The media plays an important role in the democratic process of a country, more so in today‘s technologically fast-moving environment. Its inherent ability to reach the masses implies that it has a vital role in building (and influencing) public opinion and creating awareness.
Media also plays a vital role in delineating the economic, political, social and cultural characteristics of a country. Thus, media pluralism is a cornerstone of democracy and this fact should be reflected in the plurality of independent and autonomous media and in diversity of media content. Print, television, radio and new media such as Internet are the most popular media.
The Indian media landscape is witnessing several changes that may have far reaching consequences. Major players are looking for expansion of their business interests in various segments of the print and broadcasting sectors leading to horizontal integration of media entities. Also, more and more broadcasting companies owning television channels are venturing into distribution segments of cable television, Direct-to-Home (DTH), Headend-in-the-Sky (HITS) and Internet Protocol Television (IPTV) while distribution segment companies are entering into television broadcasting, leading to vertical integration in the broadcasting sector.
The prime motivation for a media company to have presence in different media segments i.e. to have cross media holding is to maximize its reach to the consumers in different demographies with varying media consumption patterns. This also translates into higher economic gains for the companies. However, if entities having cross media holdings occupy dominant positions in different media sectors it may restrict media pluralism.
The main driver for vertical integration is economic. Though vertical integration of various entities within a particular sector results in reduction in cost to the company and economies of scale, it often manifests in the form of ills of monopolies viz. higher cost to the consumers, deterioration in quality of service in the long run and deterrence to innovations on account of entry barriers for new players. Vertically integrated companies could also affect plurality adversely, more so, if they hold dominant positions and have cross media holdings.
In order to ensure media pluralism and counter the ills of monopolies, it is felt that reasonable restrictions need be put in place on ownership in the media sector. The Media Ownership Rules should be so designed so as to strike a balance between ensuring a degree of plurality of media sources and content, and a level playing field for companies operating in the media sector on the one hand and providing freedom to companies to expand, innovate and invest on the other.
Chapter: I
Entertainment & Media Industry- A Snapshot
The Entertainment and Media (E&M) industry broadly consists of four segments i.e. Television, Print, Radio and other media (such as Internet Access, Film, Out of Home Advertising (OOH), Music, Gaming and Internet Advertising). The global E&M market size, in the year 2011, was estimated to be US $ 1.6 trillion which has grown by 4.9% from year 20102. Currently, India is the 14th largest E&M market in the world with E&M industry revenues contributing about 1% of its GDP. However, industry stakeholders understand and acknowledge that India has the potential to achieve path-breaking growth over the next few years; possibly to reach a size of US $ 100 billion.
Television
The television service sector in the country mainly comprises cable TV services, pay DTH services, IPTV services and free to air DTH services as well as terrestrial TV services provided by Doordarshan, a public broadcaster.
As per an industry report8, total TV households in India were estimated to be 15.5 Crore at the end of year 2012. Assuming that each household consists of 4 adult members, the reach of television is around 62 Crore (i.e. 15.5 Crore x 4). Thus, the reach of the television media in the total population of the country is clearly significant.
Print
As per RNI, the total number of registered publications as on 31st March 2011 is 82,222, which includes 14,508 newspapers. A total of 4,853 new publications were registered in the year 2010-11.From a language point of view, the largest number of newspapers & periodicals – 32,793 are registered in Hindi, followed by 11,478 in English. From a geographical perspective, the largest number of publications – 13,065 is registered in the state of Uttar Pradesh followed by 10,606 in Delhi.
India continues to be one of the few markets where print is growing10. Where, globally, newspapers are facing the dual challenges of falling subscription and advertising revenues and on-line advertising is unable to make up for their losses,Indian newspaper markets continue to grow at a healthy rate based on factors such as rising literacy, current low newspaper penetration, low Internet/ broadband penetration and strong home delivery business models.
