Decoding White-collar Crime and its Impact: A Reading of Vijay Tendulkar’s Play Kamala
Abstract
White-collar crime is an extension of financial corruption and typically takes place in professional spaces. It is perpetrated at the individual and institutional level by manipulating the professional spaces for private gain. The term gained currency when Edwin Hardin Sutherland used it in his published work White Collar Crime. He defines it as a crime committed by individuals in superior positions taking advantage of their professional space for private gain. It is visible in forms like wage theft, bribery, blackmailing, forgery, racketeering, etc. Its effect is devastating as research on white-collar has revealed that it affects about one-third of the entire population. Vijay Tendulkar, the Marathi dramatist, has taken up the issue of corruption in most of his successful plays. In Kamala, he presents an insight of white-collar crime in the chosen field of journalism. As a former journalist himself, Tendulkar could effortlessly discern the notable entry of white-collar crime, both at the individual and institutional level. The present paper explores the prevalence of white-collar crime in the sacred space of journalism and how its space is exploited by journalists and media houses for private gain. It additionally analyses the effects of white-collar crime on the perpetrators, the oppressed and the society at large.
Keywords: Corruption, White-collar, Crime, Journalism, Kamala, Vijay Tendulkar.
Like COVID-19, corruption is pervasive by its pandemic nature because it transcends national boundaries and frontiers and is unrestricted to a selected nation, religion or race. The anti-corruption watchdog Transparency International defines corruption as the “misuse of power for private benefit” (“What is Corruption?”). It manifests in numerous forms, and its virulent effects are notable to cripple economies and lives of human beings. White-collar crime represents an extension of corruption and is conspicuous in both private establishments and public institutions. It is non-violent in nature and is largely financially motivated. The term was first coined by the American sociologist, Edwin Hardin Sutherland, in his published work White Collar Crime. He precisely defines it as a crime committed by individuals in superior positions taking advantage of their professional space for private gain (Sutherland 9). It is visible in forms like wage theft, bribery, blackmailing, forgery, racketeering, etc. Its effect is devastating as research on white-collar has revealed that it affects about one-third of the entire population (Miele and Rymsza).
White-collar crime is a widespread problem but unfortunately its prevalence remains largely underreported despite its massive impact on business and society (Graham 2-3). However, literature is somewhat alert to the devastating effects of white-collar crime in human societies. It has rightly given adequate space for broadening awareness of this social virus. Vijay Tendulkar, the Marathi dramatist, has taken up the issue of corruption in most of his successful plays. In Kamala, he presents an insight of white-collar crime in the field of journalism. As a former journalist himself, Tendulkar could effortlessly discern the notable entry of white-collar crime, both at the individual and institutional level.
The present paper adopts an analytical approach to explore the pervasiveness of white-collar crime in the sacred space of independent journalism. It would adequately examine how journalists and media houses involve in white-collar crime by economically exploiting the premises of journalism for private gain. The objective also incorporates an analysis of the implications rising from white-collar crimes and its impact on the perpetrators, the oppressed and the cherished institutions of public relevance.
Vijay Tendulkar’s Kamala remains a compelling story of a young, promising career-journalist, Jaisingh Jadhav. Like most middle-class educated youth of his period, Jaisingh leaves his native Punjab and lands in Delhi to fulfil his material aspirations. He gains a suitable employment in a leading English language newspaper. He enters it in the capacity of a full-time staff reporter. But the metropolitan city disillusions him as it is exceedingly expensive for a small-time reporter like him. His monthly remuneration merely suffices to pay his rent and acknowledge the callings of his appetite. He discovers his present income does not fulfil his middle-class aspirations of owning land, bungalow, cars and other modern amenities. His present position as a routine journalist reduces the scope to move to higher positions in the newspaper’s hierarchy. But if he could impress his editor and the newspaper management with incredible stories, the doors for an early career-promotion and associated pay hike stand ensured. This is possible if he shifts to an emerging form of journalism called as investigative journalism. The genre of investigative journalism as opposed to routine journalism is not simply a collection of news and dissemination of information to the readers. Its scope is much wider than routine journalism. According to Investigative Journalism Manual, it is a form of journalism in which reporters make detailed research to investigate a singular story to expose pervasive corruption. It reviews effective execution of government policies and draws attention of the readers towards certain social, economic, political or cultural issues. Its flexible space allows luxurious accommodation of sensationalism and grotesque exaggeration–two sinful aspects of modern-day journalism. The extended scope facilitates investigative journalists with the cushion of vertical career-mobility and material prosperity. Media houses enthusiastically promote this brand of journalism, as it can attract both readers and potential advertisers.
