It’s been five years, and I hadn’t even noticed. It was only when a colleague jogged my memory that it struck me—I have been Readers’ Editor at ThePrint for five years.
My first reaction was to shake my head in disbelief and exclaim, “Really? I don’t believe it!”
And truly, it came as a surprise. It seems just like yesterday that I wrote my first Readers’ Editor column and began my daily interaction with readers by email.
I have become so accustomed to logging into the Readers’ Editor mailbox, reading and replying to your mail, that it’s become a second nature to me. Automatic. Reflexive. Like checking the mobile phone each morning.
The joy is that the mailbox is always full. Well, almost always. You readers, are great communicators. You like to share your views on every subject—not just issues ThePrint has written about, but also many we haven’t even thought of, such as “One Death and Some Questions”.
You’re annoyed with us when we get something wrong or write something that you disagree with; you’re pleased when you approve of what we’ve written. You complain, you compliment, you urge us to write about this and delete that.
I want to say a big thank you. For five years of feedback. For holding up the mirror to our content. For being watchful, alert, and understanding of our limitations. And for the applause.
However, more than the praise, which of course we enjoy, thank you for being critical readers of ThePrint, most of all for constantly arguing with us. Keep it coming. While reading some readers’ diatribes against ThePrint—or criticism of my replies to you—I can honestly say I’ve never felt the urge to respond angrily.
On the contrary, I welcome it.
It makes us at ThePrint think. It makes us revisit the principles of good journalism, the editorial direction we have taken, and the fact that the scales must always be balanced.
As Readers Editor, I thank you for keeping this feedback channel alive and happening. I couldn’t have gotten through the last five years without you. You have been my constant companion, and I’m happy in the company I keep.
Seriously: It would have been extremely disheartening to log in to the Readers’ Editor mailbox and find that I’ve got no mail.
An empty mailbox indicates indifference – that’s the last response ThePrint wants from you.
As I wrote in 2023, “Scold us to your heart’s content, berate us, eat us for breakfast — but do stay in touch.”
A privilege and a responsibility
This anniversary gives me a chance to share with you what I’ve learnt in these five years as Readers’ Editor. A lot.
First, to respect the reader. To take your views seriously. In practical terms, that means I must read all mail that lands in the mailbox, and I must reply to all of you, even if it is to say ‘No’.
I must share your views with ThePrint team—I am acutely aware that this is a two-way communication, not a one-way street.
I believe I have faithfully replied to each one of you who’s written to me. If I missed out on some, forgive the lapse. It wasn’t intentional.
The second lesson is one in humility. Over the last 60 months, I have understood that being Readers’ Editor is a privilege. A responsibility. It’s also demanding—you demand accountability from us. That’s partly why I was appointed as Readers’ Editor in July 2021.
Six months into being Readers’ Editor, I did reflect upon how I defined my role. In December that year, I wrote, “I see the Readers’ Editor as someone who tries to explain ThePrint to its readers and vice versa, someone who builds bridges between the two, as well as someone who takes her colleagues to task when necessary. There have been times when I haven’t agreed with a reader’s comments but that is because I have felt it was unjustified, not because I feel obliged to blindly defend the website.’’
I do see myself as a bridge that connects readers and ThePrint – a sort of human wi-fi system for them.
Especially when you write to the Readers’ Editor because you felt strongly about a matter—and you expect a reply. You trust me to share your views with members of ThePrint team. I do that – and more.
Every three months, I try to devote a Readers’ Editor column to readers mail to me. I share as many as I can. Here’s one example—Complaints, corrections, compliments – What ThePrint readers write in about.
When you submit articles, which many of you do more frequently every year, you hope we will say ‘Yes’ and publish them. When we don’t, you wait for a reply. I do just that. Usually I write, “Thank you for thinking of ThePrint, but we cannot publish your piece,” and many of you reply graciously, “Thank you so much for your prompt reply.”
No hard feelings.
In December 2025, one reader rightly called me out and reminded me that I must respect each reader and always be respectful in my replies. We rejected his submitted article, and he wrote, “This submission was met with a curt, one-line dismissal: ‘We do not entertain unsolicited articles’.”
That was me. I apologised and have been careful to never repeat the mistake of being “curt”.
Above all, you depend on me to initiate action when necessary on your behalf. When you point out genuine factual or grammatical errors, you trust me to pass them on and ensure that they are corrected.
I think ThePrint has promptly acted on all such complaints.
When you object to reports or opinion articles – which happens regularly – you want me to share them with the writers. And you know what? The writers have often written back with their clarifications.
The third lesson I’ve learnt is to be honest. My responsibility is not to blindly defend ThePrint. It is to be fair to readers and to ThePrint.
It is to admit we are wrong – publicly. In the monthly Readers Editor column, I try to ensure that.
