Rupee Resilience and the Politics of Panic
In the unforgiving theatre of modern economics, perception often moves faster than policy. A currency does not merely trade on reserves, interest rates, and remittances; it trades on confidence. And in Sri Lanka today, the battle over confidence has become deeply political.
Over the last two days, the Sri Lankan rupee has emerged as one of the strongest-performing currencies in Asia, a remarkable turnaround for a nation that only a few years ago stood at the edge of sovereign bankruptcy. The strengthening of the rupee reflects several factors: improved foreign reserves, tighter monetary discipline, increased tourism inflows, and a degree of international confidence returning to Colombo’s economic management under the administration of President Anura Kumara Dissanayake and the National People's Power government.
Yet, during the very period the rupee was stabilising and strengthening, parts of Sri Lanka’s media ecosystem appeared determined to narrate the exact opposite story.
Headlines warning of “rupee collapse,” dramatic commentary predicting currency instability, and speculative panic pieces suddenly became common across several online platforms and television outlets. One would have imagined the Central Bank vaults were empty, and queues for fuel had returned to Galle Face. But reality told a different story.
Critics within government circles now argue that certain media organisations have crossed the line between economic journalism and economic sabotage. Among the names increasingly discussed in political conversations are Newswire, Hiru TV, and Derana TV.
Newswire repeatedly carried articles suggesting that the Sri Lankan rupee was “collapsing,” creating panic and uncertainty among the public, yet failed to give similar prominence today when the Sri Lankan rupee emerged as one of the strongest-performing currencies in Asia. Critics now question whether certain sections of the media are engaging in balanced journalism or deliberately attempting to damage confidence in the country’s economy and the National People's Power government. The controversy has also revived debate surrounding the past conduct of individuals linked to Newswire and their alleged political connections, including claims involving former MP Ranjan Ramanayake. The larger question being asked in political circles is whether ethical standards and journalistic responsibility are being upheld when economic reporting appears selective, sensationalised, and politically motivated.
The accusation is not merely that these outlets reported volatility. Markets fluctuate; currencies move. That is normal. The accusation is more serious: that there was a sustained attempt to amplify fear, undermine confidence, and create a perception of economic instability at a politically sensitive moment for the NPP administration.
In mature economies, irresponsible financial reporting is treated with extraordinary seriousness. A misleading rumour about a bank can trigger withdrawals. A false narrative about a currency can influence investor psychology. Economic panic is contagious. Sri Lanka, having painfully experienced financial collapse in 2022, can ill afford politically motivated speculation masquerading as journalism.
Government supporters point to a curious silence now that the rupee has regained strength. The same outlets that allegedly rushed to publish alarmist stories appear far less enthusiastic about highlighting positive indicators. If the decline of the rupee deserved banner headlines, should not its recovery receive equal prominence?
This asymmetry raises uncomfortable questions.
Is there an editorial bias against the current government? Are certain media actors still emotionally and politically invested in the failures of the past? Or is bad economic news simply more commercially profitable than stability?
The debate has also revived controversy surrounding sections of Sri Lanka’s media establishment and their historical relationship with political power. Old allegations involving politically motivated leaks, selective reporting, and media manipulation have once again resurfaced in public discourse. For many within the NPP movement, the concern is broader than exchange rates; it is about whether segments of the information industry are attempting to manufacture instability through narrative warfare.
None of this means governments should suppress criticism. Democracies require scrutiny. Journalists must remain free to question economic policy, taxation, debt restructuring, and monetary management. But there is a profound difference between rigorous criticism and deliberate fearmongering.
The Central Bank of Sri Lanka, financial regulators, and media watchdogs may eventually need to examine whether speculative reporting intended to destabilise market confidence falls within the boundaries of responsible journalism. Countries across the world maintain safeguards against coordinated financial misinformation, especially when such reporting could trigger broader economic harm.
Sri Lanka’s economic recovery remains fragile. Inflation has eased, reserves have improved, and investor sentiment is cautiously returning, but the country is still rebuilding credibility after one of the worst economic collapses in its post-independence history. In such an environment, reckless narratives can carry real consequences.
For the NPP government, the challenge is now twofold: stabilise the economy while also confronting what supporters describe as an entrenched ecosystem of political-media hostility. Whether these allegations amount to genuine conspiracy or simply partisan frustration will remain a matter of fierce debate.
But one reality is undeniable. The rupee did not collapse this week. It strengthened. And in politics, as in markets, facts have an inconvenient habit of surviving hysteria.