A shift towards this emerging field of investigative journalism is a logical conclusion for this aspirational journalist. Jaisingh carefully explores its broadened space to present incredible stories of public significance. His investigative stories appear under his name on page one and draw a broad readership. With the growth of readership, the bank balance of his newspaper registers manifold growth from an intermittent flow of advertisement revenues. His editor typically assigns him a reporting of exclusive big-breaking news stories. Naturally most of his time is consumed in travelling from one place of the country to another searching for off-beat stories. If one day he is in Kerala, the next day he is found reporting the insurgency in the North-Eastern Region of India. Such is his operational mobility that his wife’s maternal uncle, Kakasaheb terms his brand of journalism as the “High-Speed type!” (Tendulkar Five Plays 5). By focusing on areas like “Murder, bloodshed, rape, atrocity, arson” (6), Jaisingh ostensibly seeks to expose the oppression on the poor, weak, backward and the downtrodden sections of the society. Increasingly, he seems to perceive his profession not as much as a journalist than as a watchdog or a whistleblower to monitor and unmask the prevailing corruption. He distinctly tells Kakasaheb that the weak and the backward sections of the society should be protected from the relentless onslaughts of the power wielders. He justly considers it as a duty to sanitise the moral rot that has set in the country because of the corrupt agencies of power. Therefore, one of the most fascinating investigative stories filed by Jaisingh Jadhav relates to the uncovering of the slave trading practices in India.
Vijay Tendulkar, a onetime journalist himself, overwhelmingly approves a journalist’s role of exposing corruption in the society. He is fairly undiscriminating of investigative journalism if the ethical codes of journalism are carefully maintained. What angers the dramatist is that investigative journalism has been used by a section of self-motivated journalists as a profitable instrument for furthering their vested interests. It is here one realises how the lines between ethics and pragmatics are blurred. Jaisingh’s claim as a crusader against the “bad trends” (11) of exploiting the have-nots is questionable. If the career of Jaisingh Jadhav is critically observed, the can of worms opens. His investigative journalism often laced with sensationalism transports him to the summit of success. Before long he is elevated to the position of an Associate Editor. His uncanny knack of persistently pursuing stories of “Murder, bloodshed, rape, atrocity, arson” (6) etc. to its logical conclusion makes him one of the most visible scribes in the country. The awe and the fear generated by his news stories transform him into a powerful journalist. His burgeoning reputation ensures him unrestricted access to the corridors of power. His name is enlisted in the elite group of invitees for official functions and meetings organised by foreign embassies. Influential ministers in the Central Cabinet and Chief Minister of States allow him appointments, despite their gruelling schedule. His clout has become so pervasive that he can have effortless approach to the Prime Minister’s Office. The profile that he builds in the elite circle of India’s capital will serve him as a future investment to realise his material dreams.
Jaisingh is realistic and practical. He knows his salary is very meagre for him to survive in an upscale metropolis like Delhi. He knows too that journalism with a mere cause for social transformation may not serve him well in procuring the conveniences of the material world. But, if he can play his cards properly and explore his contacts in the power lobbies, journalism may operate like a milch cow and reward him with rich dividends. Consequently, he adopts “mercenary journalism” (23) as opposed to ethical journalism for accumulating benefits of material existence. When most non-Delhi based journalists reside in rented-apartments or in government allotted subsidised accommodations, Jaisingh has already been the owner of a plot of land in Neeti Bagh, an upmarket residential locality of the national capital. Initially, he develops an outhouse but quickly supplants it with a moderate but posh bungalow equipped with all modern gadgets and conveniences. The metamorphosis is phenomenal for a mid-career journalist like Jaisingh. Within a span of five years, the man who started his fledgling career in journalism “living in the shed outside a house in Karol Bagh” (23) is hitherto the owner of a grand bungalow in one of Delhi’s most expensive residential areas. As a former journalist, Tendulkar knows it very well the struggles those rookie journalists have to encounter in giving shape to their fledgling careers.
