Print, electronic media hit under the guise of OTT platform?

 

Print, electronic media hit under the guise of OTT platform?

The freedom of media in the digital world will be reduced already. We will focus on it. Firstly we will see that while framing the rules for the digital platforms, the government has cited the NBA, the regulatory body of news channels, and the Press Council of India, the regulatory body of print media. Do these institutions have enough power to become regulators?

The Government of India has notified new rules regarding information technology on 25 February. Its name is The Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021. It is feared that these rules will pose a threat to the media institutions and independent journalists running on the Internet. The freedom of media in the digital world will be reduced already. We will focus on it. First, we will see that while framing the rules for a digital platform, the government has cited the NBA, the regulatory body of news channels, and the Press Council of India, the regulatory body of print media. Do these institutions have enough power to become regulators or are it not that by citing these toothless institutions, the government has made a monstrous control for the digital world. The term toothless has been used in courts only for these institutions. With a few examples, we will also see that a government concerned about rumors takes steps when institutions of dock media spread rumors and fake news.

The Government of India has created a code of conduct for the online platform. New rules have been set. Over The Top OTT platform on the Internet also has to follow the rules. You know Netflix and Amazon Prime as OTT platforms. Whose diversity and breadth of programs is also there because there is no censor of any kind. According to the new rules, now the content has been categorized in many ways. It has been said that a three-stage system has been set up for the settlement of disputes.

This rule does not only apply to OTT platforms like Netflix, Amazon Prime but will also apply to news websites. They have to tell from where any material has been published, who has published it. All these will have to form a regulatory body to deal with grievances, which should be headed by retired judges. Be a special person in society. You know that the freedom of media is neither decided by these regulators and not only because of it, freedom of media is protected. It is important to keep this in mind. Racking of press freedom in India has continued to fall due to these regulators.

The information broadcasting minister is right that news channels are undoubtedly a regulatory body. But some channels in the same country are members of this regulatory body and many are not. It is not mandatory for a channel to be a member of a regulatory body. If you are a Republic channel and Arnab Goswami or anchor of other dock media or a channel, then from experience and all the evidence, it can be told that there is no restriction of any rules on them. There is no moral restriction at all.

The name of the current regulatory body is News Broadcasting Standards Authority. NBSA has 26 broadcasters and 77 channel members. While the number of channels is several hundred times more than this. In July 2019, 50 channels formed an association named News Broadcasters Federation. In December 2019, this institution of 78 channels also chose Arnab as its president. The experience of the regulatory body of the news channels is not the same. In many cases, when the institution heard the punishment, the channel dropped the membership. In some cases, this institution played a good role in deciding the common ground rule. But even among them, there will be more cases when it comes to the implementation of the instructions of the government or the court. Sudarshan News had prepared a program regarding UPSC Jihad. The matter reached the Supreme Court when Justice DY Chandrachud told the NBA that you also watch TV? Why did you not control such news items? Then the court said that tell how to strengthen the organization.

In the last seven years, there have been many allegations of spreading fake news on news channels, many people have presented evidence but nothing special happened. There is no need to ask the question of what the regulatory body did in those cases or what the channels did to themselves or what the government did. you know the answer. Unilateral communal programs ran on the channels for months and months but they were not banned. Alt News has caught hundreds of fake news. Now PIB, the unit of the Ministry of Information, has also started giving fake news levels. When Alt News catches fake news, then PIB takes that fake news into cognizance, you can find the answer to this question yourself.

Like you will not be able to see the level of PIB's fake news on this news, which has been revealed by Alt News. Alt News showed how in a fake video related to the Assam elections, the leader of Congress's ally AIUDF and MP Maulana Badruddin Ajmal was shown saying that this India has been ruled by the Mughals for eight hundred years. Will make this country an Islamic nation. This video was made very viral. This video was shared by Vinod Bansal, the national spokesperson of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad. Ajmal was described as a jihadi. Said that the Chief of the AIUDF spoke of making India a Muslim nation. This video was shared by Ashok Srivastava, a journalist of Doordarshan. ABB's and India TV's news anchor shared. Not only this, Prime Minister Modi follows a handle @soulefacts He also shared it. Anuradha of Alt News found in her research that Ajmal had not given any such statement. When the entire video was viewed, Ajmal is saying that "The Mughal emperors ruled this India for 800 years." No one has dreamed such a dream, no one has dared to make this country an Islamic nation. " You can read the rest of this report on the Alt News site. We asked Prateek Sinha what happens to the regulatory bodies of the government to the channels when they catch fake news. Alt News also catches fake news being spread against the government and the BJP.

