Delhi : Ajit Anjum, now 57 and nearing the threshold of sixty, carries the visible weight of decades in television news. Once Managing Editor at News 24 and India TV, he was a familiar face in studios, anchoring debates and shaping narratives. He earlier directed the talk show Rubaru for BAG Films, hosted by Congress leader Rajeev Shukla, and received the Ramnath Goenka Excellence in Journalism Award in 2010 for his Bihar flood reporting. Old colleagues still refer to him as “channel wala Anjum.” Today, however, the same face addresses the camera on YouTube, where his channel draws millions of subscribers with political commentary and ground reports.
In this digital space, seniority has sometimes worn the cloak of arrogance. When a young journalist posed a few straightforward questions, Anjum is said to have responded dismissively: “You’ll make a reel out of this?” The implication was clear—reels and short-form content by younger creators rank lower than the longer videos he produces. The young reporter’s reply was simple and cutting: “Sir, you also make reels.” It was an observation that needed no elaboration. After all, Anjum’s own output was never destined for the pages of The Washington Post; it thrives on the same algorithmic platforms he appears to scorn when used by others.
The contradiction is hard to miss. A journalist who built his career inside conventional television newsrooms, including work connected to a Congress-linked production house, now depends on YouTube for reach and relevance. If he claims the identity of a journalist while circulating his views digitally, consistency demands that he extend the same respect to other creators operating in the same ecosystem. Treating a basic question as an affront simply because it comes from someone younger reveals more about hierarchy than about journalism.
Voices such as stand-up comedian Kunal Kamra have, in broader cultural conversations, floated the provocative idea that the voting rights of certain elders should be curtailed once seniority hardens into self-absorption—when the only reflection they tolerate is their own and the open air of democracy begins to feel uncomfortable. Whether one accepts that suggestion or not, the underlying unease is familiar: experience is valuable, but it does not automatically confer the right to look down on formats or practitioners who share the same digital ground.
When the crown of senior journalism rests on an algorithm rather than a studio floor, irritation at another person’s camera is misplaced. The young journalist’s retort did little more than recall a basic fact—the ground under everyone’s feet is the same. Arrogance, even when draped in decades of experience, does not occupy a particularly high sky.
