The perilous life of the district journalist in India

‘Laws alone are not enough to save independent and courageous journalists’
| Photo Credit: Getty Images/iStockphoto

The brutal murder of an independent young journalist, Mukesh Chandrakar, in Chhattisgarh, has once again highlighted the threats to life and the precarious nature of journalism at the district and mofussil levels. Journalists at the grass-root level in many parts of the country face similar challenges. Police and other reports suggest that Mukesh was murdered by a local contractor who was enraged by the journalist’s reports questioning the quality of a road built by the contractor. This case brings to mind the killing, in 1988, of another young journalist, Umesh Dobhal, from Uttarakhand’s Garhwal town, who was allegedly murdered by the powerful and politically connected liquor mafia that was angered by his exposés.

Limitations of the law

Mukesh’s murder has also exposed the irony that Chhattisgarh is probably the first and only State to have enacted a law, namely The Chhattisgarh Protection of Media Persons Act, 2023, to prevent violence and ensure the safety and the security of journalists while carrying out their duties. This case shows that laws alone are not enough to save independent and courageous journalists such as Mukesh, who was actively reporting from Bastar, Chhattisgarh, and exposing wrongdoing and corruption in developmental work in the region.

There is no doubt that district-level or mofussil journalists such as Mukesh and Umesh play a crucial role in bringing “unseen and unheard” stories from the hinterland. They are truly the “voice of the voiceless” as they belong to local communities, understand their pain, grievances, and struggles, and are deeply moved by stories of suffering and deprivation. Most of these journalists are not formally trained in journalism schools. Yet, they pursue their journalism out of a passion and a commitment to raising local issues and exposing corruption and wrongdoing in developmental work.

Despite their dedication, the nature of their job and working conditions for most mofussil journalists are precarious. Many journalists work as stringers or retainers, with no job security, minimal and undignified salaries, and extremely hostile working conditions. But they often provide vital leads and act as local guides and facilitators for journalists from the metro cities and big media houses who occasionally visit these places to cover stories. However, they rarely receive bylines, recognition, or respect for their contributions. Like their stories, they too are mostly “unseen and unheard”.

The lifeline

However, one cannot imagine flourishing regional language journalism without these stringers and retainers who feed the regional, district, and local pages and bulletins with their stories. In contrast, most stories in mainstream language newspapers and news channels revolve around routine crime reports, press releases, press conferences, or sound bites issued by local administrations and politicians. Occasionally, some manage to cover civic issues and local community problems.

Also read | Chennai Press Club condemns murder of journalist Mukesh Chandrakar

Unfortunately, the space for such stories in mainstream language news media is shrinking due to various factors, including pressure from local advertisers and increasing dependence on and alignment with State governments. It is well known that a significant portion of advertising revenue for these outlets comes from the same powerful and vested interests and their nexus, which have been thriving on the misappropriation of developmental funds.

This situation has led many young journalists such as Mukesh to pursue independent journalism, leveraging the opportunities provided by technology and platforms such as YouTube, social media, and a few independent digital news sites. Unsurprisingly, some of the most hard-hitting, critical, and investigative stories now appear on these platforms, which irritate and anger the powerful nexus of contractors, criminals, officers, and politicians at the district and regional levels. This nexus, mentioned in the report of the N.N. Vohra Committee — it was constituted by the Union government in the 1990s to investigate the criminalisation of politics — remains powerful and active, particularly in resource-rich States such as Chhattisgarh and Jharkhand. It is no surprise that the main accused in Mukesh’s murder is a politically ambitious contractor.

The end note

But the role of independent journalists such as Mukesh Chandrakar at the district level is crucial — they are the watchdogs for developmental projects and social welfare schemes. As routine and limited reporting by mainstream news media at the district level often avoids covering these issues in a critical way, it is journalists such as Mukesh who take huge risks to expose the powerful nexus operating at the grassroot level. Their independent, investigative, and critical reporting challenges this nexus, ensuring transparency and accountability in development projects and welfare schemes, and empowering local communities.

The presence of independent and critical journalists such as Mukesh must be encouraged and protected, particularly at the local levels where accountability mechanisms are often weaker. Journalists play a crucial role in uncovering the abuse of power, but their work frequently attracts the ire of powerful vested interests, resulting in threats, attacks, and even murder. The impunity enjoyed by such attackers not only endangers the lives of journalists but also fosters a culture of fear and self-censorship, undermining investigative reporting. This erosion of press freedom jeopardises the public’s right to know, weakening democratic institutions and leaving citizens vulnerable to unchecked corruption and injustice.

It is high time that we ensure that Mukesh Chandrakar’s sacrifice does not go in vain.

Anand Pradhan is Professor of Journalism at the Indian Institute Of Mass Communication (IIMC), Dhenkanal, Odisha. The views expressed are personal