Operation Sindoor: How media hype and misinformation hijacked the narrative

Hyderabad: In the high-stakes aftermath of Operation Sindoor, India’s recent military manoeuvre along its western front, a disturbing parallel battle unfolded across television screens, social media feeds and news websites. But this was not a battle of soldiers or strategies; it was a battle of misinformation.

As adrenaline surged through Indian media outlets, fact-checkers and independent monitors were left scrambling to untangle a web of exaggerated, inaccurate and, in some cases, fabricated reports that spread rapidly in the crucial hours following the operation.

False news of Pakistan PM’s surrender

Leading the misinformation charge was Zee News, which on live television announced a breaking news flash that startled viewers:

‘Pakistan’s capital Islamabad has been captured.’ Incredibly, the same channel went a step further, claiming that Pakistan's prime minister, Shehbaz Sharif, had surrendered, despite there being no official confirmation or supporting evidence from either side.

Over at Aaj Tak, India Today’s Hindi channel, anchors claimed that the Indian Navy’s flagship INS Vikrant had attacked Karachi port. To make the case appear convincing, they aired what they described as ‘exclusive footage,’ but the video turned out to be old visuals from Israel’s Iron Dome system, falsely repurposed as scenes from Pakistan.

Man from Kashmir wrongly identified as militant

One of the most damaging false reports came from News18 India, which flashed a photograph claiming that a ‘terrorist’ responsible for the 2019 Pulwama attack had been killed in a cross-border airstrike.

However, the man in the photograph was not a militant at all; he was an Indian civilian from Kashmir, who had tragically died in cross-border shelling initiated by Pakistan.

Meanwhile, ABP News showed supposed ‘exclusive visuals’ of Indian Surface-to-Air Missiles shooting down Pakistani drones over Jaisalmer, Rajasthan. Fact-checkers soon traced these clips back to publicly available footage of Israel’s Iron Dome, once again misattributed in the rush to break ‘exclusive’ stories.

Vernacular media adding to the noise

It was not just the major national TV networks that stumbled.

Vernacular media outlets also amplified unverified or false claims.

Mathrubhoomi, a prominent Malayalam-language news website, ran a headline claiming, without any confirmation, that a coup had taken place in Pakistan and that the army general had surrendered. This unverified claim spread rapidly across regional social media networks and WhatsApp groups, only to fizzle out hours later when Pakistani media and international observers found no basis for the rumour.

Similarly, Eenadu, one of the largest Telugu-language newspapers, splashed a sensational image on its front page and across its social media platforms, claiming that Pakistani political centres had been captured by Indian forces. However, fact-checkers later traced the image back to old photographs from Turkey, showing military operations unrelated to Pakistan or India. This visual blunder not only misled Eenadu’s vast Telugu-speaking audience but also illustrated how even respected regional newsrooms can fall into the trap of prioritising dramatic visuals over rigorous verification.

Celebratory panels and premature declarations

In one particularly surreal moment, Navbharat Times gathered a panel featuring a former Indian Army officer and six guests, who began celebrating on air after the channel flashed a breaking ticker: “Indian Army has entered Pakistan.”

The anchor led enthusiastic discussions about what this meant for regional power balances until field reporters contradicted the claim live on air, revealing that the military’s movement had not crossed into Pakistani territory.

False blasts and phantom attacks in India

The Times Now newsroom ran tickers declaring that a bomb blast had occurred at Jaipur Airport, a terrifying claim for Indian citizens, only to quietly retract the story when no such incident materialised.

On the digital side, OneIndia News reported that a blast near Pakistan PM Shehbaz Sharif’s residence in Islamabad was linked to Indian military action, stoking fears of escalating conflict, though Pakistani authorities denied any such attack had taken place.

In a separate episode, ABP’s anchor spent several minutes describing a ‘suicide bombing’ at an Indian Army camp in Jammu and Kashmir, a report later debunked by ABP’s own ground reporter live on the same broadcast. The correction came only after the misleading segment had already gone viral across social platforms.

What drives media hysteria?

These incidents are not isolated accidents. They reveal a pattern in modern media ecosystems, especially during moments of high tension, where the speed of reporting often takes precedence over accuracy, sensationalism trumps verification, and unverified claims are amplified without sufficient editorial caution.

Recent international studies highlight that such media behaviour is not unique to India.

A 2024 analysis by the Henry Jackson Society examining coverage of the Israel-Hamas conflict found that many outlets amplified unverified casualty figures without distinguishing between civilians and combatants, significantly shaping public perceptions and diplomatic responses. Similarly, research on the Russia-Ukraine conflict published by the Reuters Institute revealed that more than 80 per cent of identified misinformation on Twitter remained accessible, highlighting the enormous challenge of moderating false narratives during ongoing conflicts.

Studies have also pointed out how biased or reckless reporting during international crises can have far-reaching consequences.

A 2024 report by Africa Practice and Africa No Filter showed how negative stereotypes in media coverage, particularly during elections and crises, cost African nations billions annually in higher debt interest, demonstrating the tangible economic impacts of distorted media narratives.

Why does correct reporting matter?

The consequences of reckless reporting are not merely academic or confined to newsroom ethics. False reports can trigger public panic, escalate diplomatic tensions, provide fodder for disinformation campaigns and erode public trust in the media.

Once inaccurate information spreads, it is notoriously difficult to retract, a challenge documented repeatedly by studies on social media misinformation and breaking news cycles.

The need for loud and clear retractions and restraint

Improving the situation will require stronger editorial oversight, particularly during breaking events when the temptation to race ahead of the competition is at its peak.

It will also demand cross-newsroom collaboration with fact-checking networks, ensuring that verification becomes a shared responsibility rather than an afterthought.

When errors do occur, media houses must issue clear retractions and corrections instead of quietly deleting misleading reports, and audiences must cultivate greater media literacy to recognise when hype overrides facts.

Operation Sindoor was a test not just of India’s military preparedness but of the Indian media’s maturity and responsibility.

Unfortunately, many outlets failed that test, exposing a media landscape still vulnerable to the pressures of sensationalism and the pitfalls of an unverified breaking news culture. The evidence from India and international contexts alike suggests it is time for newsrooms to rethink their priorities, and for audiences to demand nothing less.