Over the course of 7 whole days, many opposition members, independent think-tanks & individual content creators have shown solidarity against the contentious piece of legislation in the form of a revised Broadcasting regulation bill, proposed by the Ministry of Information & Broadcasting. But the bill bears all the signs of being a digital authoritarianism project in order to control online narratives. Maybe a reaction to recent electoral turnout!
Understanding the bill in a nutshell:
| Regulating Mechanism | 1. Multiple types of broadcasters and broadcast network operators. The regulation will depend on their type. 2. Television broadcasting networks will have to register with the central government, while OTT platforms must provide intimation after meeting a certain threshold of subscribers. |
| Unified Regulatory Framework for Broadcasting | 1. The bill aims to replace the Cable Television Networks Act of 1995. 2. It also extends the regulatory purview to cover broadcasting of the over-the-top (OTT) content and digital news and current affairs, currently regulated through IT Act, 2000. |
| Programme Code and advertisement Code | 1. The Bill seeks to regulate broadcast of news and current affairs programmes (excluding print news). 2. Such programmes will have to comply with the prescribed programme code and advertisement code. |
| Self-Regulation | 1. The Bill provides for a self-regulatory structure to ensure compliance with the programme and advertisement codes. 2. This includes: a. self-regulation b. constituting self-regulatory organisations c. establishing a Broadcast Advisory Council |
| Content Evaluation Committee (CEC) | 1. Each broadcaster will have to also set up an internal Content Evaluation Committee (CEC). 2. All broadcast content must be certified by the CEC. |
| Accessibility for Persons with Disabilities | 1. The Bill promotes the use of subtitles, audio descriptors, and sign language for persons with disabilities. 2. The Bill provides for the appointment of Disability Grievance Officer. |
| Penalties | 1. Prescribes penalties such as advisory, warning, censure or monetary penalties for operators and broadcasters. 2. Reserves imprisonment and/or fines for severe offences, like obtaining registration with a false affidavit. |
| Infrastructure sharing provisions | The Bill introduces provisions for infrastructure sharing among broadcasting network operators. |
| Dispute resolution | The Bill establishes a structured dispute resolution mechanism. |
What is the need for a new Broadcast bill?
- The draft Bill regulates online content available on OTT platforms. However, such content may be accessed through other ways on the internet, which is regulated differently.
- No guidance has been provided on formulating the programme code. This may also lead to self-censorship by broadcasters. The central government will have the powers to pass orders on whether a particular content violates the programme code.
- This will also apply to news or content critical of the government. This could lead to a conflict of interest.
- The draft Bill also does not provide an appellate mechanism against orders of the central government.
- The proposed framework for regulating broadcast news is distinct from the framework for print news. This raises the question whether it is appropriate to have a differential framework for same content based on the medium of dissemination.
- The draft Bill reintroduces criminal punishment for certain offences which were recently decriminalized.
The Concerns regarding new proposals
- By the Opposition:
Opposition parties including the Indian National Congress, Trinamool Congress, Samajwadi Party & many others have proposed the Broadcasting Bill is a “threat” to freedom of speech and independent media. They asserted that the proposed bill, titled Broadcasting Services (Regulation) Bill, aims for an increased government control over content creators, ranging from social media influencers to independent news outlets which will “pave the way for excessive surveillance in the online world.” Instead of recognizing constitutional limits, the Bill increases the Union Government’s command and control over digital media
2. Independent Think-Tanks & Media Institutions:
- a. The Internet Freedom Foundation (IFF) on Saturday decried “secret” changes to the draft Broadcasting Services (Regulation) Bill, which expands regulatory requirements on online news and entertainment media. The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting has met “selective industry representatives, without representation from civil society, journalists, or other key stakeholders,” the IFF said in a statement, repeating concerns from civil society that the Bill would lead to further censorship implications for online platforms.
- b. Raising concerns about the proposed Broadcasting Services (Regulation) Bill, 2023, the Network of Women in Media, India (NWMI), has said, in a submission to the Information & Broadcasting Ministry that the bill may potentially result in control and over-regulation of the broadcast and digital media. The NWMI urged the government to refrain from going ahead with the bill without holding exhaustive consultations with all stakeholders. It warned that the Bill could drastically alter the media landscape in the country.
3. Individual Content Creators:
And finally the most affected of the bills rollout would be the independent content creators, social media handles, & even common citizens vocal on media platforms. As the bill blurs the boundary line for defining a broadcaster, it reeks convenience for the government to censor, penalize & silence its dissenters with the good old, “iron-fisting.” The bill, which is likely to replace the previous cable TV regulations, proposes to categorize digital content creators, as “digital news broadcasters”. This could mean a set of new regulations and codes of conduct for content creators across platforms and mediums, from text to audio-visual mediums.
The bill ‘technically’ could penalize an individual for sharing a mere meme or an instagram story.
The vagueness of the bill, with phrases like, “as may be prescribed” appearing 42 times in the draft and the manner of floating it amongst the concerned individuals has also raised many eyebrows. While the first draft was published for public consultation and feedback, it has only been shared with a ‘select few’ broadcasters and associations.
What should be done?
a. The government must avoid vagueness in their attempt to create fear among the citizens by presenting definite structural specifications in their legislations. The need of the hour for India is that laws made by the legislators must be “well-tailored” with no room of delusions and ambiguity.
b. Regarding the press freedom, India’s performance has been poor since a decade. The press freedom index report by the “Reporters Sans Frontiers” (RSF), have ranked India at 159th position out of 180 countries for the year 2024. To further mention, the steps taken by the present Union government, is further degrading the condition of a free & healthy media.
c. The Indian constitution under article 19(1); suggests freedom of expression for all which includes the freedom to express oneself through speech, writing, printing, visual representations, or any other means. Any law which tries to overpower an individual’s fundamental rights has been subjected to scrutiny by the Supreme Court. Presently many individual content creators have filed their plea in High courts of different states. The netizens have stormed many social media applications including Meta, Instagram & X with, “Kill the Broadcast bill,” movement. Whether the Supreme court would comment their grievances on the situation is a test of time.
Source: The Hindu & Business Standard