by Nava Thakuria
In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, as hundreds of media workers across India succumbed to the virus, fears mounted that the crisis would deeply impact the print media industry. These fears soon materialized—declining circulation figures and shrinking advertisement revenues forced several well-established newspaper groups to shut down editions, lay off employees, or close permanently. Some owners, overwhelmed by competition from digital platforms, were compelled to sell their publications.
Now, troubling signs have emerged for a pioneering media house in Northeast India, following the closure of a Dimapur-based English daily under its banner. Employees who once took pride in associating themselves with the Guwahati-based media group are now grappling with financial insecurity. The employees’ union recently reported that staff had not received salaries for over two months. Furthermore, many retired employees, including journalists, are still awaiting their rightful financial benefits as mandated by law.
This situation is unprecedented for the media house, which has, since its inception, maintained a reputation for timely salary payments and financial stability. The sudden deterioration has raised serious questions. The management has attributed the crisis to unpaid dues—amounting to nearly ₹6 crore—from the Directorate of Information and Public Relations (DIPR) of the State, related to published government advertisements in recent months.
In response, the employees’ union has appealed to the government to ensure prompt payment for all sanctioned advertisements. They have also urged the government to consider revising advertisement rates to better support media houses and allow them to uphold employee welfare. In a broader proposal, the union has recommended that the government encourage educational institutions, libraries, and public offices to regularly subscribe to local newspapers. A dedicated government fund could also be considered to ensure the survival of Assam’s print media with dignity.
While pressing for support, the union has also suggested that media houses diversify their revenue models to reduce over-dependence on government-sponsored advertisements, which may come with implicit conditions.
Amid these developments, rumors have surfaced on social media that the media house is quietly preparing for a sell-off. Unconfirmed reports suggest that a powerful national media group is interested in acquiring the entire operation, while a regional-language newspaper within the group is allegedly on the verge of being sold to another media entity. However, the current management has categorically denied these claims, branding them as baseless. In an official statement, the group reaffirmed its commitment to editorial independence, journalistic integrity, and continued service to its readers, advertisers, and stakeholders. It urged the public to disregard such speculation and misinformation.
Despite these reassurances, media observers note a perceptible shift in the editorial tone and credibility of the publications under this group in recent years. Once known for objective reporting and principled editorial stances, the group’s newspapers have come under criticism for their coverage of politically sensitive issues. During the anti-Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) movement in Assam, the group openly supported protests against the central government’s policy, which aimed to provide Indian citizenship to persecuted Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, and Christians from Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Bangladesh who arrived before 31 December 2014. The protests had engulfed the Brahmaputra Valley, with concerns that the CAA violated the terms of the Assam Accord of 1985, which had ended the six-year-long Assam Agitation.
Further, in the run-up to the pandemic, the group drew criticism for publishing extensive and seemingly biased coverage of a local press club election. Many perceived the coverage as character assassination against a respected individual, raising concerns about the erosion of journalistic ethics.
Insiders argue that the media group’s current plight is, to a great extent, self-inflicted. A faction of powerful and unaccountable employees is believed to have wielded undue influence, often mixing social and political interests with editorial policy. Their unchecked behavior may have pushed the organization into disorder, while the management, possibly fatigued or indifferent, chose to remain a passive observer.
As the crisis deepens, the future of this once-prestigious media house hangs in the balance—caught between financial uncertainty, a tarnished reputation, and the urgent need for introspection and reform.
