How media bias turned Dharmasthala’s legacy into a target for misinformation

New Delhi: A viral complaint by a former sanitation worker has dragged the 800-year-old Shri Dharmasthala Manjunatheshwara Temple into a storm of unverified allegations, racing ahead of the SIT’s probe; the complaint was filed on July 3.

He alleges that between 1995 and 2014 he was forced to bury hundreds of murder victims, many of them women and young girls, after alleged assaults. The claim went viral within hours. Social platforms, YouTube channels and a section of the media amplified it before the Special Investigation Team could even start its work.

The coverage moved faster than verification. Headlines framed suspicion as fact. Clips were shared without basic checks. Context was missing.

Mainstream Kannada newsrooms took a different line. Editors and reporters who know the temple’s record in charity, education and rural development treated the complaint as unverified and chose caution. They waited for the investigation instead of joining the pile-on.

The problem here is not one complaint. It is the way selective amplification can manufacture a sense of guilt. When activist-journalists, political operatives and social-media echo chambers push a single narrative, doubt looks like proof. 

In the Dharmasthala case, key facts were often left out. Courts have issued acquittals in earlier, unrelated matters. The temple has a documented legacy of philanthropy and interfaith outreach. None of that fits the viral frame, so it rarely appeared.

On the ground, the reaction cut through the noise. In Chikkamagaluru, Koppal, Yadgir, Mysuru and Kalaburagi, thousands of devotees, community leaders and members of minority communities rallied for Dharmasthala. Their message was simple. Let the SIT investigate. Do not judge an institution by a trending clip.

The stakes are clear. If clicks outrun due process, any legacy can be dragged into suspicion. If untested claims set the tone, reputations built over decades can be damaged in days.

The remedy is also clear. The SIT must examine the complaint and follow the evidence. Media outlets should label allegations as allegations and publish essential context. Social platforms should resist the urge to turn speculation into certainty.

Dharmasthala has survived centuries of change. It now faces a test of process and patience. The fair standard is evidence over volume. The institution’s story is one of service and resilience. It should be judged on facts, not on the velocity of a feed.