Introduction:
Former president of India’s Press Council, also a former Supreme Court Justice, Mr. M. Katju, stated that television and radio must be brought under the purview of India’s Press Council or a similar regulatory agency. The established media regulatory bodies such as India’s Press Council, which is a statutory body, and the self-regulatory organization News Broadcasting Standards Authority, issue requirements that are more in the form of guidelines. Media is largely self-regulated in India.
Indian Media consists of several different types of communications: television, radio, cinema, newspapers, magazines, and Internet-based Web sites/portals. Indian media was active since the late 18th century with print media started in 1780, radio broadcasting initiated in 1927, and the screening of Auguste and Louis Lumière moving pictures in Bombay initiated during the July of 1895.[1] It ranks among the world’s oldest and largest media. The media was free and independent in India for most of its existence. So why is there a growing importance of a media regulatory framework in recent years?
Need for Media Regulation in India
Article 19 of the Indian constitution which guarantees the right to freedom of speech and expression. The right to freedom of the press also forms part of the right to freedom of speech. This right is not absolute, however. Article 19(2) adds to the rider that this right. May be subject to legitimate limitations in the interests of India’s sovereignty and integrity, state security. Friendly ties with foreign states, public order, decency or morality. Or in the interests of court contempt, slander or incitement to an offense. The definition of many terms and the degree of ‘reasonable restriction’ are not clearly define.
The current media regulatory bodies are inadequate and there is no clear framework. There are currently no umbrella regulations on media companies’ cross-ownership. Despite some licensing rules that bar individuals from owning more. Than one broadcasting service in the same market.
A legal statutory framework will not only reasonably regulate the media sector. But can also help in avoiding monopoly in this sector.
Private bodies such as the Indian Broadcasters Federation (IBF), News Broadcasters Association (NBA), Indian Media Group (IMG), Indian Society of Advertisers (ISA), The Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI), Advertising Agencies Association of India (AAAI), Media Research Users Council (MRUC), Audit Bureau of Circulations (ABC), Press Trust of India (PTI), Confederation of Indian Industry (CII), the Associated Chambers of Commerce and Industry of India (ASSOCHAM), Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FICCI), and United News of India (UNI) play a major role in regulating electronic media in India.[2] With the current surge in the use of OTT platforms, the government has asked them to form a self-regulatory body.
The Press Council of India, too, has limited powers of enforcing the guidelines issued. It cannot penalize newspapers, news agencies, editors, and journalists for violation of the guidelines. The PCI only overviews the functioning of press media. That is, it can enforce standards upon newspapers, journals, magazines, and other forms of print media. It does not have the power to review the functioning of the electronic media like radio, television, and internet media. [3]
The question which is debated frequently is how to determine; whether a certain limitation is acceptable? There is a ‘three-part test’ that is apply when determining whether to accept a specific limitation on freedom of expression:
Firstly, the interference must be in accordance with law; secondly, the legally sanctioned restriction must protect or promote an aim that is deemed legitimate in international law; and thirdly, it must be necessary to protect or promote the legitimate aim.[4]
So, in certain cases, the regulatory system would have a strong impact on media freedom and professionalism. A structure under close control by governments is unlikely to encourage media pluralism and diversity. A voluntary scheme, or one with clear legal or statutory guarantees of freedom, can protect media pluralism from intervention by the government, and can help improve professional skills and standards.
Conclusion
Existing laws for regulation over electronic media in India are insufficient.
The laws need to keep changing with the change in technology and keep up with the pace of rapidly changing times. The inherent and constant conflict of interests that emerges from unchecked media ownership gives rise, among other things, to sponsored media articles, biased evaluations and predictions in the political and corporate arena and reckless, sensationalist coverage. When control lies with individuals who have business and political agendas, the electronic media becomes much more harmful and a tool to create disharmony in the State.
Therefore, the need to maintain pluralism is high, and the institutions and bodies involved are in the process of taking necessary steps to accomplish this, and the evolution of a strong regulatory system is not too far.
[1] Choudhry, HISTORY OF MASS MEDIA IN INDIA History of Mass media from National Institute of Mass Communication New Delhi (2018), http://www.nimc-india.com/history-mass-media-india.html (last visited Jul 18, 2020).
[2] https://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/19633/7/07_introduction.pdf
[3] Regulation of media in India – A brief overview, PRSIndia (2017), https://www.prsindia.org/theprsblog/regulation-media-india-brief-overview (last visited Jul 18, 2020).
[4] International law on media and regulation , International Law on Media and Elections – (2012), http://aceproject.org/ace-en/topics/me/mea/mea01 (last visited Jul 18, 2020).
0 Comments