Vijay Tendulkar highlights the intriguing question whether a routine journalist with a meagre monthly remuneration can gain with fair means the exclusive privileges of the affluent sections of the civil society. Jaisingh’s worldly growth is almost phenomenal. Besides possessing an elegant bungalow in New Delhi, his lifestyle and way of living undergoes a complete remodelling. When other journalists struggle to engage a single domestic help, Jaisingh has multiple attendants at his service. Kamalabai has been brought from far away Maharashtra to perform internal household works like cooking, washing and cleaning. While Ramdev and other male servants are engaged for external works like purchasing grocery items, vegetables, beverages, and in doing other sundry household works. Employing the above domestic assistants would certainly cost him a few hundred rupees from his pocket. But Jaisingh is unmindful of the pinch. It only facilitates him with an opportunity to make black money white and remain at a safe distance from the glare of the taxmen.
Mercenary journalism is generating large premiums to Jaisingh. He no longer jostles for space in the crowded city buses or local trains of Delhi. He commutes to his workplace in his personal automobile. It may be recalled that owning a personal vehicle in the 70s and 80s of the twentieth century in common was a privilege exclusive to a sizeable section of the population. Neither was it conveniently accessible nor did ordinary people possess the disposable cash to procure a luxury item like a personal car. According to Vaish, the annual production of cars in the country during the early 1980s was around 35000-40000 of Indian currency, and the considerable bulk of them were purchased for use of politicians and other senior level central and state government officials (Vaish). Again, the purchase procedure was tedious as one typically had to first book a car and impatiently waits for six months to one year for home delivery (Madanan). As a long-time insider to the profession of journalism, Vijay Tendulkar knows the packages, allowances and perks available to a working journalist of his day. An ethical journalist with hard-earned white money can hardly own a private car. Even editors of newspapers in those days could simply enjoy the luxury of riding in cars only in their officially allotted vehicles.
Another striking change in the lifestyle of Jaisingh Jadhav can be identified in his outstation trips. He is a performing journalist, and his editor acknowledges his quality. The editor of his newspaper relies thickly upon him whenever critical, sensitive and delicate issues require exclusive coverage. His official or non-official assignments transport him to all corners of the country. Whenever there is air connectivity, he compulsorily adopts the aerial route. However, in those dismal days very few people could experience the unaffordable luxury of air travelling. Top politicians, senior bureaucrats and affluent businessmen are commonly the regular flyers. The newspaper’s management usually reimburses his air fares if he is on an official tour. But there are certain news stories proceeded at the individual level and not officially designated. In such cases, Jaisingh has to bear the expenses of the flight tickets. As a young journalist building up his career in an expensive city like Delhi, he can barely afford the disposable money to be a frequent air traveller. If Jaisingh does not encounter access to illegal and tainted money from arcane sources, some of his air travels would not have been possible.
Jaisingh’s distinct taste for extravagant comforts accurately records the continuous entry of tainted cash to his pockets. Whenever he is on an official/unofficial tour, he becomes exceptionally conscious about decent lodging and boarding. He hardly checks into a budget hotel for an overnight stay. Checking into “five-star hotels” (23) has become a part of his travel itinerary. As all these hotels assuredly give a premium on quality in all its necessary operations, naturally the tariff for single-room occupancy per night runs into hundreds of rupees. Indulging in such excessive luxuries is not unknown for journalists in top-most positions of newspaper hierarchy. But for a junior level journalist like Jaisingh, his known sources of modest income can seldom permit him to indulge lavishly in such reckless extravagances. Therefore, his modified material circumstances have just attributions of the misuse of his official position as a journalist for personal gains.
An individual is thought off as corrupt if her/his tangible and intangible assets are disproportionate to her/his acknowledged sources of income. Jaisingh’s movable and immovable assets and his lavish tastes have no bearing to his valid sources of income. The man who talks of “moral principles, moral norms, moral values” (24) and swears “commitment” for “social purposes” (23) is antithetical to what he preaches and writes. But the truth cannot remain suppressed for long, it has to unveil somehow or the other. In Act II of the play, when he was insisting Sarita to join a dinner party, a slip of tongue occurs from Jaisingh. A drunken Jaisingh reveals a professional secret which has been carefully and meticulously guarded all along. Under the impact of the intoxicated drinks, he divulges his corrupt practices to his better half, Sarita. He briefs her that the Director of the National Mineral Corporation who has been recently implicated in a mega fraud case of “seventeen crore[s]” will be one of the guest in the party. He also informs her of his desire “to talk to him over drinks” so that he can “get something” (44) by making a deal with the tainted Director. The admission blows off the lid of his corrupt agenda. The deal he talks about represents a professional misconduct as per the Press Council of India’s Norms of Journalistic Conduct. It amounts to blackmail or extortion of money under the threat of maligning the corrupt people through newspaper exposure. Jaisingh’s pretence of a virtuous and honest journalist gets exposed. Under the veneer of activist-journalism, he was only trying to laugh all the way to the bank. Vijay Tendulkar is apt in his astute observation that the ultimate aim of journalism to serve the readers with authentic information on matters of civic interest has been compromised by corrupt journalists like Jaisingh. He rightly apprehends that such selfish interests of certain investigative journalists open possibilities of maligning the very institution of credible journalism and eventually weaken the mighty pillars of established democracy.
