“The media is the most powerful weapon which can mould the thought process and shape the opinions.”

Sabrimala is a temple dedicated to AYYAPPA in Pathanamthitta District, Kerala, India. Shasta, the lord worshipped in the shrine is a celibate deity so women and girls of reproductive age were traditionally prohibited from entering the temple. After the Kerala high court 's legal justification for this tradition, from 1991 onwards, women were legally forbidden to enter the temple. On September 28, 2018, the verdict of Supreme Court of India ruled that all Hindu pilgrims, regardless of gender, could enter the temple as the ban violated the right to equality and the right to freedom of religion under Article 14 and Article 25 respectively.

The judgement was followed by protests by millions of Ayyappan devotees who opposed the verdict. The female activists who tried to enter the shrine were encountered by threats of physical assault. Some female journalists were attacked by a violent crowd while they were on their way to the temple to cover the field news. The conformist priests closed the temple for purification rituals when they heard that there were attempts by the women to enter the shrine. This conflict prolonged until finally on  2 January 2019, two women, Bindu Ammini (aged 40) and Kanakadurga (aged 39), entered the Sabarimala temple.

In any modern day conflict, the role of media is central as it can shape and manipulate the public opinion.And the example of Sabarimala issue is no different.There had been wide media coverage reporting each and every incident from the verdict of the Supreme Court to the day when women finally entered the temple and its backwash.The main aim of the article is to analyse the role of media in the Sabarimala conflict.

The detailed review of the media coverage of the Sabarimala Issue in terms of ‘Positive,’ ‘Negative’ and ‘Neutral’ news by Dr. Akanksha Shukla, Associate Professor , Center for Development Documentation and Communication , NIRDPR, reveals the following data :

Bony  Thomas, founder of Kochi Biennale, was dissatisfied with the Kerala media’s coverage of the Sabarimala verdict and its aftermath. He believed that the media hadn’t been vigilant and was adding fuel to the fire.

The Malayalam literature writer, Paul Zacharia, said that there wasn’t much fact checking and dispensed the major part of the blame to the print media and dailies as some of them being more than a century old could make a profound impact on people.

Jacob George, a senior journalist, had a different take on the issue and credited the professionalism of the Kerala dailies. “It is the duty of newspapers to report. You can find fault with them for not doing deeper analysis and fact-checking of claims by political parties. But you can’t fault them for highlighting all sides of a story and for attempting to strike a balance.”

Widely-revered old hand journalist, BRP Bhaskar, sees eye to eye with Zacharia. In his words, “I think the media, in general, weren’t restrained. Even Manorama and Mathrubhumi weren’t cautious enough for newspapers with their kind of reach. When emotions are too strong and tempers run high, the media ought to have been more responsible.”

Media critic, Sebastian Paul was of the opinion that the media had been needlessly sensational and generally reported from the perspective of the protestors. Police actions were negatively portrayed and the distinction between devotees and trouble-makers wiped out.

Every coin has two sides. Media ~ the opinion shaper, on one hand is questioned for its fact checking, getting trapped into the caste and gender stereotypes, stimulating conflicts and promoting dirty politics, while on the other hand is appreciated for presenting the actual scenario at each and every stage, bringing in the much needed support from the public for the women and putting a pressure on the orthodox priests to open the doors of the temple for the women even after the judgement of the Supreme Court of India.