Nepal reference, Pak ‘link’, and opposition conspiracy theories: How TV anchors spun the July 20 march

By late afternoon on July 20, the images from Delhi were difficult to ignore: protesters marching from Jantar Mantar towards Parliament were met with tear gas shells, lathi charge, and mass detentions, while internet services were suspended around central Delhi. But anyone switching on primetime television that evening would have encountered a different story.

Across Republic, News18 India, DD News and ABP News, the focus shifted away from the protesters’ central demands – accountability over the NEET paper leak and student suicides – and towards another narrative: the demonstrations were no longer about students, but about violence, political conspiracy and threats to national security.

The protest did leave at least 100 police personnel injured and several vehicles vandalised, but as the TV visuals and headlines focussed on police injuries, the police crackdown on protesters nearly vanished on air. As did the protesters’ central demands.

This playbook bears a striking resemblance to how Indian media handled regional uprisings last year, such as the coverage of youth-led movements in Nepal, where anchors similarly leaned on tropes of “foreign hands” and “data addiction” rather than systemic grievances.

Nepal, Bangladesh and national stability

Republic TV escalated the rhetoric.

Arnab Goswami repeatedly invoked Nepal’s recent political upheaval, arguing that activists such as Sonam Wangchuk were signalling a desire to replicate similar events in India. Throughout the broadcast, he insisted that “India is not Nepal”, linked Wangchuk’s earlier references to Nepal with allegations about foreign funding, and framed the protest as part of an organised attempt to destabilise the country. The effect was to recast a student-led movement over examination irregularities into a question of national security.

A similar framing appeared on India TV as well as other mainstream media outlets, where debate participants repeatedly returned to a clip of a protester saying “ukhad denge Parliament” (we will uproot Parliament), treating one incendiary remark as emblematic of the movement. The discussion with anchor Prachi Parashar then broadened into allegations of political sponsorship, references to Article 370, Umar Khalid and “Free Kashmir” slogans, and questions over whether the protest had been infiltrated by “professional protesters”, shifting attention further away from the demonstrators’ stated demands over the NEET paper leak.

Chitra Tripathi from ABP News framed the protests as political opportunism, asking, “Kya kuch log apni siyasat ke liye yuvaon ki is aseem urja ka galat istemaal kar rahe hain?” (Are some people misusing the boundless energy of the youth for their own politics?) She later asked whether there are forces that “want India to become like Nepal and Bangladesh under the cover of public anger”.

News18 India’s Aman Chopra introduced a Pakistan angle into the coverage. He said “Pakistani handles” had become active on social media “They are saying that seven people have died during the protest, hundreds have been injured, and more than 250 people have been arrested.”

On News18 India, Amish Devgan asked, “The question is: Is the protest merely a pretext, with the real objective being to spread instability in the country?”

On DD News, Sudhir Chaudhary argued that the organisers had jeopardised national security by allegedly flying a drone in Delhi’s no-fly zone, suggesting they themselves had used the footage to exaggerate the scale of the mobilisation. 

Vandalism and the ‘goonda’ narrative

Republic TV’s Arnab Goswami described the protest as one “carried out by the goons of the CJP” and repeatedly referred to demonstrators as “goondas masquerading as students”.

Throughout the broadcast, Republic foregrounded allegations of stone-pelting and injuries to police personnel, presenting the confrontation primarily as an attack on law enforcement rather than examining the circumstances that led to the use of force.

The underlying question of why thousands of students had gathered in the first place received comparatively little attention.

On DD News, Sudhir Chaudhary devoted much of his programme to damaged police vehicles, alleged vandalism and claims that demonstrators had forced the police to resort to lathi charges. Chaudhary declared that the movement had “lost its purpose”, with footage of alleged stone-pelting, damaged police vehicles and injured personnel.

Aman Chopra adopted an even more confrontational frame.

Calling the demonstrators “professional pattharbaaz” (“professional stone-pelters”), he said, “This is Kashmir-like stone-pelting... there was an attempt to lynch police personnel.”

Opposition conspiracy

While asserting that “the country stands with the students” and noting ongoing negotiations with the government, Chitra Tripathi’s programme on ABP News devoted far greater attention to conspiracy theories about the Opposition. She suggested that controversies routinely surface immediately before Parliament sessions, citing the timing of the Pegasus revelations, the release of the Manipur video, and the Hindenburg report as examples.

Tripathi also drew parallels with previous movements, claiming, “The same people were there during the CAA protests, at Shaheen Bagh, in the farmers’ protest and in the wrestlers’ protest.” 

Sudhir Chaudhary described the agitation as having been “hijacked” by anti-Modi groups, “urban Naxals” and “anti-national” elements, comparing it to the Anna Hazare movement than to Shaheen Bagh. Social media posts documenting police action were dismissed as part of an “afwah (rumour) gang” that, he argued, was spreading misinformation despite Delhi Police’s ‘fact-checks’.

Chaudhary further criticised Abhijeet Dipke’s leadership, claiming that the Aam Aadmi Party’s leadership, IT cell and social media machinery were effectively directing the protest from behind the scenes.

‘I stand with the police’

Amish Devgan explicitly defended the police response, declaring: “Main bol raha hoon, I stand with police. Police pitne ke liye nahin hai.” (I’m saying, I stand with the police. The police are not there to be beaten.) 

Chaudhary devoted much of his programme to damaged police vehicles, alleged vandalism and claims that demonstrators had forced the police to resort to lathi charges. Social media posts documenting police action were dismissed as part of an “afwah gang” that, he argued, was spreading misinformation despite Delhi Police's fact-checks.

Aman Chopra adopted an even more confrontational frame. Calling the demonstrators “professional pattharbaaz” (“professional stone-pelters”), he said, “This is Kashmir-like stone-pelting... there was an attempt to lynch police personnel.”

With odd exceptions like this Preeti Chaudhary report on India Today, few channels scrutinised the blatant acts of police violence against young protesters. 

Most channels highlighted that the government had opened backchannel negotiations with the protesters. However, they did not mention the nearly month-long official silence that had preceded JP Nadda’s meeting with CJP representatives on Monday afternoon.

(Inputs from Chenab Guha, an editorial intern with Newslaundry.)

Small teams can do great things. All it takes is a subscription. Subscribe now and power Newslaundry’s work.