White collar crime of Jaisingh stands documented in his story of busting the thriving slave markets in the country. For the sake of evidence, he lands in the tribal area of Luhardaga in Bihar. There, he unearths a thriving slave market where vulnerable women are sold and bought for human-trafficking. He poses as a prospective customer and buys a tribal woman, Kamala for just two hundred and fifty rupees so that he could establish to the world that slave markets exist in the country despite a constitutional ban against the practice. But the manner in which he projects himself as an extraordinary journalist violates the norms of propriety and ethical codes of professional journalism. His criminal intention surfaces at the time when he buys Kamala. Instead of procuring a woman having beauty, health and a fit body, he fixes his sight on Kamala, who “had no customers at all” and was sitting in a corner with her head down. As his actual intention is to reveal the story on slave trading, he selects a woman who could be purchased at a “dirt cheap” (14) rate. The innocent Kamala follows him to Delhi with a rudimentary understanding that she was purchased as a wife.
But after reaching Delhi she is displayed in a Press Conference like the epical Draupadi in the Assembly Hall where the Pandava Queen was harassed, humiliated and disrobed of her clothes by Dushasana. In the ensuing Press Conference, she is presented like a circus animal for the press reporters to have entertainment at her cost. Press photographers were falling over each other to get the right angles of her face. One even tried to persuade her to pose hand-in-hand with Jaisingh. She is subjected to answer embarrassing questions and asked to share private information on how her community indulge in “free sex” and what they do “with the illegitimate children?” Then the reporters ask her to share her experience of sex with the men she has “slept” (29). A reporter named Dubey advances a step further when he asks her whether she had sex with her current owner, Jaisingh. He also asks her to reveal her sensuous experience with Jaisingh by making a comparison with the sexual exploits she had with the village men. Pathetically enough when Kamala is harassed, humiliated and embarrassed by a group of immoral and sadistic reporters, the so-called reformer-journalist in Jaisingh just “sat and watched” (30) with no protest or apparent remorse. The insensitive nature of the journalists including Jaisingh speaks of the volume of the inhumanity, immorality and lack of ethics that has set in the field of modern-day journalism. By allowing them to ask “terrible questions” (30) and derive fun Jaisingh not only violates Journalistic code of ethics but equally showed insensitivity to women, particularly victims of rape and trafficking.
Jaisingh’s self-seeking journalism is criminal in the sense that he disowns responsibility and compassion towards the particular sources of news which establish him professionally and materially. Kamala thinks Jaisingh purchased her as a wife. She does not understand that she would be the subject of a story that would trigger sensation in the country. She believes that Jaisingh has bought her because his wife, Sarita, could not give birth to a child even after ten years of marriage. Innocently, she volunteers to take the role of giving birth to Jaisingh’s child. But Jaisingh has other ideas. To prevent himself from being arrested under the Indian Penal Code for committing the crime of buying fellow human beings, he planned to put her up in a shelter house for women after the Press Conference is over and the story finds nationwide publicity. Sarita repeatedly objects to his inhuman move. But he argues with Sarita that Kamala would find the shelter home as a place of luxury because it would bring an end to her days of starvation. She could expect to include a roof over her head and get two free meals a day without having to do any work. To justify his argument, he cites an interview with some Adivasi women who were lodged in a prison. According to him, the imprisoned women were having a great time in jail and expressed their desire to stay there forever because they were getting everything in gratis. Despite resistance and strong protestations by none other than his wife, he takes Kamala and abandons her in the shelter home just like “a pawn in his game of chess” (43). Here, Tendulkar is exposing the criminal face of Jaisingh, which is devoid of compassion and humanity.
