Situating languages in Kazakhstan journalism education: Learning in English,writing in Russian,and thinking in Kazakh

Context of Kazakhstan

Kazakhstan is the nineth largest country, bordering China, Russia, and others. It has over 20 million residents. The country was a part of the Soviet Union for almost 70 years until 1991 when the country became an independent nation. Kazakhstan is a bilingual country, with Kazak being the state language while Russian has the official status.

In today’s Kazakhstan, the president and other high-ranking state officials regularly remark about the importance of studying and knowing the English language. As a result, Kazakhstan is adapting a trilingual policy by maintaining its state Kazakh language and official Russian language, but adding English as an international language. Fluency in English is becoming the essential quality of modern journalists (Chernii et al., 2020). This is because English can overcome the communicative barrier between local journalism and international journalism (Chernii et al., 2020).

Journalists receive different salaries depending on whether they are working for Kazakh-language media outlets or Russian-language media outlets. Journalists working for Russian-language media outlets receive higher salaries than journalists working for Kazakh-language media outlets. This is because Russian-language media outlets receive a larger share of advertising in the media market, and Kazakh-language media outlets struggle to provide sufficient coverage of socially significant and complex topics. Kazakh-language content tends to be superficial, with insufficient resources to produce engaging content (Yerkimbay, 2025). In terms of language mastery among journalism graduates, it has become a source of regular discontent among the journalism community. This explains why there was a public call in 2017 in Kazakhstan to close all university journalism programs because the graduates were ill-prepared for the media market (Kurambayev & Issenov, 2022).

Theoretical Framework

This study utilizes French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu’s (1991) field theory and the use of linguistic capital as a theoretical lens in this study. The field is a sociological concept (Bourdieu, 1991, 1998; Vos, 2019) about the way in which some forms of work get done. This theory is a key theoretical framework for researching journalism (Maares & Hanusch, 2022) and is growing in importance in the field of journalism scholarship.

Capital is one of the key concepts of field theory. Bourdieu (1991) notes that there are different forms of capital that people may possess, including economic capital in the forms of money or property; cultural capital such as knowledge, education, or qualifications; as well as symbolic capital such as accumulated prestige or honor. Other forms of capital could be political capital, information capital, and others. One of the important aspects of the capital concept is that people may convert one form of capital into another (Bourdieu, 1991). Benson and Neveu (2005) note that the journalism field tends to engage first and foremost with “those agents who possess high volume of capital” (p. 5). According to Bourdieu’s theory, individuals occupy different positions in society depending on how much capital they possess. Specifically, Bourdieu divides people into three classes—the upper level, the middle level, and the lower level. Upper-level individuals tend to have a lot of cultural capital, including linguistic capital, and they can use this linguistic capital to “sell” as a commodity (Park, 2016).

Many journalists in Kazakhstan write in both the Kazakh and Russian languages. Thus, Kazakhstan’s journalism relies on Russian-language news sources for most of their content (Brown et al., 2017; Kurambayev, 2022; Yerkimbay, 2025). In essence, learning English would promote diversity of news sources in Kazakhstan’s journalism. The idea is that one can “sell” his skills and competences not only in Kazakhstan but also elsewhere internationally in different job markets in other countries. However, Kazakhstan’s journalism is controlled and censored by the government, and independent journalists face practical challenges in undertaking independent reporting. There is a high level of corruption among journalists (IREX, 2017). The media outlets receive government subsidies, and thus, they promote government agenda and distribute official narrative of what is happening in the country. Kazakhstan journalists are underpaid (Internews, 2019). This explains why they move to better paid jobs such as those in public relations and advertising, and/or jobs within international nongovernment organizations and companies. Kazakhstan’s media outlets cover very little international news (IREX, 2024).

Theme A: Language as a Disadvantage

The common theme was that English language is considered in fact as a disadvantage associated with the journalism education they receive. In essence, seeking and acquiring linguistic capital appears to be ineffective because linguistic capital is effective when it is a part of one’s habitus, a term Bourdieu used to refer to everyday routine. This finding is in agreement with a previous study (Grieves, 2011) that argued learning journalism in English may hurt mastering one’s native language(s). Grieves quotes one of the journalists as saying, “My bilingualism could be a disadvantage sometimes because even though I speak both languages well, I do not speak either one perfectly” (Grieves, 2011, p. 249). This is because some students do not take academic/professional courses in Kazakh and/or Russian languages. Even when they take some courses in Kazakh and/or Russian languages, the coursework appears to be insufficient and creates linguistic proficiency deficiency. This is a loss for journalism. One respondent said that

I noticed my colleagues wrote better than me. We have some English language work in our field, but it is quite limited. Journalism in Kazakh and Russian is more prevalent. So, depending on the job market, this can be a disadvantage.