With the passage of time the influence of digital news is likely to increase and a combination of print and digital will drive growth. Another key growth area will be the regional markets that are steadily gaining importance in the eyes of advertisers. Realizing the huge potential of the regional print market, the national advertisers are moving to such markets. With proliferation of smart-phones and tablets in India, the digital medium can impact the magazine market. Niche content in magazines and hyper-local news in regional and English newspapers are expected to be the focus of the existing players. To ride on positive advertiser sentiment, several newspapers have launched local editions in regional languages. For instance, the Times of India has entered Kerala while The Hindu has launched its third edition in Kozhikode, besides introducing a printing facility in Mohali which will serve the states of Punjab, Haryana, and Himachal Pradesh.In order to garner additional/alternate revenues, most of the print media players have been investing in the alternate media platforms such as television, radio and the Internet. Tablet versions of newspaper and magazines are also being offered.
Radio
Radio broadcasting has been a primary medium for entertainment, information and education amongst the masses owing mainly to the affordability and terminal portability of radio receivers. Infrastructure wise, All India Radio (AIR), the public broadcaster, has a network comprising 237 stations & around 400 transmitters (149 MW, 48 SW & around 200 FM), which provide radio coverage to 99.14 % of the population and reach 91.79 % area of the country. The FM Radio coverage is about 40% of the territory of India. As on date, 242 private FM radio stations are in operation in 86 cities of the country. Phase-III of the FM radio services expansion plan is intended to extend FM radio‘s reach to 294 cities with additional 839 FM radio stations thereby boosting the regional growth of FM radio stations. It is expected that post Phase III, the FM radio will cover around 85% of the territory of the country.
Increase in radio listenership has been the major growth driver, with consumers listening to radio through new mediums like mobile phones and live Internet streaming. The streaming of radio programmes on the Internet by both traditional radio broadcasters as well as Internet-only broadcasters is on the rise. By streaming their programmes online, station operators can widen their reach beyond their signal area and increase their potential to sell to national advertisers.
Other Media
As of September 2012, Internet subscribers11 have risen to 2.4 Crore (excluding Internet access by wireless phone subscribers), wherein the number of broadband subscribers is 1.47 Crore, showing an annual growth of approx. 14.42%. Internet penetration12 is still low in India (2%) as compared to the mature markets such as Hong Kong (41%), France (35%), USA (29%) etc.
Impact of Technological developments
The discussion on E&M industry would not be complete without considering the impact of the technological developments, especially convergence. Some of the technological advancements that have impacted the media sector are smart phones, 3G and 4G technologies, tablets, video on demand, 3D technologies and Digital Rights Management (DRM)14. There has been a paradigm shift in the way the content is prepared, carried and delivered.
Historically, telecommunications, information technology (IT) and broadcasting operated independently. The technologies, content/ information transmitted and networks employed by them were distinct and separate. Television, radio, telephones and computers were used for specific different purposes. However, technological developments particularly related to IP technology and increasing use of packet switched digital communications have made converged services possible. The telecom networks can provide access to internet and broadcast content in addition to telecommunication services and similarly with digitization, cable TV networks can also provide Internet access as well as telephone services.Market related convergence also occurs due to consumer expectation of one-stop service availability, innovative bundling of services and pricing.
In these days of emerging convergence, the print media is rapidly embracing new technological innovations and progressively utilizing e-services by launching e-versions of their print newspapers, magazines and directories etc. Besides this, news and entertainment videos, e-version of the print media are being made available to subscribers on computers and other digital devices such as Smart phones, Tablets, etc.
As another example of progressive convergence, many telecom companies in India are offering interactive broadcast content services such as news & updates, astrology, contests & gaming, Video on Demand (VoD), Internet radio services etc through voice portals. IPTV is also being eyed by many telecom operators as a way to boost the uptake of broadband.
Convergence of customer premises equipment, transmission and access media and service providers reduces the cost of delivery of service and it also increases the level of competition.
