An Editor’s Choice & Discretion

An interesting debate involving the media fraternity of north-east India recently surfaced with two major issues, is it logically correct for an editor of a daily newspaper to regularly write a column for another daily (where both competing dailies are published in the same language)? Moreover, does the practice indirectly establish that the columnist-editor simply failed to increase the visibility of his/her newspaper for years and hence went on exploiting space in the other daily, which seemingly enjoys a higher circulation and credibility? The discourse involved some professional journalists based in other parts of the country, where it was largely resolved that if the respective newspaper managements agree, the issue of an editor writing columns in separate media outlets is understood as settled.

However, for any reason, if the editorial management of the recipient media house prefers to discontinue the particular column, that should be acknowledged gracefully by the editor-columnist. At the same time, if the editor of a newspaper asks a columnist to concentrate on particular issues (or coverage areas), that should be accepted as the concerned editor’s prerogative, and the direction should not be raised as a censorship on freedom of expression. The editor-columnist may lose the space in that particular newspaper, but he/she has every right to pursue their preferred issues anywhere.

The intriguing debates kicked off soon after a social media post by a senior editor based in Meghalaya, who alleged that the management of an Assam-based daily abruptly decided to stop the said editor’s regular column.  The post described that the editor-columnist was asked by the then editor of the Guwahati newspaper to write a column for the paper. It was more than a decade back, and the columnist agreed with the idea that the newspaper allowed free and independent expression of views. However, recently, the editor sent an article on the eviction drives going on in various parts of Assam, which was seemingly a critical piece on Assam chief minister Himanta Biswa Sarma. Soon, the columnist received a message from the Guwahati newspaper saying that the management refused to carry the article. Moreover, the columnist was advised to prepare the media columns focusing only on Meghalaya issues. It pained the editor, and he immediately declared not to write for the Guwahati newspaper anymore.

New Delhi-based journalist-author Paranjoy Guha Thakurta opined that whether an editor should be writing a column for another daily should be decided by the owners/publishers of the two publications. If both publishers agree, there would be nothing unethical for the editor-columnist to write for both newspapers. In the US, this happens from time to time. However, this practice is not common in India. Regarding the prerogative of an editor/publisher to accept or reject any article or column, he believes that how the Meghalaya columnist was rejected was unacceptable. Mumbai-based journalist Gurbir Singh also asserted that if a newspaper offers a writer to write a regular column, the particular editor should not dictate to the columnist about  the content, which we can term as ‘pro establishment censorship’.

The Guwahati daily is currently facing internal and external problems to deal with rather than reacting to the social media post of the Meghalaya editor. Hundreds of its employees are now deprived of their salaries for at least two consecutive months, where the management cited the outstanding dues from the Assam information and public relations directorate (against the published advertisements. Even though the newspaper usually maintains its credibility while disseminating primary information and putting editorial viewpoints, lately the same principle is found largely compromised. While reporting the anti-CAA movement in Assam, the newspaper bluntly supported the violent agitation. Similarly, it made a series of unchecked reports over a city press club election just ahead of the Covid-19 pandemic induced nation-wide lockdown, where those reports were bent upon character assassinating the former press club secretary.  

The pandemic devastated the newspaper with shrinking circulation and advertising revenues. And it was accumulated by a section of arrogant reporter-employees, when the management remained as a mute spectator to a disorder in the making.

A serious matter to carefully think about by the media persons, indeed.

Also Read: Ensuring Media Safety in Poll-Bound Bangladesh