The respondent also noted, “It would be helpful if internships were conducted in English as well.” This male student explained that he was expected to write in Russian and Kazakh languages during his internship. “We learned how to use great English language sources, but we did not have many opportunities to write powerful texts.”

“. . . . I realized that I cannot use my English language skills and then I made other plans for the future,” noted one female student wanting to quit journalism.

Part of the explanation is that journalism is taught in what is known as “translanguaging.” Carroll (2022) describes the process of “translanguaging” as assigning reading materials in one language and using another one in class discussions and allowing students to ask questions or answer questions in their first language and switching from one language to another. Even if their English is improved, “it is more likely to be at the cost of sacrificing understanding the subject content” (Wyatt & El Gamal, 2023, p. 91).

One journalism professor noted

all [students] have different language skills. Some do not speak or do not understand English. Sometimes you repeat the same lectures. I never switch language in teaching. I use English. But I would ask them [students] to come to my office where I would explain in Russian even though Russian language is not our priority as language. Those [students] who were not confident in their English language, they never showed up to office hours other than asking for grade discussion. I would not interrupt them if they use Russian words in class.

Another journalism instructor noted a point.

I answer questions at the beginning in English and for some students I explain in Russian and for those who speak Kazakh, I will explain in Kazakh. It is like a multilingual class in the end. Sometimes they do not even ask any questions in Russian. . . . I realized that it is better to have slides in Russian and speak in English, and this way I can be sure that students understand me . . .. This is why I am trying many ways to deliver main information I am providing.

Another professor who recently returned from Japan from her graduate studies and currently teaches at a university in Kazakhstan defended the translanguaging in the classroom: “Professors in Japan do not care whether you speak Japanese or English.” In terms of professional exposure to reporting in Kazakh and/or Russian languages, the faculty member defended this idea by saying that students get practical experience writing in Russian/Kazakh during their internships.

Students noted they have three languages alternating in the same course. “Our teachers speak Russian but students are supposed to speak only in English,” said one student. “Teachers would initiate switching from English into Russian language in teaching. . . . Our supervisor used to speak Russian even if he knew English,” another student added. Such findings are not unique to the context of Kazakhstan. In South Africa, for example, English and Afrikaans are alternated in journalism courses, and it was noted that Afrikaans lectures are weak, and such linguistic weakness reflects the students’ language level (Botma, 2012). This would in turn affect the quality of journalistic texts.

While English should provide additional capital for those interested in journalism, it appears to come at the expense of journalistic competence in their native and/or official language(s). It may also be the case that studying multiple languages reduces high levels of competency in all the languages.

Theme B: Political Obstacles

The second common theme was that the participants have restrictions to fully use their “linguistic capital” in journalism. Aspiring journalists propose article ideas, but their immediate supervisors tend to “kill” their ideas, citing, “We have a structure.” Journalists say that they are not allowed to apply their “capital,” including searching for new sources of information such as international sources beyond normal assignments. Normal assignments generally exist to cover government activities and other coverage favorable to authorities. Generating ideas does not require a foreign language skill, but knowing another language exposes aspiring journalists to diverse professional ideas that they could apply in their own localized context.

These prevailing practical restrictions relate to what Bourdieu called tensions within the field and a “constant struggle over positioning structured by the dichotomies of ‘new’ versus ‘old’” (Maares & Hanusch, 2022, p. 739) entrants to the field. This is a struggle internally because new entrants to the field can change the field considering they potentially bring with them new outlooks, new values, and new concerns (Vos, 2019, p. 3), and over time, they can develop more responsibility and authority in the field (Vos, 2019). It is unsurprising that new entrants encounter resistance because they can serve as forces of change (Tandoc & Jenkins, 2017) even if journalism students do not see themselves as the agents of change (Broersma & Singer, 2021). Aspiring journalists enter journalism expecting to put their talent and interest to write into practice (Nölleke et al., 2020). However, they find it discouraging to learn that journalism has practical restrictions and pressures including economic challenges, time pressures, and editorial rules (Nölleke et al., 2020). A tradition of authoritarianism in Kazakhstan intensifies the need to maintain the status quo.

One female student said she

would suggest using data-driven topics . . . why we should tackle the issue using data . . .. But they would say someone from the administration has to approve the information. They did not fully understand that data could be a source of insight. . . . We could have made our channel unique by using data. But they insisted on only covering issues approved by officials.

This quote suggests deeper political influence over professional skills one brings to the newsroom.