Tendulkar also provides an insight of white-collar crime among owners of mass media. The growing nexus between media barons and powerful politicians results in a compromise to the freedom of the press. Critical readers can easily observe certain owners of newspapers exploiting the power of the press to reap personal benefits. The press barons threaten to plant stories against the corrupt so that they could indulge in a game of blackmailing to extract a deal. They protect the ones that compromise with their threats, but the uncompromising ones are unmasked in the pages of their group of newspapers. Jaisingh’s newspaper owner, Sheth Singhania, is one who maintains a cordial relation with high profile corrupt politicians and bureaucrats. He efficiently uses the handle of blackmailing and palm-greasing to erect a media conglomerate and diversify his profits in emerging sectors like the hospitality and real estate industry.
White collar crime, no doubt, serves the narrow interests of individuals like Jaisingh Jadhav and Seth Singhania, but the consequences ensuing from transgressions of power and position invites crisis at the level of individual/s, institutions and the society at large. Crisis, according to Caplan, is a period of intense difficulty or danger people encounter because of some particular events leading to distress and impairment in functioning (Caplan 18). Misuse of his profession lands Jaisingh in a crisis. His personal life and security remain compromised, exposing his spouse to spend restless hours worrying about his safety. Frequent exposure of corruptions and scams of the high and the mighty cause him receive threatening calls of serious consequences even at the dead of night. On one occasion, readers are informed that an anonymous caller telephoned him and threatened to take away his life for writing a story against a Member of Parliament from Madhya Pradesh. He denies the threats as nugatory and considers “half of them are from the police” (7), yet inwardly a nagging fear settles in a corner of his heart. The apparent crisis makes him cautious to the extent of jotting down each caller’s name and identity. He instructs his wife, Sarita, to ink the names of the callers compulsorily in a note book. Despite the menacing threats, he continues with the lucrative game and ignores reporting to the police or feels the necessity of applying for an armed license for self-defence.
His corrupt journalism suits his purpose, but his “madness” causes emotional crisis to his wife. The threatening calls, “sometimes ....in the middle of the night” (7), send shivers down Sarita’s spine. She spends anxious hours worrying about his personal security. His nonchalant attitude and sheer rejection to take necessary precautions deepens her distress and prolongs her misery:
Sometimes the phone rings in the middle of the night. If I pick it up. I have to hear some terrible things. Often, my husband isn’t at home. And I wouldn’t know where to look for him. (7)
Sarita applies course correction to her husband’s unethical journalism, but her efforts remain unreciprocated. His ears pretend to be deaf to her words of wisdom and pragmatism. Frustration builds in her and she even contemplates of leaving for her parent’s home at Phaltan. But his mind is so possessed by the greed for material growth that he loses his human considerations and instead books a ticket for her. She regains her poise and decides against leaving him. However, the emotional bonding between the husband and wife deteriorates and widens more so because of the latter’s fertility-related complications of becoming a biological mother.
Sarita’s role and place in Jadhav’s life is to cater to his physical desires and for accompanying him to the social gatherings in Delhi’s elite circle. He takes his wife to the frequent invitations that he receives from the “foreign embassies” (23) stationed in New Delhi. She is also present in those parties where he fixes clandestine deals with corrupt officials like the Director of the National Mineral Corporation. Besides the body, Tendulkar believes that Indian society has been all along using married women for serving as homemakers and for maintaining the biological chain of progeny. Jaisingh Jadhav’s attitude towards his highly educated wife is no better, as Sarita’s position in his life is like that of a domestic slave. This could be the reason her education remains unused in gainful employment and more in serving his domestic needs. He reduces Sarita to the position of an estate manager to oversee the management of his assets accumulated through his corrupt journalistic practices. She has to take the telephone calls in his absence and jot down the names of the callers in a notebook. He scolds her if she cannot ink the names. She directs Kamalabai, the housemaid to cook his favourite dishes like cauliflower curry and mutton biryani and keeps a tab on Ramdev, one of the male servants who maintain a ready stock of beer and other favourite drinks of her husband. She is to further ensure that his clothes are ironed and kept in his cupboard. Jain, the newspaper colleague of Jadhav, cannot stop himself from remarking:
This warrior of exploitation in the country is exploiting you. He’s made a drudge out of a horse-riding independent girl from a princely house. Hai, hai! [Theatrically,toJaisingh.] Shame on you! Hero of anti-exploitation campaigns makes a slave of wife! (17)
Like most traditional Indian bahus or daughter-in-laws, Sarita too resigns to her lot and hardly shows any semblance of protest against the exploitative tendencies of her husband. Her stigmatised status of being barren or infertile stands in her way and limits her options to fight against the abuses of male privilege. She cannot also take the route of separation owing to the social stigma attached with a divorcee. The downward spiral of her subjugated experiences, however, encounters a vertical elevation when Kamala opens her eyes. Even though she asserts and decides to hold a Press Conference and expose her husband, “who in the year 1982 still keeps a slave, right here in Delhi,” she cannot muster enough courage to proceed against him. Instead, she reconciles to her condition as a slave and continues the relationship with the “slave-driver” (46).