Why regulate?
1.The products of media are not regular commodities as they constitute and shape cultural life of a society and serve as a strong tool to form public perception. Media products play a special role in democracies as media in modern societies provide the arena for public debates, a virtual public space where different issues of public interest can be represented and discussed. Media influences ideas and therefore can swing opinions.
2.The size of the E&M industry, its current growth trends, its future potential and its power to influence news and views within its reach are the factors that attract, amongst others, large corporates and political parties and organizations to the media business.
3.There is an increasing trend of influence of political parties/politicians in the media sector. Political parties either directly or indirectly through surrogates control newspapers, TV channels and TV distribution systems. Such TV channels and newspapers would, obviously, promote the leaders and propagate the agenda of these political parties. This tendency is more prevalent in regional markets. There are TV channels directly or indirectly named after political leaders/parties. In the cable TV distribution space, there are complaints that entities backed by political parties are either taking over operations of other cable TV operators or driving them out of business using other means, thereby virtually extending their monopoly in the entire region. In such a situation, the broadcasters are at the mercy of these politically backed entities for distribution of their channels in that region. Such entities may practically throttle content selectively to suit their own agenda as well as fetter competition in the market, depriving consumers of the benefits of effective competition.
4.A number of corporate sector entities are entering the media sector. Corporates can use media to bias views and influence policy making in a manner so as to promote their vested interests while generating business revenues for themselves. This has led to emergence of large media conglomerates where single entities/groups have strong presence across different media segments.
5.The inherent conflict of interest which arises from uncontrolled ownership in the media sector gives rise to manifestations such as (i) paid news (ii) corporate and political lobbying by popular television channels (iii) propagation of biased analysis and forecasts both in the political arena as well as in the corporate sector (iv) irresponsible reporting to create sensationalism. These are even more lethal where the ownership/control rests with entities which have both business and political interests. Such ownership/control is not uncommon in the country.
6.News is meant to provide information that is not only of interest to the public, truthful and factually correct, but also information that is balanced, objective, fair and neutral. This clearly sets apart what is described as ―news‖ from opinions expressed in editorial articles or advertisements and commercials paid for by corporate entities, governments, organizations or individuals. When the distinction between news and advertisement gets blurred, advertisements begin to masquerade as news. When such paid news is published or broadcast, the reader or the viewer is misled into believing that an advertisement or a sponsored feature is a news story that is truthful, fair and objective. We have recently witnessed a virtual media war between two national dailies regarding publishing of paid news during coverage of assembly elections in a state.
7.There have been several instances reported of leading news channels/news-dailies exploiting the power of the media in collusion with corporate houses and politicians in lobbying for influencing policy decisions to favour such corporate houses. Not very long ago, the story of how corporate houses connived with the media in an attempt to influence political decision making to distort the market in a core infrastructure sector, engaged the nation‘s attention.
8.Media outlets owned/controlled by industrialists or business houses have it in their power to propagate biased analysis or forecasts to further their business interests or harm the interests of business opponents, to the detriment of the interests of investors and other stakeholders. Such exercises could vitiate the investment climate in the country and jeopardise economic growth. Similarly, media outlets owned/controlled by politicians/political organisations may also try to influence public opinion in their favour by propagating biased analysis or forecasts e.g. manipulated EXIT polls etc.
9.Media outlets owned/controlled by political/business entities may try to sensationalise a news item to undermine the interests of their opponents with scant regard for the overall national interest. Instances of such irresponsible reporting and sensationalisation are not uncommon during, say, political elections, when controversial news items/videos/visuals are bandied in the public domain through media outlets.
Regulating ownership of media outlets is thus essential in the public interest, as a guarantee of plurality and diversity of opinion. It is, therefore, topical to start talking about regulation of media ownership.
Summary of Recommendations of TRAI on “Media Ownership” dated 25th Feb. 2009
1. Cross-media control/ ownership or Horizontal Integration
i) Necessary safeguards should be put in place to ensure that plurality and diversity are maintained across the three media segments of print, television and radio. It should remain positive in essence.
