How many Indian soldiers were killed? However, in any military operation, truth is often the first casualty. All belligerent nations practise information warfare.

In modern warfare, military operations and digital propaganda operate in tandem. Disinformation is not an adjunct to war but a part of it. The media must stop treating platforms as neutral sources. Fact-checking must be integrated into the editorial process. Journalists need new protocols for digital verification, particularly during crises. Information warfare is designed to destabilise, provoke, polarise, and obstruct rational policy making. Credibility remains the crucial element. Lies succeed when they are loaded with some truth.

 As citizens, we must ask ourselves: Are we being fed truth, or simply someone else’s version of it? With so many competing narratives, we need to ask ourselves if the war is over or if the real conflict, the one for our minds, is just beginning.

Evidently transparency and the “Fog of War” do not go together. Operation Sindoor and its Pakistani version, ‘Operation Bunyan al Marsous’ (Wall of Lead), had only two belligerent nations, India and Pakistan, in the kinetic war. However, in the information sphere, there were several participants — Turkey, China and Malaysia, and Western industrial democracies.  

Pakistan’s information warfare apart, Indian television headlines screamed: “Indian Navy Destroys Karachi Port!” “General Asim Munir Arrested After Coup!” “Indian Army Takes Over Islamabad!”
As a democracy, the Indian news media should not lose
its credibility, which differentiates it from Pakistan, where the political and military leadership muzzles the media. The Indian news media cannot afford to become a weapon of mass deception.

(The writer is a member
secretary at the Institute of Contemporary Studies
Bangalore, a security studies think tank)