I&B Ministry
Comment: Why it’s important for Rathore at MIB to walk the (sports) talk
He may have started the #HumFitToh IndiaFit campaign that went viral on social media last month and had celebs and plebs posting images of their health routine. He may also be a comparatively low-profile minister in the PM Modi cabinet who has delivered on various fronts, including being proactive on issues relating to sports. But Minister of Information & Broadcasting and Youth Affairs & Sports Rajyavardhan Rathore now needs to bring his Olympian attitude-to-succeed and political astuteness to marry the various causes his two ministries espouse.
Though he has been around at MIB for some years now, acting as a junior to more high-profile ministers like Arun Jaitley and Smriti Irani, Rathore’s rise at MIB has lot to do with his success as minister of Youth Affairs and Sports. And, India’s broadcast and entertainment industry, still reeling under the after-effects of a slow economy and some economic policy decisions taken by the federal government, believed they may have found a messiah in Rathore when he was given independent charge of MIB a couple of months back. The arrival in the ministry of a new Secretary (Amit Khare) raised hopes further of removal of many artificial roadblocks created by the previous regime.
Many of the earlier and controversial moves by the Ministry, headed by former TV actress-turned-politician Smriti Irani had the broadcast industry, especially, in a bind and hindered unencumbered growth and expansion. Policy decisions like introduction of hiked processing fees, new classification of `regional’ channels, unofficially nudging TV channels and teleport operators to move operations from foreign to Indian satellites, centralization of regular approval processes, etc. sent the industry into a tailspin.
What was intriguing that though justified by the former minister and some bureaucrats, such moves in the MIB flew in the face of the present BJP-led government and PM Modi’s repeated assertions that India was taking policy steps to improve the country’s global ranking in the `Ease of Doing Business’ index. So much so that the Prime Minister’s Office had to intervene and order a rollback of a MIB decision under Irani on online content and fake news.
Col. (retd.) Rathore as both the Sports and MIB Minister has all the powers at his command to take right steps for the development of sports culture in the country that has produced only a handful of Olympian medalists in individual sports — he himself shot at a silver medal successfully. He has proved his determination in revamping school games with the successful conduct of `Khelo India’ (Play India), which is a holistic approach to prepare athletes from schools to Olympics. It is aimed at achieving the twin objectives of mass participation and promotion of excellence in sports through competition on ground and slick packaging through TV sports channels to give the much needed exposure to emerging Indian talents in the sporting arena.
However, some critics have questioned his commitment to promote sports through media as despite being the Sports Minister, he didn’t protest when his senior at MIB introduced in December 2017 a whopping Rs.100,000 as processing fee for channels telecasting live sporting events.
Given the fact that for the first time he has freedom and a free run to integrate promotion of sports with industry-friendly media policies, it is hoped that he uses the time wisely and work to fulfil the Prime Minister’s ambitious goal of making India both a global media and entertainment hub, and a sporting power.
The lifeline of a sports channel is to have at least three or four live sports properties in a day and channels like Star Sports and Sony-ESPN excel in such a lineup. But a high processing fee per channel per day for live telecasting sporting events could soon make such business decisions unviable for sports channels; especially when they not only invest in telecast rights, but also building up properties from the scratch — Pro Kabaddi League, Pro Wrestling League and Ultimate Table Tennis are prime examples of this model. High fees, which also include temporary uplinking costs incurred on government permissions and technologies, not only put heavy burden on sports channels but also act as a dis-incentive to invest in other non-cricket and emerging sports like badminton, table tennis, weightlifting, boxing, basketball, gymnastics, football and athletics.
Unlike in developed countries, the governing bodies in India that are running these non-cricket sports mostly survive on government grants and fail to attract major sponsors or TV channels as partners for promotional activities. Some of the recent policy decisions of MIB (in the form of high processing fee and creation of artificial barriers) have further disincentivized TV sports channels in joining hands with sports federations to showcase sporting competitions with a view to give a platform to emerging talents and bring more audience to the television screens and also on the ground.
