I&B Ministry
MIB to examine FTII demand for greater financial powers
NEW DELHI: The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB) has agreed to examine a demand for an enhanced delegation of financial powers and flexibility in purchase of hardware etc to the Film and Television Institute of India (FTII) in order to enable the students to do their creative work.
Films Division director general Mukesh Sharma has been asked to study the demand and give his report within a fortnight.
Following the end of the strike by FTII students after an assurance of meeting the MIB officials, a meeting was held in Mumbai today between representatives of FTII Students Association and the Ministry team headed by MIB secretary Sunil Arora.
The students, under the coordination of Aruna Raje, who represented GRAFTII – a body of alumni of the institute – will submit a blue print within a fortnight for turning FTII into an institute of national excellence at par with reputed institutions across the world.
The Ministry has already announced its intentions in this regard, but the students were told that their views would form a major input for taking this matter forward.
A second round of talks will be held with the Ministry delegation on 10 October in Mumbai. A request would also be made to MIB Minister of State Rajyavardhan Rathore to meet the students in Delhi in the near future.
Apart from the Secretary, the Ministry was represented by Joint Secretary (Films) K Sanjay Murthy; Films Division director general Mukesh Sharma; FTII director Prashant Pathrabe and FTII registrar U C Bodke.
The FTII Students’ Association was represented by Harishankar Nachimuthu, Ajayan Adat, Vikas Urs, Reema Kaur, Malayaj Awasthi, Ranjeet Nair and Shini J K.
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.