2.Vertical Integration
i) The broadcaster should not have ―control‖ in distribution and vice-versa.
iii) The existing broadcasters who may have ―control‖ in distribution (MSO/Cable/DTH) and entities in the distribution sector who may have similar ―control‖ over broadcasting should be given sufficient time of three years for restructuring.
iv) For the purpose of putting in place effective safeguards to prevent vertical integration between the broadcasting sector and its distribution platforms as recommended above, the word ―entity‖ be given a broad meaning so as to include any person including an individual, a group of persons, a public or private body corporate, a firm, a trust, or any other organization or body and also to include ―inter-connected undertakings‖ as defined in the Monopolistic and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969 (54 of 1969).
3.Limit on number of Licenses by a single entity:
The current restrictions on number of licenses held by a single entity (including policies and TRAI recommendations on FM Radio and Mobile TV) are adequate for the time being.
4. Concentration of Control/ Ownership across Media:
After working out the required safeguards for horizontal & vertical integration, the merger and acquisition guidelines for the sector may also be issued to prevent media concentration and creation of significant market power.
5. Cross control/ ownership across Telecom and Media companies: No restriction should be imposed on cross control/ ownership across telecom and media sectors, at this point of time. The issue could be reviewed after two years.
D. Recommendations of ASCI
1. Cross Media Ownership
(i) Cross media ownership restrictions rules must be put in place by the appropriate regulator. There is ample evidence of market dominance in certain relevant markets. Cross media restrictions must be based on a detailed market analysis of well defined relevant markets.
(ii) Any cross media rules on ownership must include broadcasting, print and the new media.
(iii) The market survey and analysis needs to be made periodically (every 3-4 years) and the ownership restriction/ rules may then be changed accordingly.
(iv) Disclosure norms that makes cross media affiliation and ownership clear to the viewer need to be publicized.
2. Vertical Integration
(i) Regulations on vertical integration are necessary to ensure that the ―must carry‖ against the ―must provide‖ provisions of the broadcasters are mandatory and non- discriminatory.
(ii) The appropriate regulator must also be able to monitor compliance and regulate the rate at which access to broadcasting service networks are provided so that the delivery platforms do not block competitions from others.
(iii) A cap on vertical holdings must be carefully determined. The suggested cap must be based on existing market conditions, and implementable.
3. Aligning regulatory framework to market conditions
(i) The emerging convergence must be taken into account and the regulatory framework for media must be aligned to address competition concerns among the media spectrum. The regulatory framework must be aligned to market realities in terms of convergence and would have to be framed in a holistic manner.
(ii) A convergence regulator to cover all media access print, broadcasting and telecom must be established.
E. Disqualification of certain entities for entry into Broadcasting and Distribution activities (Recommendations of TRAI dated 12th Nov. 2008 and 28th Dec. 2012)
Media plays a special role in democracies. It serves as a strong tool to form public perception as it provides the arena for public debates where different issues of public interest can be represented and discussed. Media influences ideas and therefore can swing opinions. It is, therefore, important that an arm‘s length distance is ensured between the media and organs of governance, political institutions and other entities which have a profound sway over public opinion. In many developed democracies, certain entities such as political and religious bodies are explicitly debarred under the relevant laws from holding broadcasting licences. In this regard, TRAI has issued certain recommendations and salient points of these recommendations are as below:
(i) Political bodies should not be allowed to enter into broadcasting activities.