Bourdieu posits that influxes of new agents into the field can serve either as forces for transformation or conversation. At the managerial or professional elite level, new agents can only establish themselves by marking their difference with those already in the field, and thus have the greatest incentive to establish a new kind of press outlet or adopt a distinctive editorial voice (Benson & Neveu, 2005, p. 5).

Part of the explanation is that Kazakhstan’s journalists are expected to serve the authorities (IREX, 2015; Kurambayev & Myssayeva, 2025). “Journalists are being trained to serve the system, to become soldiers who disseminate state propaganda rather than independent professionals,” explains one respondent. “Despite . . . conflict inside fields, most of this activity will tend to largely reproduce the structure of the field . . .” (Benson & Neveu, 2005, p. 6).

One male respondent noted

The state media will likely continue hiring English speaking journalists to present Kazakhstan in a positive light. This means that when foreigners search for information about Kazakhstan, they will mostly find state-approved content about investment, economic growth, and official statements. Independent analysis and critical perspectives might not be translated due to financial and human resource constraints. This creates a skewed perspective about Kazakhstan.

Or another respondent explained that

some Kazakh and Russian media outlets translate important articles into English. However, these translations often manipulate content by selectively including or excluding certain information. For example, XYZ ¹ publishes in three languages and I have compared their English versions to the version of Kazakh and Russian ones. The English version often presents a different perspective especially when covering political matters. Some content seems to be tailored for foreign audiences . . ..

Given this context, students admit that there was no need for English language skill in their media outlets. “Since it was a Kazakh-speaking environment, there was no perceived need for these ideas and there was not much enthusiasm for” it, said one female respondent remembering her experience with a news outlet.

In spite of the potential for English to provide more freedom of access and knowledge, it can be concluded that English does not produce more freedom but is incorporated into a restrictive system. This finding also suggests that Bourdieu’s notion of linguistic capital may be applicable in a limited mode in a politically authoritarian context and in a politically sensitive field like journalism.

Theme C: Personal Benefit

The third common theme was that respondents benefit from their linguistic capital indirectly and personally more than professionally. This benefit may involve learning software faster, being able to read news in English, and attending international trainings/conferences/seminars. Respondents also noted that they were able to get a job outside of the profession (such as in teaching English, an HR position, a job in marketing, etc.). Thus, English capital is being redirected to other fields by aspiring journalists, leading to the “capital diversion effect.”

It is important to acknowledge that linguistic capital distribution is unequal (Bourdieu, 1991). Botma (2012) cites Bourdieu’s work that “different speakers compete on a particular language market (field) for the best positions and the rewards on offer (capital)” (p. 32). In such context, individuals from the upper or middle classes tend to have advantages over people who are in lower classes. Better educated individuals may learn foreign languages faster (Gerhards, 2014) because they may have educated parents and/or peers that they can relate to and learn from. Individuals from lower-level backgrounds may learn to speak confidently and fluently in other languages (Bourdieu, 1991), but “a candidate competing in his or her second or third language would be at a disadvantage against competitors who are able to use their first language” (Botma, 2012, p. 32).

One respondent shared on learning English, “it helped me intern and work in international organizations.” She added that, “Yes, I might know English as a second language, but in my daily journalistic work, I do not use it.” Another respondent said that knowing the English language helped her to get a job outside of journalism. “I worked in a completely different field in Kazakhstan, in HR. I think studying in English mainly influenced how I consume news.” She noted that her language skills helped her to stand out in recruitment and that she was able to “sell” her linguistic capital. As noted in Bourdieu’s (1991) work, individuals lacking linguistic competence “are de facto excluded from the social domains” (p. 55).

One female participant said,

I sometimes discuss foreign films. That is when access to information becomes easier. A lot of the time, information gets translated, especially about movies. Finding good information in Kazakh is very difficult. I think English sources help me. . . . I can watch interviews with actors and directors in the original language, rather than relying on translations, and I can get information from primary source.

In another case, a respondent noted benefiting from his English in learning software. “Of course, working with global cases, analyzing international cases, staying up-to-date with trends and learning various tools like Adobe InDesign, Adobe Illustrator, Photoshop, and other applications in their default English language helped a lot, even when learning Python.”

Some respondents end up collaborating with international journalists visiting Kazakhstan as part of their assignments, and Kazakh journalists get to see their foreign colleagues’ work and how they do their jobs. It is unclear how much impact, if any, such collaborations will have on these Kazakhstani working journalists. One respondent noted that learning the English language “would expand perspectives, provide direct access to global sources, and enable journalists to verify information independently.” She also shared her collaboration with European journalists.

Theme 3 suggests that English language capital is more about personal benefit rather than professional benefit. While individual’s personal lives may become more informationally rich, this does not necessarily mean a richer journalistic profession for Kazakhstan.