If the government — and the MIB —believes that those managing and telecasting games like cricket can afford to pay the high processing fees and, thus, should be taxed is an argument that’s flawed. It is like in aiming to punish a high performer — also admittedly a bit controversial —for its success, the government has, in reality, managed to end up pushing those low-profile but potential target-sports further down. Controversies and opaqueness notwithstanding, it cannot be wished away that India’s cricket administrative body BCCI has successfully managed to promote the game in India and abroad with resounding success — and in turn making the country a global force to reckon with.
Even the sector regulator, TRAI, had opposed formally introduction by MIB of processing fee for live telecast by non-news and current affairs TV channels and questioned the government as why such a step was taken without due consultation process. Now that the regulator has come out with some progressive recommendations relating to Ease of Doing Business in the Broadcast sector and issues relating to uplink and downlink of TV channels, instead of acting on those suggestions, another move has upset the industry — a recent MIB reference to the regulator to study the matter of temporary uplinking has not gone down too well with the industry that was hoping some respite under Rathore at MIB.
The Sports Minister, who is also the MIB Minister, has a rare opportunity to showcase his talent — to promote sports in India through mass media by easing regulations and lessening the burden on the broadcast sector through administrative reforms, which will very well be in line with PM Modi’s vision. Khelega nahin India, toh champion kaise banega India (If India doesn’t play and gets a chance to showcase talent, how would champs be created)?
I&B Ministry
IT Rules tweaks are clarificatory, not expansion of powers: MeitY
Govt signals flexibility as platforms push for clarity on user content rules
NEW DELHI: The Centre has sought to dial down concerns over its proposed amendments to the IT Rules, with Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology secretary S Krishnan asserting that the changes are intended as clarifications rather than an expansion of regulatory powers.
Pushing back against criticism from platforms and civil society, S Krishnan said the amendments “do not in any way actually give us wider powers” and are meant to remove ambiguity in how existing provisions are applied. He added that the trigger came largely from within the ecosystem, with intermediaries themselves seeking clearer guidance on compliance, takedowns and record preservation.
At the heart of the debate is the growing friction between platforms and policymakers over responsibility for user-generated content. Intermediaries have argued that they should not be treated on par with publishers, particularly when content is created and uploaded by users. Krishnan acknowledged this concern, noting that “a sharper distinction” between user content and publisher content is needed and is currently under examination.
The issue becomes more complex in enforcement scenarios. While registered publishers can be directly asked to modify or remove content, intermediaries often lack control over the original creator. “In such cases, the intermediary cannot direct those changes,” Krishnan explained, underlining the need for procedural nuance.
Another key proposal under discussion is to bring user-generated news and current affairs content within a more unified regulatory ambit, potentially under the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting. The move follows suggestions that a single authority should handle such content, regardless of whether it originates from a publisher or an individual user.
Even as the government frames the amendments as a tidy-up exercise, fault lines remain. Industry players have flagged concerns over compliance burdens, especially for smaller businesses, and questioned whether advisories could effectively become binding without explicit legislative backing. Krishnan said the government is mindful of these risks and is exploring ways to ease obligations, including possible relaxations under certain provisions.
The ministry is also considering consolidating multiple advisories and guidelines into a more structured framework, a step widely seen as addressing long-standing confusion over what platforms are expected to follow.
On takedowns, the government has reiterated that due process will remain unchanged. Krishnan stressed that actions will continue to be governed by established procedures, with reasons recorded and review mechanisms in place. He also pointed to the surge in deepfakes and synthetic media as a factor behind rising content disputes, calling it a “scale challenge” for regulators.
Interestingly, Krishnan also framed social media platforms as commercial entities rather than pure vehicles of free expression, hinting at a broader shift in regulatory thinking as platform economics come into sharper focus.
With stakeholders seeking more time and, in some cases, a rollback of the proposals, the government has kept the consultation process open-ended. Krishnan said further revisions remain on the table, signalling a willingness to adapt the draft based on feedback.
For now, the message from MeitY is clear: the rules may not be tightening in intent, but the effort to define them more clearly is well underway.
