First of all, that is a false comparision, since China does not allow any journalists to report anything that goes against the state's narrative. Hence why there is no Chinese equivalent of Ajai Shukla.Simple. Shiv Aroor doesn't go into details. He never went into details. Ajai Shukla caught attention because he diverted significantly from the narrative of the establishment and the Army.
Lets take the case for China. If 98% of Chinese reporters stick to a narrative and the 2% doesn't - would they catch attention? Good.
Now imagine if the 2% reporter gives a far more detailed assessment of the issue and even new information - then even if the reporter is ANTI-PRC or ANTI-CCP, many people will tend to believe this reporter and start questioning the popular narrative.
Shive Aroor hasn't yet given his version of detailed lay of the land in Ladakh, has he? Hence.
Whoa. Whoever claimed Mr. Panag to be anti-truth? Almost everyone will welcome Panag to be as detailed in his rebuttal of Ajai Shukla. We all would enjoy that clash.
And there is plenty of satellite imagery that contradicts his claims. Meanwhile, Shiv Aroor has never reported anything on the standoff that was proven to be factually incorrect. We cannot say the same for Ajai Shukla.