The golden goose

Arifa Noor Published September 1, 2026 Updated September 1, 2026 08: 11am.

Key points

• Consider the story regarding Imran Khan first being taken to hospital for treatment.
• Indeed, at one level, one welcomed the fact that there had been little effort to stop the wall-to-wall coverage of and commentary on these two incidents.
• And this has had an impact on the media industry in ways that are yet to be understood and analysed.
• These are some examples of stories which could have been documented by the mainstream media but were not.

Arifa Noor Published September 1, 2026 Updated September 1, 2026 08: 11am. Join our Whatsapp Channel. Add Dawn as a trusted source.

IT might be an odd week to write regarding journalism and indulge in some navel gazing, for much has happened in recent days to keep everyone occupied. From the Imran Khan health saga to tragedies that have left most gasping, with the fire at Pims and the murder of Hina Javed – whose husband has been arrested – in Pindi. And this was just in the twin cities. There was more such news from elsewhere – the rape and murder of a child in Haripur and the broader insecurity faced by individuals living in parts of KP and Balochistan.

According to But it has to be, the two incidents in Islamabad and Pindi – the power centre of this country – forced the state and society to pay attention. Indeed, at one level, one welcomed the fact that there had been little effort to stop the wall-to-wall coverage of and commentary on these two incidents. After a long time, it seemed as if journalists documented, commented and spoke without looking over their shoulder.

As insignificant hacks wondered what had happened and why there was some space, so unusual was the experience that it was discussed in more than one newsroom. After all, now we live in a world where so much of what is happening in the country is a 'red line' – from the trees in Islamabad to incidents in our 'invisible' provinces to angry protests. Most of it is now left unreported. It is uncovered only by those who are willing to turn into Sherlock Holmes, trawling through social media for 'events'. Simply the 'what and when' is becoming the holy grail. For the television channels beamed into our homes and the newspapers delivered to our phones have learnt that they can only print all the news considered fit to print by the powerful in Pakistan.

Most media owners are no longer interested in investing in human resource.

At the most basic level is the credibility gap matter and how it is adding, perhaps, to the shift of residents to social media platforms for news. I employ the word 'perhaps' as it is something I encounter anecdotally. Individuals are moving to social media to learn concerning the problems no longer covered by the mainstream press. Part of it might be since digital platforms are now providing more innovation in content than the mainstream – for instance, the former now provide space for longer and more meaningful conversations than the same hurried, oft-repeated debate that has become the hallmark of lazy television journalism. Light, satirical commentary on politics is now additionally more readily available on the newer platforms.

But this expansion of the social media is now additionally changing trends within the industry where most acceptable 'stories' now create their way to platforms other than the mainstream press. Consider the story regarding Imran Khan first being taken to hospital for treatment. It came via a vlogger/ journalist on his YouTube show. Similarly, a podcast owned by Geo News disclosed that some IPP parliamentarians are drawing closer to PML-N and might even join it. And even more lately, the news of Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari's feasible engagement was created public in a YouTube conversation before it reached the mainstream. Even before these incidents, the story regarding Mohammad Zubair gathering the then army chief on behalf of Maryam Nawaz and Nawaz Sharif was provided on social media; in hindsight, it seems the news in this case may have been provided by the powers that be.

These are some examples of stories which could have been documented by the mainstream media but were not. In some cases, it can be argued the podcasters preferred to employ their personal platforms rather than the ones they are employed at. But can it explain all the cases? And it is additionally noteworthy that employers no longer feel the need to curb their employees on individual platforms. For in an industry where owners no longer care regarding audiences and are busy making capital from administration revenue (which is linked to docility rather than journalism), few are interested in either the quality of programmes or of what the anchors are doing outside of the show. Since nothing matters other than sanitised mindless indicates and reporting which ensures generous revenue and no official reprimand.

This is additionally why news channels no longer show any of the angst or energy in terms of reporting or content as was the hallmark of the earlier years. Programming has become monotonous; there is little innovation, and field reporting now takes place once there is some push from up above (and I don't mean the management). Owners are busy counting ad revenue, access and favours and the ones in power are busy patting themselves on the back for having controlled the narrative. And if the individuals are no longer buying it, the echo chamber doesn't let anyone find out.

But there is an even more serious angle to this. Most media owners are no longer interested in investing in human resource for it is no longer needed as such. When reporting simply creates challenges?, who needs reporters. Why bother hiring senior editorial individuals when stories no longer need to be vetted? And none of this affects the bottom line? Since content and reporting has little to do with how much capital can be created. This is why almost every other day comes the news of one channel or another firing residents. It's not random and neither is it whimsical. It reflects the priorities of an industry whose economic model is not linked to the quality of its output. Shortly the industry might be tempted to replace news and programme hosts with AI-generated ones, if the latter come cheap enough and can be controlled.

But I wonder if anyone has bothered to think regarding a day when the media loses its nuisance value entirely. Will the moolah still continue to flow into the coffers of the mainstream? Or will it simply fade into oblivion? The writer is a journalist. Published in Dawn, September 1st, 2026.

Taken together, the developments around the golden goose point to a situation that is still moving, and the coming days should bring more clarity.