Here's how the regional media reported the latest religion data from 2011 census

Only a handful of papers could stay away from sensationalising their headlines.

The question of reservations and quotas tends to dominate pre-election promises, which is why various opposition parties had been demanding release of the statistics on economic and social status of different castes. But what was released instead was the population data by religion from the 2011 Census of India.

The data shows that the population of Hindus in the country has dipped below 80% for the first time even as the community still makes for a lion’s share of 79.8% of the population, while Muslims make up the next big chunk at 14.2% and Christian, Sikhs, Buddhists and Jains together comprise roughly 5%.

That the Muslim population grew by 0.8% in the 10-year period while the Hindu population declined by 0.7%, was perhaps bound to create news, particularly as the figures had been compiled and were ready to be released in March 2014, but were held back by the previous United Progressive Alliance  on the eve of the Lok Sabha elections. The data has now been released by the ruling National Democratic Alliance government, led by the Bharatiya Janata Party, on the eve of the Bihar Assembly elections.

Here's a look at how some of the front pages of newspapers across the country reported the release of these figures.

English press

The Hindustan Times headline, which announced that Hindus were now less than 80% of the country’s population, was termed “sensationalist” by many observers on social media. Even though the subheading clarified that the rate of Muslim population growth in the country is slowing down, the heading did result in some eyebrows being raised.

The Hindu, on the other hand, highlighted the fact that the Muslim population growth rate has actually slowed down over the last decades.

The Telegraph, meanwhile, went with this clever graphic to display just how large the Hindu population is in the country as compared to other religions.

Hindi press

The Times group's Navbharat Times went for an explosive headline that literally translates to "The political data of religion", and chose to highlight the fact that the growth rate of Muslim population was the fastest.

Dainik Jagran too pointed out that the Muslim share in the population has increased.

Amar Ujala made use of graphics to say the same thing and announced that the growth rate of Hindus was slower than that of Muslims.

The Gujarat edition of the Rajasthan Patrika highlighted the 79.8% Hindus and 14.2% Muslim figures while presenting a pie-chart of the respective share of various religions in the total population. It also highlighted that the growth rates across all religions had, in fact, slowed down.

Marathi press

Shiv Sena’s mouthpiece Saamna in Maharashtra ran with the protests by the Patel community for reservations in Gujarat as its lead story. However, the story on the census data roared that Hindus were still strong in Hindustan [India] with an exclamation mark.

On the other hand, Lokmat pointed out that in spite of the reduction in the birth rate, the percentage of Muslims in the population has risen.

Kannada press

In Karnataka, Udayvani Karnataka ran the story with the headline “Muslims increase more than Hindus! Percent of Hindus declines”.

However, the same newspaper had a different and more tempered headline in its English edition and the exclamation mark was gone too. “Hindu population declined; Muslims increased: 2011 census,” the headline said.

Prajvani, another Kannada newspaper, ran with “Rise of the Muslim population” as the headline along with Religious census: The declining number of Hindus” as the tag for the story.

Punjabi press

The Punjabi Jagran said, "Hindus and Sikhs decline as Muslims rise".

The Punjabi Tribune took the same approach and said, "Hindu and Sikh population declines in the country"

Everywhere else

In Gujarat, the Divya Bhaskar’s headline announced that the Hindu population fell by 0.7% and that of Muslims grew by 08.%, according to census data.


Ei Samay in West Bengal ran with a straightforward “Muslim population growth rate is 24%, Hindu 16.8%, says religious census” as its headline.

Assam Tribune focussed on the Muslim population in the state.

The Sangai Express from Manipur also focussed on the state and highlighted that Hindus and Christians were approximately the same number in the state.

Support our journalism by subscribing to Scroll+ here. We welcome your comments at
Sponsored Content BY 

Do you really need to use that plastic straw?

The hazards of single-use plastic items, and what to use instead.

In June 2018, a distressed whale in Thailand made headlines around the world. After an autopsy it’s cause of death was determined to be more than 80 plastic bags it had ingested. The pictures caused great concern and brought into focus the urgency of the fight against single-use plastic. This term refers to use-and-throw plastic products that are designed for one-time use, such as takeaway spoons and forks, polythene bags styrofoam cups etc. In its report on single-use plastics, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) has described how single-use plastics have a far-reaching impact in the environment.

Dense quantity of plastic litter means sights such as the distressed whale in Thailand aren’t uncommon. Plastic products have been found in the airways and stomachs of hundreds of marine and land species. Plastic bags, especially, confuse turtles who mistake them for jellyfish - their food. They can even exacerbate health crises, such as a malarial outbreak, by clogging sewers and creating ideal conditions for vector-borne diseases to thrive. In 1988, poor drainage made worse by plastic clogging contributed to the devastating Bangladesh floods in which two-thirds of the country was submerged.

Plastic litter can, moreover, cause physiological harm. Burning plastic waste for cooking fuel and in open air pits releases harmful gases in the air, contributing to poor air quality especially in poorer countries where these practices are common. But plastic needn’t even be burned to cause physiological harm. The toxic chemical additives in the manufacturing process of plastics remain in animal tissue, which is then consumed by humans. These highly toxic and carcinogenic substances (benzene, styrene etc.) can cause damage to nervous systems, lungs and reproductive organs.

The European Commission recently released a list of top 10 single-use plastic items that it plans to ban in the near future. These items are ubiquitous as trash across the world’s beaches, even the pristine, seemingly untouched ones. Some of them, such as styrofoam cups, take up to a 1,000 years to photodegrade (the breakdown of substances by exposure to UV and infrared rays from sunlight), disintegrating into microplastics, another health hazard.

More than 60 countries have introduced levies and bans to discourage the use of single-use plastics. Morocco and Rwanda have emerged as inspiring success stories of such policies. Rwanda, in fact, is now among the cleanest countries on Earth. In India, Maharashtra became the 18th state to effect a ban on disposable plastic items in March 2018. Now India plans to replicate the decision on a national level, aiming to eliminate single-use plastics entirely by 2022. While government efforts are important to encourage industries to redesign their production methods, individuals too can take steps to minimise their consumption, and littering, of single-use plastics. Most of these actions are low on effort, but can cause a significant reduction in plastic waste in the environment, if the return of Olive Ridley turtles to a Mumbai beach are anything to go by.

To know more about the single-use plastics problem, visit Planet or Plastic portal, National Geographic’s multi-year effort to raise awareness about the global plastic trash crisis. From microplastics in cosmetics to haunting art on plastic pollution, Planet or Plastic is a comprehensive resource on the problem. You can take the pledge to reduce your use of single-use plastics, here.

This article was produced by the Scroll marketing team on behalf of National Geographic, and not by the Scroll editorial team.