Jaisingh Jadhav’s white-collar crimes invite crisis to the institution of print media. His selfish misadventures lowered the bar of credible, responsible and committed journalism. His colleagues in the press spend sleepless nights whenever he is out of town to collect resources for his next front-page stories. His news stories have set a new benchmark and editors of every newspaper are exerting pressure on their respective reporters to follow Jaisingh’s path of exploring “mal-masala” (23) news-contents. Jain’s words are illustrative of the heat encountering the scribes of contemporary national dailies:
Sensational journalism! You’re all right, but from tomorrow our editor’s going to twist all our tails. Look what Jaisingh brought! You have to bring something more sensational, more explosive.” (27)
The “new journalism” (24) professed by self-seeking journalists like Jaisingh Jadhav are piling pressure on the honest journalists as they have to either perform or perish. Their level of frustration is writ large on their conduct and behaviour. Reporters covering the press meets at the Delhi Press Club often drown their frustrations by trying to extract sadistic pleasures from the subjects on hand at the press briefings. During Kamala’s Press Conference, readers can very well gauge the insensitivity of these frustrated reporters as their questions are directed not on the issue of human trafficking but on the personal life of the subject. Instead of empathising with the marginalised tribal woman, they harassed her with embarrassing questions on her sexual life, the number of times she slept with different men, and whether she had some free sex with this new Sheth [Jaisingh]. The pressure on their jobs is so apparent that they are oblivious to the prescribed codes of journalistic practices relating to sensitive issues on women and the downtrodden.
Tendulkar presses the alarm bells that crisis has descended in the very independent nature of the press. The prevalent nexus between media barons, bureaucrats and politicians in power is a signal that the freedom of the press is under compromise. Owners of newspapers are increasingly developing tendencies to exploit the power of the press to accrue personal benefits. They blackmail the corrupt by threatening exposure of their unethical practices in the spaces of their newspapers. Those who submit and hand over a part of the loot are protected and spared from public censure, while the unwilling lot of them are maligned with an exposure of their misdeeds. Jaisingh’s newspaper owner, Sheth Singhania, is involved in such a racket. He uses his media to accumulate personal property and wealth. There is a “scandal” in his “new hotel” (16). He uses his clout in the corridors of power “to manage two or three newspapers and a skyscraper in every big city” (23). He evades paying “income-tax” and robs the nation of valuable revenue by managing the taxmen. He is also known to be a “swindler” and a “black marketeer” (50). When Jaisingh exposes the slave market of Bihar, his proprietor is pressurised not to pursue with the remaining parts of the story because “some very big people are involved in this flesh racket”. Buckling under tremendous pressure, Singhania decides to sack the very journalist who was till the other day responsible for growth of “circulation and advertisement” (48) of his newspaper. This shows how corrupt politicians can wield the strings of newspapers run by motivated owners. In the bargain, the freedom of the press loses its power to report the truth, and the reading public is deprived of real news.
Thus, Vijay Tendulkar’s play Kamala remains as an inquest of white-collar crime in journalism. Investigative journalists like Jaisingh Jadhav have exploited the space of this noble profession to advance his vocational career and accumulate tangible and intangible assets and fill his life with extravagant tastes. He achieves all these through a terrible compromise with ethical practices of journalism. Even owners of media are not left out of white-collar crime. They equally explore the power of the press to diversify their private business and invest in profitable ventures. Their unethical practices pose a serious question to the independent nature of the press. The impact of white-collar crime in the lives of individuals and in the level of society is massive and far more devastating than the naked eye can meet. It not only has economic ramifications for families but is equally responsible for ruining domestic peace and harmony of its members. In the institutional level, it brings a collapse to systems which undermine the healthy development of societies. The particular groups that suffer most from the devastating effects of white-collar crime and criminals are the marginalised and the downtrodden.
Works cited and consulted:
Breez Mohan Hazarika, Research Scholar & Associate Professor, Department of English, DCB Girls’ College, Jorhat (Assam) Email: brizmohanjrt@gmail.com. Voice: 09435091512