I&B Ministry
I&B ministry seeks clarifications on financing & management control from Space TV
NEW DELHI: The government today refused to be cowed down by strident questions relating to the Tata-Star DTH joint venture and hinted that procedures were followed in the case of Dish TV, 20 per cent owned by Zee Telefilms, too.
Replying to a written question on whether the government is still examining Space TV’s (the JV’s proposed brand name for a DTH service) application even after accepting Rs. 100 million as a precursor to the licence, information and broadcasting minister Jaipal Reddy said that certain clarifications had been sought from the joint venture.
“Space TV has been asked to provide certain clarifications about project financing and nature of management control to ensure conformity to DTH guidelines,” Reddy said in a written reply in lower house on the last day of the winter session of Parliament today.
However, the minister clarified to another part of the same question, asked by Congress MP Avtar Singh Bhadana, that licence was granted to the Subhash Chandra-controlled ASC Enterprise “after detailed examinations” of its application.
“The ministry granted licence to ASC Enterprise Ltd also after detailed examination of their application, in accordance with DTH guidelines, including sources of funding, foreign investments, shareholders agreements, etc,” Reddy informed parliamentarians, trying to make it clear Space TV was not being handed step-motherly treatment.
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.
