Self-regulation for the press

Prof Rakesh Kumar Goswami
On National Press Day (Nov. 16), it is time to examine if the model of self-regulation can work for the Press like it is envisaged for the broadcast and the digital media in the new rules.
In June last year, the Central government notified the Cable Television Networks (Amendment) Rules, 2021, which provides a statutory mechanism for redressal of grievances and complaints of viewers relating to television programmes. According to these amended rules, there is a three-level complaint redressal structure, the first level of which is self-regulation by broadcasters. The second level involves self-regulation by the self-regulating bodies of broadcasters; and third is the oversight mechanism by the Central Government. This self-regulatory mechanism is similar to the one for the over-the-top (OTT) players and digital news publishers as envisaged in the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, issued only a few months before the cable television network rules.
According to the new rules, every broadcaster shall establish a grievance or complaint redressal mechanism and appoint an officer to deal with the complaints. The grievance officer shall take a decision on every grievance or complaint within fifteen days and inform the complaint of its decision. If the decision of the broadcaster is not communicated to the complainant within the stipulated period of fifteen days, or if the complainant is not satisfied with the decision of the broadcaster, he or she may prefer an appeal to the self-regulating body of which such broadcaster is a member, within fifteen days therefrom. The self-regulating body shall dispose of the appeal within sixty days of receipt of appeal and convey its decision in the form of a guidance or advisory to the broadcaster, and inform the complainant of such decision within a period of fifteen days. If the complaint is still dissatisfied, he may within fifteen days of such decision, prefer an appeal to the Central Government for its consideration under the oversight mechanism. It is only at this stage that the government comes into the picture. Under the oversight mechanism, the Central government shall set up an inter-departmental committee chaired by the additional secretary in the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, and consisting of representatives from the Ministry of Women and Child Development, Ministry of Home Affairs, Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology, Ministry of External Affairs, Ministry of Defence, and representatives of such other ministries and organisations, including experts, as the Central Government may decide. The inter-departmental committee can make the following recommendations to the Central Government:
(i) advising, warning, censuring, admonishing or reprimanding such broadcaster; or
(ii) requiring an apology of such broadcaster; or
(iii) requiring such broadcaster to include a warning card or a disclaimer; or
(iv) requiring such broadcaster to delete or modify content or take the channel or a programme off-air for a specified time period where it is satisfied that such action is warranted, for reasons to be recorded in writing.
The Central Government may, after taking into consideration the recommendations of the Committee, issue appropriate orders and directions to the broadcaster. A similar oversight mechanism is in place for the internet intermediaries and the digital platforms.
The Cable Television Network Rules made under the Cable Television Network Act, 1995, were aimed at regulating content and operation of cable networks in the early 1990s when there was a haphazard mushrooming of cable television networks in the country. The rules had programming code for the content and advertising codes for the advertisements to be followed by the broadcasters but there was no mechanism for complaint against either the content or the advertisements shown on television.
Until the amendment in the cable television network rules, two self-regulating bodies of the broadcasting sector – the Broadcasting Content Complaints Council (BCCC) under the Indian Broadcasting Foundation (for non-new content) and the News Broadcasting Standards Authority (NBSA) set up by the News Broadcasters Association – looked after the complaints related to the content broadcast on television. Even though both these bodies are headed by an eminent jurist, mostly former Supreme Court judges, they did not have any statutory status. The amended rules give legal recognition to both the NBSA and the BCCC.
These two self-regulating bodies respectively framed the code of ethics for non-news and news content. The IBF formed the self-regulatory content guidelines for non-news and current affairs channels to ensure that broadcasters conformed to the ‘Programme Code’ prescribed under the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995 and the Rules framed thereunder. And, the News Broadcasters Association, which has been rechristened as the News Broadcasters and Digital Association (NBDA), has framed the Code of Ethics and Broadcasting Standards. For the digital platforms, such a code has been notified under the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021.
The remarkable feature of all these guidelines is the model of self-governance, self-regulation and self-monitoring.
If this model can work for the broadcast and digital media, why can it not for the print media? This question assumes importance on the National Press Day (November 16), which commemorates the setting up of the Press Council of India, a statutory quasi-judicial autonomous authority. There is no self-regulating body of the press like the BCCC and the NBSA. The Indian Newspaper Society (INS) is a central organisation of the Press of India and is focussed on promoting and safeguarding the business interests of its members incidental to the production of their publications.
Some former Press Council of India chairmen have called for setting up a media council of India as the statutory body for complaints related to media but the government has preferred self-regulation by the broadcasters and digital platform. At a time when the Supreme Court has expressed concern over rising hate speech in the country, especially from the studios of news channels, it may be worthwhile to study if the BCCC and NBSA can do anything to curtail this phenomenon. It is equally important to study if the Press Council of India has been able to curb the menace of paid news and other ills related to the print media.
But the model of self-monitoring may still be the answer to the ills that plague the Indian media today.
(The writer is Professor of Print Media at the Indian Institute of Mass Communication and Regional Director of its Jammu campus.)