When we mistakenly published an article on an alleged statement by former Bangladesh President Sheikh Hasina before she fled Dhaka in August 2024, and another which incorrectly claimed that “150 gm of semen” was found in the private parts of the rape and murder victim at the RG Kar Medical College and Hospital, Kolkata, both were removed from ThePrint website.
I wrote about both in this Readers Editor column.
Building a bridge
The fourth learning is to fulfil the objectives I wrote about when I became Readers’ Editor. To ‘build a bridge’ between ThePrint and readers.
I’ve tried to explain ThePrint to readers. I believe that if I explain how we function, how we create and produce editorial content, and the challenges we face, the readers will gain an understanding of our approach to journalism.
I saw no point in writing reams on the principles of good journalism practices. I wanted to show, not tell, with examples from ThePrint’s work.
Over the last five years, I have tried to introduce you to ThePrint, the teams that run different departments—from marketing to the various editorial sections and the stories they write or shoot.
For example, one Readers’ Editor column covered what goes behind the scenes to produce the explanatory video, Cut the Clutter, five days a week, or why we write a 50-word edit.
Other columns described the editing desks, the graphics team, the video and photography departments, the science reporters, the feature writers, the speed desk, etc.
I’ve tried to explain how journalists went about their work – often in difficult circumstances, put faces to bylines: Covid pandemic, the Sri Lankan economic crisis (2019), the violence in Manipur, Pahalgam-Operation Sindoor, Air India crash in Ahmedabad, Delhi car blast, general and state elections, Nepal students uprising, the Jantar Mantar protests and other important coverage from August 2021 to August 2026.
Complaints, complaints, complaints
The fifth lesson in my education as Readers’ Editor has been to keep a level head, to be calm, patient and, when necessary, firm but polite.
Over the years, the mailbox has been filled with hatred and venom. Messages also had communal content. By 2026, these are fewer and further between. Between 2021 and 2023, readers regularly shared views about ThePrint’s coverage – and especially its opinion articles—through a Hindu-Muslim bias.
Mail often accused ThePrint of being biased. Here is what I wrote in December 2022, “I receive frequent emails accusing ThePrint of “anti-Hindu bias”, of “peddling fake narratives” or “paid news” — “your newspaper (sic) is biased, period”, wrote one aggrieved reader…’’
The common thread in these reproaches is that ThePrint does not give adequate space to the Right but promotes “anti-Hindu” sentiment. That we were sympathetic to the left-liberals.
This accusation is unfair and untrue. Repeatedly, I wrote back to readers pointing out that all views were being given space and that ThePrint had no agenda –except to be balanced, fair, and reflect different shades of opinion. I pointed out that we had columnists like R Rajagopalan, Seshadri Chari, Jaithirth Rao whose views “inflect to the right”.
This fell on deaf ears of some readers who would reply in uncomplimentary language.
As Readers Editor, I learnt to keep my cool, not to reply unkindly, not to be aggressive, or to get into an argument. If readers were determined in their points of view, then so be it. As I often wrote to them, “Everyone is entitled to their views”– the readers too.
Usually, this ended the exchange of emails.
Another area of regular distress is the pop-up advertisement which accompanies articles. Readers complain that they can’t read the articles because ‘those creatures’ obscure them.
I have agreed with them but calmly tried to explain that we cannot stop pop-up ads simply because they are irritating. ThePrint, like any other news media organisation, needs them for financial support. That ends the argument but not the complaints!
Ditto with submissions. In the last two years, I have received a constant stream of articles for publication in ThePrint. It is wonderful that so many readers wish to see their name in ThePrint, but it’s impossible to accommodate them all.
More often than not, I have to refuse. I have dealt with it extensively in this Readers Editor: Readers have the last word at ThePrint. Keep sending us your mail.
However, some readers can be persistent: They repeatedly mail articles and want to know how to improve their writing, topic-selection – and could I please help them?
I take a deep breath and recall when I started out in journalism. I too sent articles into publications. I wanted to see my byline. So, I reply to the readers’ mail with writing briefs.
On the other hand, ThePrint colleagues are occasionally lax in replying to readers’ mail on their stories. Once again, I had to firmly remind them to do so.
My colleagues are usually obliging but sometimes I have to constantly remind them to make a correction or to reply to a mail. Again, patience thy name is Shailaja.
That’s it then. As Readers’ Editor, I have other takeaways but we’ll keep those for another column.
The Readers Editor’s mission? To listen, learn, and locate ThePrint at the heart of conversations in the news and with its readers.
Bring on another year.
Shailaja Bajpai is ThePrint’s Readers’ Editor. Please write in with your views and complaints to readers.editor@theprint.in
(Edited by Ratan Priya)