On January 18 this year, when the case of fake TRP came up, the NBA had demanded action against Arnab's channel. What happened to that demand? The NBA itself cannot afford to take Arnab's channel. Prakash Javadekar did not say this or did not get a chance to tell. In place of this, there would have been a channel that had been questioning both the NBA and the government would have been active. The NBA has also said that the rating agency Bark had complained earlier but it was ignored. This shows that even the rating agency does not listen to the NBA. So you saw that the regulatory body that the government was referring to by bringing strict rules for digital media does not have any special power. All channels have the freedom not to become members of the NBSA. Will this freedom be with the digital platform?

Now come to the Press Council of India or the Press Council of India. In August 2019, this institution had supported the Supreme Court to curb the media in Jammu and Kashmir. In the case of Anuradha Bhasin, you can watch the news from the Internet. Opinion changed when there was criticism. Did the government come forward for freedom of the press then? In 2018, the Press Council of India said in the Supreme Court that it has no power to punish any media institution or person for violating the Press Council of India Act.

So you saw that the Press Council of India and the News Broadcasters Association (NBA) are toothless organizations. Has the government created a similar regulatory body for the Internet platform? The answer is no. If the motive is to stop the rumors, then the government should tell what it was doing when rumors were being spread about the Taliban. However, see another statement of the Minister of Information Broadcasting. All this is part of the press conference of 25 February.

Was the government worried when the Nanochip was rumored in a two thousand note? Similarly, communal rumors were spread in many cases, what did the government do? You can see many high court comments about how many lies were spread by news channels at the same time last year in connecting Corona to the Taliban. If the government is really serious about rumors, then I want to tell a statement of Home Minister Amit Shah. The statement is of 2018, which was given among BJP workers in Kota, Rajasthan. You can also listen to the entire byte. But very carefully both good and bad things have been said simultaneously. According to the convenience, you can say that we have refused and you can also see that the matter has gone.

Is it not that in the name of these rumors, there is a preparation to crush the websites which question the government. Many people are questioning this. You know that every TV has a child lock and there is a different category for children to watch on Netflix and Amazon. If you are a subscriber, then what you will see is all the information under your name is already on that platform. People at home can know who has seen what. It is also marked separately for children. A separate profile can be created for children in which content above the age of 12 will not be shown. Parents can know what children are watching. All this is already in Prime and Netflix. But the new rules were defended by resorting to parental law. The Editors Guild of India has expressed concern about the new IT rules. The Guild has said in its statement that the rules made under the Information Technology Act will bring about a fundamental change in the work of publishers working on the Internet. This will give a big push to the freedom of media in India. These rules give power to the central government to block, delete or change any news published anywhere across the country. Without any judicial intervention. Many of the provisions of these rules make digital news media and media in large measure undesirable.

The Editors Guilt is concerned that the government did not consult any stakeholders before issuing notification of the rules. The Guild demands that these rules are put on hold and there should be proper negotiations with all the parties.

The government should note that in the name of putting a stop to social media, it cannot abolish the constitutional protection given to the independent media which is the cornerstone of our democracy.

In the context of these rules, a report by Hartosh Singh Bal was widely discussed in Caravan magazine. You can read that report on Caravan's website. It has been told that the ministers of the government were concerned about how to curb the news published against the government, journalists, and media institutions. You will still find that news on Caravan's site. In it, only journalists are giving advice on how to enslave journalists. Today Gandhi would not have been marching for freedom of media but not Dandi March. News Minute and The Wire have challenged in the Delhi High Court. The Wire has said in its petition that the Supreme Court had repealed section 66A of the IT Act. The Delhi High Court has issued a notice to the government on this petition. Nitya Ramakrishnan is fighting this case on behalf of Wire and News Minutes. Live law has also challenged these rules in the Kerala High Court. The Kerala High Court has also issued a notice to the Central Government.