I&B Ministry
CBFC took unilateral decision to put list of offensive words on hold: Rathore
NEW DELHI: The Parliament was informed on 13 March that the list of 28 “objectionable and abusive” words suggested for banning from Indian films by Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) chairman Pahlaj Nahalani was held back. This, because a need was felt to consult on the same with people from different sections of society.
Minister of State for Information and Broadcasting Rajyavardhan Rathore told the Lok Sabha today that the decision in this regard had been taken by the Board in a meeting on 23 February.
The Minister also said that the list of objectionable words circulated by Nihalani on 12 February this year had been compiled by regional offices of the CBFC in 2003.
Meanwhile, a Ministry official told Indiantelevision.com last month that any decision in this regard may have been taken at the level of the Board or by its chairman, who had issued the list leading to protests from some members.
Rathore had earlier said, “CBFC under the Ministry certifies films for public screening in accordance with the Cinematograph Act, 1952 and Cinematograph (Certification) Rules, 1983. Section 5B of the Cinematograph Act, 1952 provides principles for guidance in certifying films. Guidelines for certification of films notified under the Cinematograph (Certification) Rules lay down among other things that CBFC shall be guided by the following principles in this regard: (i) human sensibilities are not offended by vulgarity, obscenity or depravity; and (ii) such dual meaning words as obviously cater to baser instincts are not allowed.”
In a circular to the producers’ association and regional officers, the Board had last month listed several “objectionable words” that are being used in films and directed its regional officers to ensure a ban on the list of cuss words. It also aimed to seek more conformity from directors and scriptwriters on cultural matters and political correctness. It also said Mumbai should be used in place of Bombay.
The list led to a Twitter war of words, where some members said Nihalani had taken the decision unilaterally.
However, Nihalani told Indiantelevision.com that he was within his rights to issue the list as he was only using the powers given to him under the Cinematograph Act and was only referring to words that the Certification Guidelines do not allow.
I&B Ministry
AIDCF moves TDSAT over Waves plan to stream linear TV channels
Industry body flags regulatory gap as OTT push sparks broadcast turf war
NEW DELHI: The battle between traditional television distributors and digital platforms has found its way to the courts, with the All India Digital Cable Federation (AIDCF) moving the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) against Prasar Bharati’s latest OTT play.
At the heart of the dispute is Waves, Prasar Bharati’s OTT platform, which has invited applications to onboard linear satellite TV channels. Aidcf, which represents multi-system operators (msos), argues that this move sidesteps existing broadcasting rules and risks tilting the playing field in favour of digital platforms.
The federation’s petition hinges on a key provision in the Uplinking and Downlinking Guidelines, 2022. Clause 11(3)(f) allows broadcasters to downlink channels only if they provide signal decoders to recognised distribution platforms such as MSOS, DTH operators, hits operators and iptv platforms. OTT platforms, aidcf points out, do not feature on that list.
In simple terms, AIDCF’s argument is this: if OTT platforms are not officially recognised distributors, they should not be receiving broadcast signals in the first place. By inviting channels onto Waves, the federation claims, Prasar Bharati is opening a backdoor that lets broadcasters bypass long-standing rules.
The concern goes beyond legal interpretation. Aidcf says OTT platforms currently operate without a clear regulatory framework, allowing them to expand into traditional broadcasting territory without the compliance burden that cable and satellite operators must carry. That, it argues, creates an uneven contest.
There is also a warning for broadcasters. If they provide signal decoders to an OTT platform like Waves, they could risk breaching the very conditions under which their downlinking permissions were granted.
For its part, Prasar Bharati’s Waves initiative is positioned as a step towards wider access and digital reach, bringing linear television into the streaming era. But critics say the move blurs the line between regulated broadcasting and largely unregulated streaming.
The matter is expected to come up before tdsat next week. The outcome could do more than settle a single dispute. It may help define how India regulates the fast-merging worlds of television and OTT, where the lines are getting fuzzier by the day and the stakes, sharper than ever.
