I&B Ministry
NDTV ban: SC to hear appeal today
MUMBAI: The Supreme Court in New Delhi is on Monday scheduled to hear the appeal filed by NDTV against the ban imposed on its NDTV India channel for telecasting security-related information linked to the terrorist attack on the Pathankot air force base earlier this year.
India’s highest court had, on November 6, deferred the hearing in the case to 5 December, citing reason of no urgency for its hearing. Information and broadcasting ministry had asked NDTV India to go off-air on 9 November after the government accused it of airing sensitive information related to the terror attack on Pathankot base in January.
NDTV had, however, refuted the allegations stating that other channels had also reported the same. Information and broadcasting minister M. Venkaiah Naidu however supported the ban, stating that it was in the interest of India’s security.
Major media organisations and journalists condemned the ban and protested against it, comparing it with the emergency when the right of the freedom of press was violated.
Naidu had earlier said that there have been only two cases in the past two years and the current year where the government put on hold its orders asking TV channels to prohibit transmission for limited time.
These relate to channel DY 365 for a news broadcast on 12 June 2014 and the NDTV India for a report on 4 January 2016, Naidu told the Parliament. In both cases, he said, the channels had made representations to the ministry which were under consideration.
In a separate case, Prannoy Roy and family-controlled NDTV heaved a sigh of relief. The channel had got a notice from SEBI in June 2016 for alleged violation of takeover norms with respect to timely disclosure of share transactions of its promoters. With regards to their petition to the Delhi High Court, the date of the hearing, which was 29 November. was adjourned to 17 January 2017.
Also read
http://www.indiantelevision.com/regulators/ib-ministry/telecast-ban-withheld-in-two-of-31-cases-no-imc-recast-plan-161203
http://www.indiantelevision.com/television/tv-channels/news-broadcasting/limited-punitive-action-taken-against-31-tv-channels-in-11-years-161126
http://www.indiantelevision.com/television/tv-channels/news-broadcasting/ndtv-india-ban-sc-to-hear-appeal-on-5-dec-govt-may-restructure-review-panel-161109
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.
