Tabassum Khan is facing a deluge of online abuse after making the gutsy decision to convict 14 Hindu men in a lynching case. Meanwhile, the mainstream media has been utterly silent or, worse, passive in their coverage. The likes of CNN, the New York Times, and even vanity outlets like Vice are conveniently sidestepping this critical story—why? Could it be because it doesn’t fit their neatly packaged narrative? You’ve got to wonder how many editorial meetings it takes to skip over a complexion of the social justice narrative that involves Hindu men as perpetrators.

What’s particularly jarring is how these outlets portray Khan—turning her into a villain in a story that should highlight the broader issue of religious tensions in the region. Instead of shining a light on online abuse against a brave judge, they choose to focus on how she “divided” the community. I mean, really? It’s almost as if they’re suggesting that justice itself is divisive. Spare me the theatrics!

This kind of selective reporting reeks of an agenda that seeks to protect certain narratives while demonizing others. It’s especially rich coming from networks that claim to champion justice and equality but bail when it’s too messy or disrupts their narrative flow. You want a true reflection of societal issues? You won’t find it in corporate media that prioritizes narrative control over critical truth-telling.