I&B Ministry
FM Phase III e-auctions off to slow start; Govt claims Rs 395 crore as winning price
NEW DELHI: The e-auction for FM Radio channels in Phase III got off to a slow start with no bids in certain cities and the provisional winning price lower than the clock round price.
In all, four rounds of e-auction were held today with 135 FM channels in all the 69 cities of the first stage being opened.
At the close of first day of bidding, 78 channels in 54 cities became provisionally winning channels with cumulative provisional winning price of around Rs 395 crore against their aggregate reserve price of about Rs 357 crore.
The e-auction began today (27 July) with Auction Activity Requirement set at 80 per cent. A total of 26 bidders were allowed to participate in the auction.
However, there were no bids for 15 cities and the demand over the price in many cities fell by up to three per cent below the aggregate demand.
The Percentage Price Increment (in INR) applicable for the next clock round was five per cent or higher in the metros of Delhi, Mumbai, and Chennai and in cities like Bhubaneswar, Bengaluru, Aurangabad, Ahmedabad, Guwahati, Jodhpur, Karnal, Patna and Pune.
The highest provisional winning price – the same as the clock round price at the end of the fourth round – was in Mumbai – Rs 41.91 crore, Delhi – Rs 37.41 crore, Bengaluru – Rs 25 crore, Hyderabad – Rs 18 crore, Pune – Rs 16.21 crore, Chandigarh – Rs 15.61 crore; Chennai – Rs 14.2 crore; Lucknow – Rs 14 crore and Ahmedabad Rs 13.89 crore.
The ongoing auction is a Simultaneous Multiple Round Ascending (SMRA) e-auction, which is being conducted online from Auction Control Room No. 404 B Wing, Shastri Bhawan.
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.
