I&B Ministry
I&B Ministry to create online mechanism for all applications for TV channels, teleports
NEW DELHI: The Information and Broadcasting Ministry has once again asked prospective broadcasters to deal directly with the Ministry with regards to permissions for television channels or teleports and not appoint any intermediaries or consultants.
In a public notice issued today by Joint Secretary (Broadcasting) Supriya Sahu, similar to the one issued late last year, the Ministry said anyone who wishes to apply for permission to start a television channel, teleport or various permissions under the Uplinking and Downlinking guidelines, can seek clarifications at the Open House held every month for the purpose and also get information on pending issues.
The Ministry will not entertain any intermediary, consultant, advisor, consultancy organisation or firm to liaise with the Ministry on behalf of applicants and permission holders for following up on their requests.
The Ministry follows an absolutely transparent and open process to grant various permissions to television channels, teleport operators, news agencies etc.
In addition, the Ministry has also put in place a specialised software, Satellite Television Channels Application Tracking System (STATS), for those who have already applied to the Ministry for various permissions. An lD and password have been given to all of them to track the status of their pending applications.
The Ministry is in the process of automating the entire Broadcasting Wing to ensure that an online mechanism is brought for various applications. Once in operation, this web enabled software will help applicants to apply online and also make payments of various fees etc., through the payment gateway.
All applicants and permission holders have therefore been advised not to approach anyone who claims to be an advisor, consultant or facilitator on behalf of applicants.
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.
