The debate in India surrounding Russian President Vladimir Putin's interview isn't the result of a small controversy, but rather the larger question of what kind of image India is projecting through its representatives on the international stage. When India Today/Aaj Tak journalist Anjana Om Kashyap and her colleague Geeta Mohan interviewed Putin, his posture, body language, and demeanor became more prominent than the conversation itself. Many viewers considered this a violation of Indian etiquette, and the issue quickly surfaced on social media, news forums, and public discourse.
This discussion is important because it is no longer just a matter of the individual behavior of two journalists; it has become a broader question of India's cultural character, international etiquette, diplomatic sensibilities, and the professional identity of the Indian media. In this era of global politics, where every word, every image, and every gesture is instantly broadcast around the world, the behavior of any representative is seen as part of the nation's collective identity.
The core of Indian civilization has always been based on humility, respect, and dignity. "Atithi Devo Bhava" is not just a slogan, but a deeply rooted value of life in Indian society. We have always believed that guests should be welcomed with respect, regardless of their power, society, or country. Therefore, when the President of a superpower like Russia, which plays a pivotal role in global politics, sits down to give an interview to Indian journalists, expectations naturally rise.
Central to these expectations is the professionalism of journalists—firmness in words, courage in questions, but also dignity in posture and presentation. Indian citizens are not wrong in believing that their media representatives should also uphold India's cultural dignity on the world stage.
Journalism is inherently fearless. Questioning power is its dharma. International leaders are well aware that the media's role is not merely to praise; criticism and tough questions are also part of the democratic framework in which powerful leaders hold themselves accountable. But there's a difference between asking bold questions and crossing the line into incivility, and this distinction makes this debate relevant.
Many onlookers commented that the seating arrangement was overly informal and inappropriate for a head of state. Regardless of the media practices of any country in the world, a minimum level of formal etiquette is observed when conducting interviews, especially when the interviewer is a president, prime minister, or high-ranking global leader. Such an interview with a leader like Russian President Putin is not considered a normal media interaction; it is part of the implicit symbolic dimension of India-Russia relations.
A natural question arose in the audience's minds: While Putin was sitting with poise, upright posture, and diplomatic dignity, did the Indian journalists' extremely relaxed, almost homely, posture meet international expectations? People aren't suggesting journalists sit with their heads bowed, intimidated, or subservient. But every professional should adopt a basic formal style consistent with civility and etiquette. This is the cultural nuance that distinguishes India.
The question also arises: is this controversy the result of over-sensitivity? Has the public given more importance to journalists' position than to their work? This question cannot be ignored. One of the media's roles is to create a comfortable environment so that leaders can speak freely. But does comfort mean abandoning decorum? This balance is the core of this debate.
Another important aspect is that amid the controversy, some social media messages claimed that Western countries call Indians derogatory names. This statement is not only baseless but also creates unnecessary inferiority complex in Indian society. Applying such derogatory labels to an entire country based on the behavior of a single journalist is not only wrong but also against India's growing global reputation. India today is one of the world's fastest-growing economies, a center of global diplomacy, and the world is giving respect and opportunity to Indian talent. In such a situation, spreading false, derogatory, and unsubstantiated information only divides society.
Indian journalism faces a significant challenge today. On the one hand, it bears the responsibility of asking tough questions of governments and powerful institutions, while on the other, it must adhere to international standards of professional conduct. It's safe to say that if India wants to be a powerful voice in the world, its media must display the same level of dignity and seriousness.
This controversy highlighted another aspect—the instant and rapid response of social media in India. Today, every scene, every word, every action reaches millions of people in an instant. This is beneficial because it increases accountability, but it is also challenging because emotions can overpower logic. This is why events are sometimes exaggerated beyond reality. But in this case, people's sentiments reflect a genuine concern—how is Indian identity being portrayed on the world stage?
This criticism is not meant to insult journalists. It is a serious and necessary discussion that India, which is steadily rising in world politics, must also display a similar maturity and balance in its behavior, speech, presentation, and communication. India's cultural heritage is not limited to dress or language; it is also manifested in our conduct, humility, respect, and poise.
International leaders look to India not only for its economic and strategic potential, but also for its cultural strength, its moral tradition, and its deep civilization. India has always been known for its legacy of courtesy, dialogue, and balance. Therefore, it is natural to expect that our journalists, our diplomats, our professionals—as they represent India to the world—should also reflect the dignity and grace that distinguish us.
This incident has taught us a lesson: the wider the communication horizon, the greater the responsibilities. And when responsibility involves a nation's reputation, even small details become important. Seating, professional posture, language—all are part of the larger framework that the world sees as "India."
Ultimately, the crux of this debate is that journalistic freedom and courage should be respected, but at the same time, it should be ensured that India's cultural dignity and international decorum are upheld on every platform. Freedom and decorum are not contradictory—together, they create the balanced, mature, and credible image of India that the world needs today.
The identity of India lies in its civilization, and the essence of this civilization says this –
There should be courage as well as sensitivity.
There should be firmness in questions and dignity in behavior.

Email:------------------------------priyankasaurabh9416@gmail.com