Women in Cricket Journalism Have Always Faced Sexism. Social Media Has Made the Abuse Relentless

Twenty-four years have passed since an India-England one-day international at Mumbai's Wankhede Stadium. England won by five runs. Andrew Flintoff celebrated by running across the outfield and twirling his shirt, and Sourav Ganguly later answered with his famous shirt-waving celebration on the Lord's balcony. Those images remain part of cricket's living memory. But for the woman journalist covering that match, it was also an early chapter in a profession where her presence was often judged before her reporting.

More than two decades later, the landscape of cricket journalism has changed. The journey from print to television, Instagram, TikTok and other digital platforms has given journalists access to larger audiences than ever before. Yet that expansion has carried a cost, one borne particularly heavily by women. Sexism in cricket journalism is an old problem; social media has turned it into a form of public abuse that can follow a journalist around the clock.

Finding a place in the press box, protecting a voice online

During her early experiences at Wankhede, the author was among the very few women in the cricket press contingent. Establishing professional credibility was a challenge in itself. Working among male colleagues, facing comparisons with predecessors and repeatedly proving her expertise became part of her working life.

Her career passed through several important periods in Indian cricket, including the 2026 World Cup, the 2026-08 India-Australia series associated with the Monkeygate controversy, the 2026 T20 World Cup and the 2026 World Cup. Interviewing figures such as Sachin Tendulkar, Shane Warne and Brian Lara also formed part of her professional experience.

She worked as cricket editor at NDTV 24x7 and later returned to cricket coverage through the digital programme The Scoop. During that period, the distribution model of sports journalism was changing rapidly. In the past, an article or television programme was discussed through newspaper pages and among viewers. Now, a few seconds from the same programme can be extracted and distributed to millions through social media.

Her 2026 article questioning the male gaze and the presentation of women in IPL broadcasting went viral. The response included accusations that she was jealous and overly feminist. The reaction exposed an important distinction. Criticism can address a journalist's arguments, but when a debate shifts towards her gender and personal identity, it has moved beyond professional disagreement.

The business of social media and journalism stripped of context

Instagram and TikTok now play an increasingly important role in cricket journalism. Longer programmes are cut into clips lasting one to three minutes. Their purpose is to attract viewers, expand a programme's reach and generate digital engagement. Impressions, shares and video popularity have become important measures of editorial success.

The problem begins when a short extract from a longer discussion reaches audiences without its original context. A journalist's political observation, a question about gender equality or criticism of a former cricketer can be compressed into a few seconds. Viewers often respond without hearing the full discussion. The subject of debate then shifts from the argument to the journalist's personal identity.

In my years of watching matches and following sports journalism, one lesson has remained clear: cricket's public life does not end at the boundary rope. A question in the press box, an observation in the commentary box and a video published online all become part of the sport's social memory. But when distribution speed matters more than context, journalism's responsibilities can weaken.

In the era of radio commentary, a commentator's voice travelled across different parts of the country. Regional languages and digital video have made cricket discussion even more accessible today. That is a positive development. Yet wider reach does not guarantee a safer environment. A viewer who dislikes a journalist's opinion can now reach her social-media account directly. Disagreement can quickly turn into abuse, racist remarks and threats.

Cricket, politics and the double test facing women journalists

The challenges facing women journalists are not always confined to gender. Political and national-identity disputes surrounding cricket can intensify personal attacks. One example emerged from The Hundred, when the selection of Pakistani bowler Abrar Ahmed by Indian-owned franchise Sunrisers Leeds became controversial.

Former India captain Sunil Gavaskar made comments about the participation of Pakistani players that the author challenged. She subsequently faced intense criticism and abusive responses online. In this episode, a commercial recruitment decision in cricket became entangled with arguments about national security and political identity.

An important question follows: does a journalist have the same freedom to challenge the opinion of a celebrated former player as anyone else? Former international players naturally retain influence over public discussion. But reputation does not confer immunity from scrutiny. A journalist's responsibility is not simply to repeat popular opinions; it is also to examine the reasoning behind them.

The author's criticism of IPL cheerleading belongs to the same wider debate. She questioned whether the predominantly white composition of cheerleading teams reflected attitudes connected to colourism and the objectification of women. The issue draws attention to the role of women and the quality of their representation in cricket's commercial presentation. Treating female performers and journalists merely as visual attractions or sources of controversy diminishes the professional contribution that the sports industry should recognize.

The line between disagreement and harassment

In the author's experience, the nature of online abuse changed over time. Criticism was no longer confined to her reporting or opinions. She encountered sexualized comments, racist insults, political accusations and attacks on her personal identity. One response included a threat of physical violence.

Disagreeing with a journalist is part of public debate; threatening violence is not professional criticism but a serious safety concern. Cricket media must understand this distinction. Social-media companies need effective systems for reporting threats, removing abusive content and escalating serious cases to the appropriate security authorities. The responsibilities of publishers and broadcasters cannot end when they put a journalist on air. They must also provide clear support and protection procedures for their employees and contributors.

Another contradiction is evident. Digital platforms give journalists access to enormous audiences, but the personal cost of harassment often falls on the journalist alone. Where institutional support is weak, experienced women may avoid controversial subjects or withdraw from public platforms. The loss extends beyond individual careers: cricket journalism also loses diversity of experience and opinion.

The old press box remembers stories that a new digital feed sometimes leaves behind. I have sat in football press boxes asking cricket questions and learned that a sport's real story extends beyond its score. In cricket, the question is equally important: how much dignity and protection are given to the people who write and tell the game's stories, as well as those who perform on the field?

The next question belongs to cricket institutions

Increasing women's participation will not be enough if they cannot work on equal terms and express their views safely. Cricket boards, franchises, broadcasters, publishers and social-media companies cannot separate themselves from this responsibility. They need rapid responses to online threats, clear policies against gender discrimination and institutional support for journalists.

A stadium is a diary written in noise, then gradually erased by empty seats. In the digital world, however, words do not disappear so easily; they remain in screenshots, videos and comment threads. The question is whether cricket's industry will give the next generation of women journalists merely a platform to reach audiences, or the right to speak without fear. The sport's next major test may lie in that answer.