This is not an opinion piece but an appeal to the participants, organisers, and sponsors of the great Indian television debates that have created multiple primetime slots. In many ways, it can also be seen as a piece of unsolicited advice from someone who has seen it all and done it all. Let us agree that all of us are confronting the concern about whether we, as a nation and as a people, can survive these highly toxic and polarising TV debates, which have normalised the vilest of abuses and obscene expressions. The recent one being just one of the cases where the spokesperson of the ruling party hurled the filthiest of abuse at the representative of the main opposition party. The current reality across most of the platforms has degenerated into loud, abusive, and polarised shouting matches that prioritise sensationalism over substance and promote partisan narratives, resulting in an "us vs them" atmosphere which easily travels from the studio to the streets. We have chosen to forget that this kind of toxicity shuts dialogue, whereas respectful, constructive arguments move everyone forward-even when agreement is not reached.
A Vile Turn
It just requires all the stakeholders in these kinds of programmes to go back to primary school textbooks to realise that Indian democracy, the world's largest, has long been celebrated for its vibrant diversity, forceful debates, and constitutional commitment to liberty and equality. However, in recent years, the tone and tenor of public discourse-particularly in political and digital spaces-have taken a poisonous and abusive turn. This shift threatens the very foundation of democratic functioning. While India faces many challenges, from economic inequality to institutional corruption, one of the most insidious and dangerous threats is the degeneration of public discourse into a space dominated by hate, abuse, misinformation, and polarization.
A healthy democracy relies on informed, rational, and respectful debate. The public square-whether on television, social media, or parliamentary floors-should be a platform for discussing policies, exchanging ideas, and resolving disagreements through dialogue. However, when discourse becomes toxic, it replaces thoughtful argument with personal attacks, slander, and emotional manipulation. Rather than addressing real issues such as unemployment, education, or healthcare, debates often devolve into shouting matches and ideological mudslinging. This undermines the very essence of democratic deliberation, and the TV newsroom debates are leading this trend.
Demonising The 'Other'
Toxic discourses organised, advertised, and promoted by the TV platforms have a polarising effect on society, as several studies have shown. Politicians and party spokespersons frequently use inflammatory language targeting religious, caste-based, or regional identities, deepening existing social divides. Social media further amplifies this division by creating echo chambers where people are exposed only to like-minded views, reinforcing prejudice and demonising the "other". The result is a growing atmosphere of hostility and intolerance. In several cases, this has led to real-world violence, such as mob lynchings or communal riots, threatening the fabric of Indian pluralism.
The media house owners, TV anchors, reporters, as well as spokespersons, must not forget that a thriving democracy allows space for dissent, protest, and critique. However, when public discourse turns abusive, it often targets those who question or criticise power-be they journalists, students, artists, or activists. Online harassment campaigns, legal intimidation, and even threats to personal safety are increasingly common in the times we live in. This creates a chilling effect, discouraging individuals from speaking out or participating in democratic dialogue. When dissent is silenced not through argument but through abuse, democracy suffers.
A Theatre Of Insults
Toxic public discourse frequently overlaps with the deliberate spread of misinformation. Fake news, doctored videos, conspiracy theories, and half-truths circulate widely, especially on social media platforms. When citizens base their opinions and electoral decisions on falsehoods, the democratic process is distorted. Misinformation also fuels hatred and fear, making it easier for those in power to manipulate public opinion and evade accountability.
When political leaders, media outlets, and influencers themselves indulge in lethal rhetoric, it damages the credibility of the institutions they represent. Parliament becomes a theatre of insults rather than nuanced deliberation and lawmaking. Taking a clue, primetime debates by news channels have become arenas of sensationalism instead of journalism. This erosion of trust weakens the very institutions meant to uphold democratic values.
Toxic and abusive public discourse may not be as dramatic as a constitutional crisis, but it is more dangerous because it corrodes democracy from within, making it harder to have meaningful conversations, solve real problems, or hold power accountable. Combating this threat requires a collective effort-from politicians, media, civil society, and individual citizens-to restore civility, fact-based dialogue, and mutual respect in public life. The fact of the matter is: when citizens cannot trust what they hear, how can they make informed choices?
Democracy is not just about elections. It's about how we talk to each other, how we treat each other, and how we solve problems together. If we allow our public space to be filled with abuse, hate, and lies, then democracy itself is at risk. People must demand, as a collective, from the leaders of the political parties and their spokespersons healthier and much more temperate arguments from them. The mantra for all should be that we must speak respectfully, even when we disagree. And most importantly, we must listen-truly listen-to others. This is how democracy can be protected not just with votes or the regular elections but with voices that heal, not hurt.
(The author is a Professor and Rajya Sabha Member from the Rashtriya Janata Dal)
Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the author