(ii) Pending enactment of any new legislation on broadcasting, the disqualifications stated below for political bodies to enter into broadcasting and/or distribution activities should be implemented through executive decision by incorporating the disqualifications into Rules, Regulations and Guidelines as necessary. “Disqualification of political bodies:
(a) A body whose objects are wholly or mainly of a political nature;
(b)A body affiliated to a body, referred to in clause (a);
(c) An individual who is an officer of a body, referred to in clause (a) or (b);
(d) A body corporate, which is an associate of a body corporate referred to in clause (a) or (b);
(e) A body corporate, in which a body referred to in any of clauses (a) and (b) is a participant with more than a five per cent interest;
(f) A body which is controlled by a person referred to in any of clauses (a) to (d) or by two or more persons, taken together;
(g) A body corporate, in which a body referred to in clause (f), other than one which is controlled by a person, referred to in clause (c) or by two or more such persons, taken together, is a participant with more than a five per cent interest.”
(iii) Religious bodies may not be permitted to own their own broadcasting stations and teleports. However, broadcasting channels may be permitted to carry programmes aimed at the propagation of different religious faiths subject to strict compliance with the applicable content code or programme code, as the case may be.
(iv) Urban and local bodies, Panchayati Raj bodies and other publicly funded bodies should not be allowed to enter into broadcasting activities.
(v) The Central Government Ministries and Departments, Central Government owned companies, Central Government undertakings, Joint ventures of the Central Government and the private sector and Central Government funded entities should not be allowed to enter into the business of broadcasting and/or distribution of TV channels.
(vi) State Government Departments, State Government owned companies, State Government undertakings, Joint ventures of the State Government and the private sector, and State Government funded entities should not be allowed to enter into the business of broadcasting and/or distribution of TV channels.
(vii) If the Central Government has already accorded permission to any State Government/State Government owned companies/State Government undertakings/Joint venture of the State Government and the private sector/State Government funded entities to enter into the cable distribution platform, then the Central Government should provide an appropriate exit route.
While recommending the disqualification of certain entities for entry into broadcasting and distribution activities, TRAI‘s basic intention was to ensure that power of the media is not exploited by such entities for swaying public opinion in their favour, or for promoting vested political interests and propagating ideologies.
However, other kinds of entities can also gain such effective control over the media as to be able to exploit its power for their own purposes, often spreading misinformation and compromising public interest. There may be a need to expand the list of entities to which general disqualification would apply.
In addition, there is a need to address the problem of surrogates, whereby a disqualified entity may wield media power through another entity over which it has influence, and which does not suffer from general disqualification for entry into the media sector. Grant of license/permission to such a surrogate entity may defeat the very purpose of putting general disqualifications in place. In the circumstances, it may be argued that the licensor should have the power to disqualify an entity from entering the media sector, wherever the licensor is satisfied, based on its own assessment or on the recommendations of the regulator, that the granting of a media sector license to that entity would be detrimental to the public interest. Ofcom, for example, prohibits persons who in its opinion, are subject to undue influence by an otherwise disqualified person.
Chapter: III
International scenario
Media ownership rules and restrictions have been included in the regulatory framework of several international markets. Many international markets have identified the parameters that define the level of concentration in media ownership and cross media holdings. These parameters are reviewed periodically and the restrictions/ safeguards are modulated accordingly. The media ownership regulations in UK, USA, Australia, Germany, South Africa, Canada, South Korea and France have been studied.
The international markets have prescribed different kinds of restrictions in their jurisdictions depending upon the requirement of the particular country or market. The regulations in the major international markets can be placed in following broad categories:
A. Disqualifications:
Restrictions on allowing certain persons/ entities/ organizations to operate in the media sector.
B. Restrictions on domination within a media sector
i. Restrictions on dominance in TV broadcasting: Restrictions on control of significant percentage of total television audience shares and/or restrictions on holding multiple licenses.
ii. Restrictions on dominance in Radio broadcasting: Restrictions on control of significant percentage of total television audience shares and/or restrictions on holding multiple licenses.
iii. Restrictions on dominance in Print Media: Restrictions on control of significant percentage of market share by a single entity in the print media.
