Nepali media is becoming increasingly vulnerable to misinformation. The country has always had a weak media system, limited resources and a small market. Over the years, we saw the emergence of a partisan press than an independent and credible source of information. Mission journalism, a term used for opposition media during the authoritarian monarch-led Panchayat regime (1960s to 1990), defined Nepali journalism as a tool for advocacy and struggle. As state-owned media and mission-driven private media presented vastly different perspectives, the citizens often viewed them as political instruments.

The media’s role changed after private media emerged with significant investments in the 1990s. However, the lack of media literacy, combined with the low penetration of private and independent media outlets, led to most Nepalis trusting or distrusting the media without being critical.

Understanding media operations, news content production and critical information analysis are crucial elements for media literacy. While developed countries with solid media systems have understood its importance for democracy and curricula development in educational institutions, Nepal still lags behind.

The lack of media literacy was not a big problem before the spread of the internet. Citizens’ low purchasing power and the difficult terrain in which people lived meant news-based mainstream media reached only a handful of the population, and the majority of contents were not problematic. The advent of the internet and smartphones overwhelmed citizens with all kinds of information. Given their media illiteracy, they consumed information and misinformation without questioning them. People held YouTube’s content equivalent to television’s and Facebook’s user-generated content equivalent to mainstream media news.

Omnipresent misinformation

A 2022 survey by the Centre for Media Research Nepal showed that 92 percent of heavy social media users are exposed to misinformation [Disclosure: I am associated with this institution]. Another survey in 2024 among the general population by the same institution revealed that around 67 percent of people witnessed misinformation last week. They reported being exposed to misinformation in local meeting places and from mainstream media, but a considerable proportion of misleading information came from social media platforms. Moreover, 81 percent of respondents said they were very concerned or concerned about the negative impacts of misinformation in society, whereas 97 percent believed misinformation was or would be a big problem for society and politics. Although this reveals the omnipresent nature of misinformation today, efforts to minimise its impacts are severely inadequate.

During the 2017 election, misinformation became the online tactic of politicians to insult, accuse and demean opponents, and to spread false information to impact the popularity of candidates. Despite policy efforts from the Election Commission of Nepal and the monitoring and public awareness initiatives from civil society and mainstream media, misinformation was rampant in the 2022 elections. Cheap fake—content that easily looks manipulated—was used by politicians during their campaigns but had no significant impact on the overall results of elections. However, such information manipulation tactics would have become influential if they were planned and coordinated on a large scale. Considering the emerging AI tools, the upcoming elections will be a playground of information manipulation, which can seriously impact results.

Combating challenges

Correct information is the best antidote to misinformation, which is possible only in the presence of authentic media. However, there is a disturbing trend of discrediting and humiliating the media using misinformation. Political leaders, especially the ones using populist tactics and having a significant presence on social media, are on the frontline of such trends. Since our media system is already weak, humiliating the press rather than improving its functioning is equivalent to laying down our best weapon against misinformation.

The state should respond through favourable policies such as laws and regulations that facilitate healthy public discourse through media. Our policymaking is not evidence-based, resulting in the formulation of restrictive policies that cannot be implemented to minimise undesirable actions or those that further weaken democracy against populism.

Fact-checking is a reactive response, and civil society organisations and the media must prioritise it. South Asia Check, Nepal’s first fact-checking organisation, is nonfunctional, and Nepal Fact Check and Nepal Check are the only functional fact-checking organisations in Nepal. They have limited resources and expertise and can only produce a few fact-checks per month. Although fact-checking is essential in making media, prominent people and leaders accountable, misinformation impacts citizens, as it takes time to fact-check.

Although media and information literacy are long-term practical approaches, inculcating critical thinking among citizens takes time. Media and information literacy components should be integrated into the curriculum of schools and universities and backed by public awareness campaigns. In Nepal, where voter education is inefficient, such campaigns by state and civil society institutions are extremely rare. The government, civil society organisations, political parties, private sector and media must collaborate and bring about effective solutions to fight misinformation.