UPSC Ethics paper is not a test of how much you can recall, but of how you reason when values collide. Before listing the GS-IV syllabus, the UPSC notification says the paper seeks to assess a future public servant’s “attitude and approach” towards integrity, probity, problem-solving and the challenges of dealing with society.Values, definitions, thinkers and quotations are the raw material, not the finished answer. What the examiner rewards is the ability to spot the ethical issue in a situation, identify who is affected, weigh competing duties and interests, and reach a decision that is principled as well as practical. Aspirants are expected to develop ethical reasoning, not ready-made answers.UPSC Ethics Answer Practice series is meant to build that skill. Each week, we take up an issue from the news, map the values, principles, stakeholders and competing duties inside it, and test them through a UPSC-style theory question and a case study. What follows each question is not a model answer, but a thought process to help you approach it.Last week, the questions were on AI Ethics, this week, the questions focus on the theme of media ethics. Recent investigative reporting by The Indian Express on the Election Commission of India (ECI), alongside coverage of protests, brings the ethical responsibilities of journalism into focus. Such reporting helps us revisit truth, impartiality, evidence and accountability. How journalists scrutinise those in power without becoming partisan? How do they report competing claims without compromising accuracy? What institutional safeguards are needed to hold those in power answerable to the public? QUESTION 1 (Theory)“A free press is democracy’s conscience, but a conscience that depends on the powerful for its survival cannot always speak freely. Ethical media needs courage inside newsrooms and safeguards around them.” Examine this statement in the context of media ethics. — Article 19(1)(a) guarantees freedom of speech and expression, and press freedom is read into it, subject to the reasonable restrictions in Article 19(2). In Romesh Thappar vs State of Madras (1950) and Indian Express Newspapers vs Union of India (1985), the Supreme Court treated an independent press as essential to an informed democratic public.— John Stuart Mill’s marketplace of ideas explains why: truth is more likely to emerge when ideas compete openly. But a marketplace works only if the contest is fair, ownership is plural and the information is accurate. — Bertrand Russell valued the scientific method and the desire to know, regarding credulity and propaganda as intellectual and moral failures. In journalism, truth supports informed public debate and accountability.— This is why scrutiny of those in power carries moral weight. Gandhi, who edited Indian Opinion and Young India, wrote that the sole aim of journalism should be service, and warned that an uncontrolled pen serves only to destroy. Gandhi’s emphasis on means reminds us that even a true story must be pursued through clean means. Story continues below this ad— Aristotle’s doctrine of the golden mean helps explain this balance. Courage lies between cowardice and recklessness. A journalist who avoids questioning authority out of fear fails in professional responsibility, while one who makes allegations without evidence acts recklessly. Similarly, a civil servant must resist improper instructions without abandoning reason, law or impartiality.— The ethical principle is clear: impartiality does not mean indifference to wrongdoing, and courage must be guided by evidence and sound judgement. Journalists must verify information, report accurately and avoid discrimination or bias. — Moreover, there are times when media institutions may fail from within. Paid news and private deals between media companies and corporates have been flagged by the Press Council of India and SEBI. TRP-driven sensationalism rewards outrage over accuracy. Trial by media can prejudge the accused. Privacy, now part of Article 21 after Puttaswamy (2017), and the dignity of victims are often the casualties of a race for the first headline.— Technology compounds these issues. Algorithms create echo chambers, deepfakes blur truth and falsehood, and generative AI makes it cheap to produce realistic content without accuracy. As the satirist, essayist, and cleric Jonathan Swift put it— “Falsehood flies, and the truth comes limping after it.”Story continues below this ad— Therefore, safeguards must be designed at institutional level. Think of credibility, verifiability, transparency, disclosure of ownership and distributed ownership, transparent and rule-based government advertising, stronger self-regulation, editorial charters that separate the business side from the newsroom, internal ombudsmen, legal protection for sources, reasoned and reviewable takedown orders, and media literacy for citizens.— The Digital News Publishers Association has voluntarily drawn up a Code of Ethics for its members which includes principles like accuracy, right of reply, respect for intellectual property rights and grievance redressal mechanism.— Remember the balance: press freedom is not press immunity. Article 19(2) restrictions, Mill’s harm principle and Gandhi’s warning on the uncontrolled pen all remind us that the same power that exposes wrongdoing can also ruin reputations. QUESTION 2 (Case Study)Apply the similar framework given in the theoretical question above and use it to arrive at an ethically justifiable decision in the following caselet.Story continues below this adYou are a senior investigative journalist with a leading national news organisation. For eight months you have been tracing how a flagship rural health scheme in State X bought rapid diagnostic kits, without competitive bidding, from a firm owned by a close associate of the Chief Minister. Test records from three district hospitals, handed to you on condition of anonymity by a mid-level health department official, suggest that the kits gave false negatives. Doctors at the hospitals confirm, off the record, that some patients were wrongly cleared and sent home.One page in your file, a signed approval note, is a photocopy that you have not been able to authenticate. A junior officer named in the papers may have only forwarded them on instructions.When you submit the story, your editor-in-chief asks you to hold it, citing “legal risk”. The next day the owner praises your work, offers you the headship of the national capital bureau, and mentions that the group has applications pending before the State government and that the State is among the organisation’s largest advertisers. (Representational image generated by AI)You decline to drop the story. Within days, the firm’s lawyers send a legal notice threatening criminal defamation proceedings. A police officer informs you that a notice asking you to disclose your source and hand over the documents is “under consideration”. Your husband, a government employee, hears that his transfer is “being reviewed”. A coordinated online campaign brands you “anti-national”. A rival digital platform offers to publish the documents in full within the week, unedited. Late one night, your source calls: he is afraid of being identified and asks you to “drop it”.Questions:(a) Identify the ethical issues and dilemmas involved.Story continues below this ad(b) Who are the stakeholders, and what options are available to you? Critically evaluate each of them.(c) Which course of action would you adopt, and why?(d) What institutional measures would you suggest to protect investigative journalists from such pressures?Express Tip: ‘The Defence Tip’Before you finish the above ethics case study, ask yourself four questions:1. Can I defend my choice ethically?(Which principles support it: truth, public interest, fairness, minimising harm? Why is it better than the alternatives?)Story continues below this ad2. Have I been fair to everyone named in the story?(Have I verified the facts and avoided harming someone who may only have followed instructions?)3. Have I protected both the source and the public?(Is the source’s identity safe? Is anyone still at risk while the story waits?)4. Is my decision both principled and practical?(Does it uphold integrity without being reckless? Can it be implemented, and can it trigger institutional reforms?)— A strong ethics answer will resist the two extremes— “publish at any cost” and “drop it to protect yourself and your family”. A free press needs courage, but it cannot be built on courage alone. The journalist in the caselet shows what courage looks like when it is exercised well— verify the facts, be fair to those named, protect the source, put the pressure on record and use institutional routes before leaving the institution. (Refer: 1. UPSC Ethics Simplified: What makes a good journalist? Philosophers’ lessons that hold true for civil servants too , 2. Code of ethics for digital news websites)For any queries and feedback, contact raveena.baneta@indianexpress.com. Click Here to read the UPSC Essentials magazine for September 2026. Subscribe to our UPSC newsletter. Stay updated with the latest UPSC articles by joining our Telegram channel – IndianExpress UPSC Hub, and follow us on Instagram and X.