How does the concept of Brahminical patriarchy shape Indian media content?

Indian Media and Caste: of Politics, Portrayals and Beyond

Pranjali Kureel1

CASTE: A Global Journal on Social Exclusion Vol. 2, No. 1

The concept of Brahminical patriarchy serves as a foundational structure that shapes both the composition and the content of Indian media. According to the sources, Brahminical patriarchy is not a system exclusive to Brahmins, but rather a framework where privilege and deprivation are allotted based on caste, necessitating the control of women’s bodies to maintain caste boundaries. This framework influences media content through historical hegemony, biased portrayals, and the exclusion of marginalized voices.

Dominance in Media Production and Ownership

The sources argue that the media industry is characterized by the hegemony of dominant castes, which has existed since its inception. Because media houses are often privately owned and controlled by extended families, positions are frequently filled through exclusionary networks.

• Newsroom Composition: A study revealed that among 121 leadership positions across newspapers, TV channels, and magazines, none were occupied by individuals from Scheduled Caste (SC), Scheduled Tribe (ST), or Other Backward Class (OBC) communities.
• The "Savarna Gaze": This lack of diversity means that the content produced—whether news or entertainment—reflects the worldview, biases, and locations of upper-caste creators rather than an objective reality.

Journalism: "Visible Dalit, Invisible Brahmin"

Brahminical patriarchy shapes how news is reported, often focusing on the victims of caste while shielding the structures of the oppressors from scrutiny.

• Victim Porn: Reporting on caste atrocities often omits the "oppressor" part of the story, focusing instead on Dalit victims in a manner described as "victim porn". This practice keeps the caste conditioning and pride of Brahmin-Dwija communities away from public scrutiny.
• Invisibilization of Urban Casteism: Media often reduces caste to a "rural problem," failing to report on the Brahminical hegemony prevalent in urban spaces, such as in academia or the editorial staffs of major newspapers.
• Cultural Exclusion: Mainstream media frequently ignores significant Ambedkarite cultural events, such as Ambedkar Jayanti or Mahaparinirvana divas, while providing extensive coverage for Hindu religious festivals.

Cinema and Television: Defining "Indianness"

In the entertainment sector, Brahminical patriarchy reinforces specific cultural values and norms that equate Hindu upper-caste lifestyles with "Indianness".

• The "Ideal" Woman: The popular image of the "Bhartiya Naari" (Indian woman) is essentially a Hindu upper-caste woman, often portrayed through symbols like sindoor, bindi, and jewelry.
• The Hero as Saviour: Characters are often structured around a Hindu upper-caste "hero" or "saviour", while Dalits and Adivasis are relegated to the sidelines as victims.
• Standard of Beauty: Media reinforces "savarna" beauty standards (fair skin, tall, and thin), as exemplified by film dialogue that equates fair skin with being Brahmin.

Exclusion within Feminist Discourse

The sources highlight that even supposedly "progressive" or "women-centric" media often operates within a linear and exclusionary framework.

• The Modern Woman: Representation of the "modern Indian woman" is typically limited to Brahmin-Dwija women.
• Erasure of Dalit Women's Agency: Mainstream media fails to represent the specific struggles and historical agency of Dalit women. For example, media often presents "leaving the home to work" as a new empowering act for women, ignoring that Dalit women have historically worked outside the home for centuries.
• Sexual Subjectification: Media often portrays sexual autonomy as a form of empowerment for dominant women, while lower-caste women’s bodies have historically been subjected to different forms of sexualized labor and availability in the public domain.

Emerging Resistance

While Brahminical patriarchy continues to shape mainstream content, the sources note a growing anti-caste discourse through filmmakers like Nagraj Manjule and Pa Ranjith, who challenge the "victim/saviour" binary by presenting assertive Dalit characters with ownership of their own subjectivity. Additionally, social media has provided a platform for Ambedkarite voices to reclaim their worldview and register dissent against these historical hegemonies.

Urban newsrooms are described as spaces of Brahminical hegemony because they are characterized by the overwhelming dominance of upper-caste individuals in leadership roles, exclusionary recruitment practices, and an editorial "gaze" that protects the interests of the oppressor while marginalizing the oppressed.

The sources highlight several specific reasons for this characterisation:

1. Total Absence of Marginalised Leadership

The description of hegemony is rooted in stark statistics regarding newsroom composition. A 2019 report by Oxfam and Newslaundry revealed that among 121 leadership positions (such as Editor-in-Chief and Bureau Chief) across newspapers, TV channels, and magazines, not a single one was occupied by a person from the Scheduled Caste (SC), Scheduled Tribe (ST), or Other Backward Class (OBC) communities. Instead, the vast majority of these roles are held by those from the "general category" (upper castes). This dominance extends to the "face" of news: three out of every four flagship debate anchors are upper-caste, with zero representation from Dalit, Adivasi, or OBC communities.

2. Exclusionary Networks and Social Capital

Because media houses are privately owned, they are not legally required to implement reservation policies. This allows for a "caste nexus" where positions are often filled through informal networks and extended family connections rather than public advertisements.

• Inherited Advantage: Upper-caste individuals benefit from social and cultural capital accumulated over generations, which provides them with the connections necessary to enter and rise within these spaces.
• Media Education: This hegemony begins at the educational level; media colleges are often dominated by Brahmin-savarna students, while students from marginalized backgrounds face alienation or hostility toward affirmative action, often forcing them to hide their identities.

3. The "Invisibilisation" of Urban Casteism

The sources argue that urban newsrooms maintain hegemony by framing caste as a strictly "rural problem". By sending journalists to villages to cover atrocities while ignoring the preponderance of Brahmins and savarnas on their own editorial staffs, they shield urban Brahminical structures from scrutiny. This practice, described as "Visible Dalit, invisible Brahmin," ensures that while the Dalit victim is put on display, the Brahminical conditioning and pride of the urban elite remain unquestioned.

4. Cultural Hegemony and Bias

The cultural output of urban newsrooms reflects the worldview of the dominant castes who control them.

• Selective Coverage: Mainstream media frequently provides extensive coverage for Hindu upper-caste religious festivals (like Karva Chauth or Lohri) but maintains a "complete silence" or boycott regarding significant Ambedkarite cultural events, such as Ambedkar Jayanti or Mahaparinirvana divas.
• Epistemic Violence: By monopolising the "power of the word," dominant groups in newsrooms act as the producers of knowledge, while the marginalized are reduced to "objects" of the reporter's gaze rather than subjects with their own thinking capacity.

In summary, urban newsrooms are viewed as Brahminical spaces because they function as caste-exclusive houses where the "oppressor" tells the story of the "oppressed," thereby reproducing the very social structures they claim to objectively report on