Complaints, corrections, compliments – What ThePrint readers write in about

Your feedback is invaluable as it helps ThePrint team to correct, reset its compass, and better align content to readers’ interests.

Illustration by ThePrint

Gosh, has the media been going places, or what? Did you notice how it’s gone all ‘foreign’ on us, recently?

In the last month, whenever you opened a newspaper, online or offline, switched to a news channel, browsed social media or visited us at ThePrint, chances are you’d find Ukraine-Russia or the fall and rise of governments in Pakistan heading the headlines. Alternatively, you’d be in Colombo, alongside Indian reporters who rushed there to describe the impact of an economic crisis so dire it forced people out onto the streets of Sri Lanka.

It’s been years since events abroad—this time in three different countries—have upstaged domestic news in the Indian media, that too, for weeks on end. Yet, that’s what has happened: Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has dominated the news cycle for over two months, Pakistan hit the headlines and stayed there after a no-confidence motion by the opposition against Imran Khan in early March, and Sri Lanka became news at the beginning of April when President Gotabaya Rajapaksa declared an emergency.

At ThePrint, these stories received plenty of traction, in both the reporting and opinion sections. For instance, the website sent correspondent Vandana Menon to Sri Lanka, one of the first Indian print media organisations to do so.

As Readers’ Editor, I looked forward to and expected reactions from readers, especially since ThePrint’s coverage of all three was widely read or watched, at least, initially. I did get mails, but most were by way of requests—Could ThePrint write on NATO or the European Union’s possible military involvement in the war, asked one reader. But besides suggestions, readers either didn’t feel strongly enough about these issues—even those in our neighbourhood—or they had developed reader fatigue.

You’ve got mail

What did the readers write in about?

I don’t know if this is a good thing or bad, but since January 2022, readers of ThePrint have not been unduly exercised by what they’ve read or seen on the website—mail to the Readers’ Editor has come in a steady flow, not in a flood. This may please and relieve the editors: It suggests readers are satisfied and, therefore, not writing in with howls of protest; it also suggests that we are doing the right things, in the right ways.

However, before smugness sets in, let me quickly add that it could also stem from a lack of reader interest. That would be a pity: I would rather hear from readers, angry or agitated, than not hear from them at all. Your feedback is invaluable as it helps ThePrint team to correct, reset its compass, and better align its content to the readers’ interests.

So, please, readers, keep the mail coming—praise us or hit us, if you must, just not below the belt.

Complaints and corrections

The mails that have popped up in the Readers’ Editor mail can be roughly classified under 4 Cs: complaints and corrections, comments and yes, the occasional compliment.

The subjects have varied: You harbour anti-Hindu sentiments, say some, you give misleading headlines, complain others; you have blocked me, and, oh hey, what just happened to my subscription? You-know-what, I’m cancelling my subscription (oh dear, please don’t).

Someone wants more coverage of this while another wants it of that—will someone please tell Shekhar Gupta (Publisher and Editor-in Chief, ThePrint) to speak about such-and-such in his ‘Cut the Clutter’ bhashan? And why on earth do you accept advertisements for a product that doesn’t get delivered?

And so it goes.

Let me expand on some of these comments.

First up, complaints.

Many pertain to what some readers detect is a ‘bias’ defect in ThePrint.

They read an ‘anti-Hindu bias’ into many articles. One reader summed up the general sentiment, by writing: “Your coverage every day displays extreme anti-Hindu bias.” Similar remarks, from another reader, were much more virulent with wild, unsubstantiated accusations against ThePrint, in language so offensive it does not bear repetition.

A reader was outraged by the review of the film Kashmir Files and insisted ThePrint had ‘deep biases’, that it belonged to a ‘group of reporters’ who have been ‘distorting events and history since Independence’.

There have been several complaints about views expressed by Shekhar Gupta in his weekly column National Interest, accusing him of similar biases. One reader said his articles reflected ThePrint ‘veering more and more in service of Leftist liberal’ ideology.

How does one reply to such mail? Since this criticism is not substantiated by factual evidence, I acknowledge the reader’s right to their opinion, and ever so politely remind them that ThePrint is committed to fair and objective journalism.

A frequent grouse is the lack of space for comments under individual reports—readers say they are being denied the right to express their views. I have explained to them that this facility was suspended because many people (mis)used it to abuse reporters – and why don’t they write to the Readers’ Editor instead?

There was also the curious case of the ‘blocked’ reader. He claimed he’d been ‘blocked’ from commenting on ThePrint’s YouTube channel—where this facility continues— but after a thorough investigation, ThePrint’s technical team found no such thing. The mystery continues…..

This leads me to the next type of complaint: It’s about other technical issues. A lack of access to ThePrint’s YouTube channel and subscription anomalies lead this list. Most of these have been resolved amicably.

Moving on to corrections: Oops, this is where ThePrint gets caught out by readers. Luckily, most of the mistakes are not factual errors.

One alert reader reads the headlines with utmost care and has, correctly, found fault with several. ‘Pakistan staring at $20 billion CAD. All eyes on ImranKhan’s address to the nation’ is one where he, rightly, observed that the average reader didn’t know what the initials ‘CAD’ meant or stood for.

Then there was this headline: ‘Former NSE chief didn’t have defined policies for server access to aid manipulation’, where the lack of a comma entirely changed the meaning. The headline ought to have read, ‘Former NSE chief didn’t have defined policies for server access, to aid manipulation’. After the reader’s observation, it was changed.

Comments and compliments

As for comments, many of these come with suggestions: Please write about the Metro car shed in Mumbai; please investigate the ‘genocide’ of minorities in Pakistan, and when will you write about the impact of Covid on schools with repeated shutdowns? Why not begin a children’s vertical at ThePrint?

One persistent reader wanted to know my thoughts on ‘bullet train, Ram Mandir, Patel memorial, new airports which will mostly be used by Wealthy…’, and when I said I wasn’t competent to comment on these, he said he was very disappointed in me. Oh well, win some, lose some.

As for compliments, yes, we have received a few of those, too, along the way. A reader appreciated the ‘wonderful reporting in general’, a second enjoyed the ‘OTC’ with Malavika Sarukkai, a third wah–wahed a ‘brilliant’ piece on Shyam Benegal’s TV series ‘Samvidhan’. Thank you, readers.

Then, there are readers who want to be read: They submit articles they have written for publication. While ThePrint is grateful for this interest, it doesn’t publish unsolicited articles, unless they are, well, too good to be not published. If you have a good one, first pitch it to [e-mail] and wait for a response.

Finally, we have at least one reader who thinks ThePrint needs help—and has offered his services. He writes that he can help boost traffic, brand awareness and sales with his own recipe for online success.

Think I better forward his offer, immediately, to the editors.

Shailaja Bajpai is ThePrint’s Readers’ Editor. Please write in with your views, complaints to [e-mail]