I&B Ministry
Cabinet approves 26 per cent FDI in digital media
MUMBAI: As the cabinet government amended the foreign direct investment (FDI) policy, it has also given the nod to 26 per cent overseas investment in digital media with government approval.
"The extant FDI policy provides for 49 per cent FDI under approval route in up-linking of ''news & current affairs'' TV channels. It has been decided to permit 26 per cent FDI under government route for uploading/streaming of news and current affairs through digital media, on the lines of print media," an official statement said.
While the FDI policy has not touched digital media for a long time, the cap has been introduced along the lines of print media where 26 per cent FDI is allowed through government approval route.
“The scope of the impact will be determined by the wording of the provision in the FDI policy. News and current affairs are present on social media platforms, on digital platforms that are subsidiaries of foreign brands etc. How would you differentiate between TV channels which have 49 per cent and their online streams, which will effectively have 26 per cent?” Eros International group chief marketing officer Manav Sethi commented.
The previous time when FDI norms in media were relaxed was in November 2015 to attract overseas funds. The FDI limit in news channels and private FM radio was raised to 49 per cent,up from 26 per cent, while 100 per cent foreign investment was allowed in entertainment channels.
“FDI in digital media is a welcome development. Clarity around this fast-growing segment of the media industry will act as an enabler for capital infusion. Significant value will be unlocked going forward,” Deloitte partner Jehil Thakkar commented.
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.