C. Restrictions on domination by the media i.e. Cross Media restrictions:
i. Restriction on acquiring a license in any media segment in case the person/company holds a license in any other media segment in that particular market/area e.g. the ―Two out of Three‖ rule i.e. any entity can at most have presence in two out of three media segments (Television, Radio and Newspaper) in the same market/service area.
ii. Restrictions on limit of investment in other broadcasting activities by the holder of a broadcasting license.
D. Restrictions on mergers and acquisitions: Restrictions on mergers of entities holding significant market power.
A. Disqualifications
UK :The following entities are prohibited from holding a broadcast license:
Local Authorities ,Political Organizations ,BBC ,Persons who in the opinion of the Office of Communications (Ofcom) are subject to undue influence by a disqualified person such as to act against public interest ,Religious bodies may not hold licenses for the commercial TV channels, etc
Germany:Political parties and organizations are prohibited from holding a broadcast license.
B. Restrictions on domination within a media segment
USA :
National TV Ownership: No limit on the number of TV stations a single entity may own nationwide as long as the station group, collectively, does not reach more than 39% of all U.S. TV households18.
Local TV multiple ownership: An entity may own two stations in the same DMA (Designated Market Area)19 if either (1) the service areas of the stations do not overlap or (2) at least one of the stations is not ranked among the top four stations in DMA (based on market share) and at least eight independently owned TV stations would remain in the market after the proposed combination.
Canada
Generally, an entity is not permitted to own more than one over-the-air station in one language in a given market. However, the Canadian Radio-television Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) has made a number of exceptions to this policy over the years in recognition of the need for locally focused programming in small cities adjacent to larger centers.
France
For radio, an entity may not control one or more stations or network(s) if the aggregate audience exceeds 150 million.
Non-EU investment is limited to a 20% share of the capital of a terrestrial Radio service in French language.
C. Restrictions on dominance by the media-Cross media Restrictions
Australia
A person must not control:
o A commercial TV broadcasting license and a commercial radio broadcasting license having the same license area.
o A commercial television broadcasting license and a newspaper associated with that license area.
o Or a commercial radio broadcasting license and newspaper associated with that license area.
Canada
Generally, the CRTC does not approve transactions that results one entity owning or controlling media outlets in more than two of the following categories in the same market:
Local radio stations,
Local television stations and
Local newspapers.
Thus no single person or entity can control all three types of media
etc………………………..
Chapter: IV Media Ownership/Control
A. Why media ownership/ control matters
1.Media markets, in the pursuit of efficiency through economies of scale and network effects, generally have a tendency to move away from the competitive form of organization towards oligopoly or monopoly. Such a situation raises concern as the efficiency that results from large economies of scale also leads towards a smaller number of competitors and can degenerate into inefficient abuse of monopoly power. Monopoly in media markets is however quite different in its impact from monopoly in products and services markets. Concentration in media markets, apart from the usual economic effects, can profoundly influence opinion and ideas.
2.Empirical evidence suggests that concentration in media markets – fewer independent owners of media outlets— has a negative effect on diversity. The economic interests of media owners influence their advertising, programming choices, and how they provide access to information.
3.Media ownership is a source of debate, comments and government review in many countries around the world. Media ownership is regulated differently to ownership of most other business activities because of the media‘s place in a healthy democracy. They provide the range of voices and opinions that informs the public, influences opinion, and supports political debate. Regulation to ensure a plurality of media ownership is therefore particularly aimed at ensuring a diversity of news provision. There is a widely held belief that media outlets concentrated in the hands of too few entities could threaten access of diverse view-points.
4.The 1st Report (2007-08) of the Select Committee on Communication (House of Lords), UK, has listed the ways in which ownership can impact on news output, which include the following:
(i) Direct intervention by an owner
(ii) Indirect influence of an owner through the appointment of an editor who shares his views
(iii) The influence of the business approaches that an owner can take different approaches to journalism
5.It is not necessary for an owner to give a direct instruction in order to influence content. There are many ways in which owner can influence a newspaper without giving a downright instruction. More common is the indirect influence that an owner can have. Usually the appointment of a newspaper‘s editor is down to the owner of that paper. This gives the owner a clear mechanism of influence over his title‘s editorial agenda. Once an editor is in place it is usually the owner who has the power to fire him so even when the editor and owner have different views there is considerable incentive for the editor to avoid upsetting his owner.
