Every week, hundreds of crimes are reported across India. Most barely make it beyond the locality where they occur. Yet a few cases suddenly take over front pages, prime-time debates and social media feeds, like the recent Ketan Agarwal case in Pune. That raises an obvious question: why do some crimes dominate the news cycle for days, while others disappear without a trace?
An old-school journalist in me would say that editorial decisions are guided by established news values. Is the crime unusual? Is the victim or the accused a public figure? Does the incident expose systemic failures in policing or governance? Does it serve a larger public interest? The more a case ticks these boxes, the greater its chances of receiving sustained media coverage.
But journalism today isn’t driven by editorial judgement alone. It runs on attention. And attention is unpredictable.
In the digital age, what spreads fastest is not always what is most important, but what is most shareable. Drama helps. So do unexpected twists, leaked chats, family disputes and emotional narratives. Cases involving affluent or influential families also tend to generate greater curiosity and prolonged discussion than those involving ordinary citizens, even when the latter may be equally serious, or more so.
Also, it wouldn’t be an exaggeration to say that today, the public itself often decides which crimes become national stories. A crime that might once have remained confined to a small town can now become a national talking point within hours. A few viral posts, a short video clip, a wave of memes, and suddenly the story is everywhere. Once it starts trending, mainstream media have little option but to follow it.
Location still matters more than we admit. Incidents in cities like Mumbai, Delhi, Bengaluru or Pune almost automatically receive more coverage. Part of it is logistics -- reporters are based there, access is easier, visuals are quicker to gather and officials are more reachable. In remote places, the same kind of case may struggle to get sustained attention simply because it’s harder to report in real time.
The availability of information also determines the lifespan of a story. If there’s CCTV footage, witness accounts, police briefings or court proceedings, the story naturally generates more updates. Without fresh details, even serious cases begin to slip from headlines. It’s not necessarily about importance; it’s about whether there’s something new to say each day.
And finally, there is the business side of news. Whether it’s TV ratings, website clicks, or social media engagement, audience response shapes what stays in focus. Stories that pull numbers tend to stay longer, not always because editors want it that way, but because the system rewards it.
So maybe the question isn’t why some crimes dominate headlines. It’s why certain stories manage to keep renewing themselves in the public eye, while others, often just as serious, quietly run out of visibility.
(The author is the Pune Bureau Chief of The Free Press Journal)