6.Further, some owners take a long view of the need for investment while others take a short-term view of profits. An owner‘s approach to profit making and investment in news gathering can affect news content in broadcasting as well. Broadcast news output may be affected by cost-cutting measures, targeted investment, and retrenchment. A more subtle, but potentially more powerful influence, which can emanate from the particular vision of an owner or an editor-in-chief, is manifested through what kind of journalism is invested in, and what kinds of stories are followed or not followed. According to the Select Committee, different ownership structures could have different impacts on journalism and content.
Paid News in the spotlight
The issue of paid news has been debated for a long time, most recently during the 2012 Gujarat assembly elections, the Jindal Steel-Zee News dispute and disqualification of a sitting UP MLA by the Election Commission of India (ECI) in October 2011. The Standing Committee on Information Technology recently submitted its report on the “Issues Related to Paid News”. The report discusses the definition of paid news, reasons for its proliferation, existing mechanisms to address the problem and recommendations to control it.
Need for comprehensive definition of paid news
The Press Council of India (PCI) defines paid news as any news or analysis appearing in print or electronic media for consideration in cash or kind. The Committee acknowledged challenges in defining and establishing incidence of paid news, citing new manifestations like advertisements disguised as news, denial of coverage to select electoral candidates, private deals between media houses and corporates and the rise in paid content. Hence, it asked the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MoIB) to formulate a comprehensive legal definition of ‘paid news’ and suggest measures for usage of ‘circumstantial evidence’ in establishing incidence of paid news.
Reasons for rise in incidence of paid news
The Committee identified corporatisation of media, desegregation of ownership and editorial roles, decline in autonomy of editors/journalists and poor wage levels of journalists as key reasons for the rise in incidence of paid news. It urged the MoIB to ensure periodic review of the editor/journalist autonomy and wage conditions. It also recommended mandatory disclosure of ‘private treaties’ and details of advertising revenue by the media houses.
Need for empowered regulators and stricter punitive provisions
The Committee observed that statutory regulators like the PCI and Electronic Media Monitoring Centre (EMMC) lack adequate punitive powers while self-regulatory industry bodies like the News Broadcasting Standards Authority have even failed to take cognisance of the problem. The PCI and self-regulatory bodies are also plagued by conflict of interest since a majority of their members are media-owners.
The Committee recommended the establishment of either a single regulatory body for both print and electronic media or setting-up a statutory body for the electronic media on the lines of the PCI. Such regulator(s) should have the power to take strong action against offenders and should not include media owners as members. It highlighted the need for stricter punitive provisions to control paid news and sought further empowerment of the ECI to deal with cases of paid news during elections.
Committee critical of government’s inaction
The Committee censured the MoIB for its failure to establish a strong mechanism to check the spread of paid news. It criticised the government for dithering on important policy initiatives, citing the lack of action on various recommendations of the PCI and ECI. Previously, the PCI had sought amendments to make its directions binding on the government authorities and to bring the electronic media under its purview. Similarly, the ECI recommended inclusion of indulgence by an electoral candidate in paid news as a corrupt practice and publication of such paid news as an electoral offence. The Committee also expressed concern that the MoIB and self-regulatory bodies have not conducted any study to evaluate the mechanism adopted by other countries to tackle the problem of paid news.
| The Department-Related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Information Technology presented its 47th report on the “Issues Related to Paid News” in the Lok Sabha on May 6, 2013. The Committee is headed by Mr. Rao Inderjit Singh. | |||
| |||
No comments:
Post a Comment