Date : 02/01/2024

Relevance: GS Paper 2 – Polity – Legislation ( Also Relevant for GS Paper 3 – Science and Technology – IT Technology

Keywords: IFF, OTT, IPTV, Prasar Bharti

Context-

The landscape of media and entertainment is undergoing a seismic shift with the Union government's introduction of the Broadcasting Services (Regulation) Bill, 2023. This ambitious legislation seeks to modernize regulations and enhance business ease while expanding its regulatory ambit to include Over-The-Top (OTT) platforms and digital content. However, the draft has sparked a vigorous debate, as legal experts and advocates express concerns over potential censorship and its impact on freedom of speech.

Key Provisions of the Bill:

1. Mandatory Registration:
   The Bill proposes a significant change by requiring formal registration or intimation to the government for any person or broadcasting company providing services or running a network. Exceptions are made for authorized bodies like Prasar Bharati or Parliament channels. This aligns with existing provisions for cable and satellite broadcasting network operators, emphasizing the need for approval and maintenance of subscriber data.
2. Expanded Scope to Include OTT Platforms:
   A groundbreaking aspect of the Bill is its extension to cover networks using the internet for broadcasting services, including Internet Protocol Television (IPTV) and OTT platforms. However, the specific limits regarding the number of subscribers or viewers are left to the discretion of the Union government, potentially raising concerns about arbitrary decision-making.
3. Content Quality and Accessibility:
   The Bill introduces a set of guidelines for content quality and accessibility. All programs and advertisements must adhere to the Program Code and Advertisement Code, which are yet to be defined. Broadcasters are required to classify their programs based on context, theme, tone, impact, and target audience, with classifications prominently displayed at the beginning of each show. Access control measures for restricted content and guidelines to enhance accessibility for persons with disabilities are also outlined.
4. Self-Regulation Mechanism:
   A notable feature of the draft is the proposed self-regulation regime. Broadcasters and broadcasting network operators are mandated to establish a Content Evaluation Committee (CEC), comprising members from various social groups. The CEC will certify programs, ensuring compliance with program and advertisement codes. The government retains the authority to define the operational details of the committee, including its size and quorum.
5. Three-Tier Regulatory Structure:
   The regulatory framework is delineated into three tiers: self-regulation by operators, self-regulatory organizations, and a Broadcast Advisory Council. Operators must address complaints through a grievance redressal officer. If unresolved, matters can be escalated to self-regulatory organizations, which have the power to expel, suspend, or penalize members. The Broadcast Advisory Council, consisting of independent experts and government representatives, oversees the implementation of regulations and addresses content violation complaints.
6. Inspection and Seizure Provisions:
   The Bill grants the government the authority to conduct unannounced inspections. Operators must facilitate monitoring at their cost and risk equipment seizure if violations are suspected. However, provisions are in place for the return of seized equipment if compliance with rules or guidelines is demonstrated within 30 days. The requirement for a written notice before confiscation aims to provide operators an opportunity to present their case.
7. Penalties for Non-Compliance:
   Penalties for non-compliance with program and advertisement codes include the removal of objectionable shows, orders, apologies, off-air periods, and even cancellation of registration. The Centre can prohibit program transmission or broadcaster operation citing public interest or national security reasons. Monetary penalties and imprisonment are prescribed for serious offenses, with amounts varying based on the financial capacity of the entity.

Concerns and Criticisms:

1. Impact on Freedom of Speech:
   Digital rights organizations, such as the Internet Freedom Foundation (IFF), caution against potential overreach, leading to self-censorship by online platforms. The resemblance of the proposed codes to those applicable to cable TV raises concerns about the impact on free speech, journalistic expression, and artistic creativity. The fear is that publishers may conform to government preferences to avoid broad discretionary punishments.
2. Delegation of Rule-Making Powers:
   The IFF highlights the extensive delegation of rule-making powers to the Centre, leaving several provisions to be determined later. Excessive delegation raises concerns about uncertainty for stakeholders, as the Bill includes numerous instances of "as may be prescribed" and "as notified by the [Union] Government." The lack of accompanying safeguards against arbitrary rule-making is a point of contention.
3. Subjectivity in Content Standards:
   Technology policy experts underscores the need for careful consideration regarding the requirement for all online content creators to adhere to a program code. The subjective nature of terms like 'good taste' or 'decency' may lead to ambiguous interpretations, potentially stifling the dynamic creativity and expression thriving in the digital space.

Comprehensive Analysis:

1. Balancing Regulation and Freedom:
   The draft Broadcasting Services (Regulation) Bill presents a nuanced challenge in balancing the need for regulatory oversight with the preservation of freedom of speech and artistic expression. While the government asserts that the bill is a step toward modernizing regulations, critics argue that it could stifle creativity and impose a restrictive framework on content creators.
2. Evolving Nature of OTT Platforms:
   A major point of contention arises from the broad scope of the Bill, which encompasses both traditional broadcasters and the evolving OTT space. OTT platforms operate on a different business model and content delivery mechanism, posing unique challenges in applying a regulatory framework designed primarily for traditional media. Striking a balance that addresses these differences is crucial for fostering innovation and diversity in the digital media landscape.
3. Potential for Over-Compliance and Self-Censorship:
   The concerns raised by digital rights organizations regarding over-compliance and self-censorship highlight the delicate balance required in regulating online content. The fear is that stringent regulations and potential penalties may lead platforms to err on the side of caution, curbing diverse voices and perspectives for fear of government reprisal.
4. Need for Clarity in Rule-Making:
   The extensive delegation of rule-making powers to the Centre, as pointed out by the IFF, introduces an element of uncertainty. Clarity in rule-making is essential to provide stakeholders, including content creators and platforms, with a transparent and predictable regulatory environment. Striking the right balance between flexibility and specificity in rule-making is crucial for the effective implementation of the legislation.
5. Addressing Accessibility and Diversity:
   The inclusion of guidelines for accessibility and diversity in the Bill reflects a positive step toward fostering an inclusive media environment. Mandating broadcasters to implement measures for persons with disabilities and ensuring representation from various social groups in the Content Evaluation Committee are commendable efforts to promote diversity and accessibility in content creation.
6. Potential Impact on Creative Dynamism:
   The concerns raised by technology policy experts regarding the potential impact on the dynamism of the digital space are pertinent. The subjective nature of terms like 'good taste' and 'decency' introduces an element of ambiguity that could hinder the dynamic and innovative nature of content creation in the digital realm.

Conclusion

The Broadcasting Services (Regulation) Bill, 2023, represents a significant step by the Union government to modernize regulations and extend oversight to the burgeoning digital media landscape. While the intentions to ensure content quality, accessibility, and representation are commendable, the broad scope and potential for overreach raise valid concerns. Striking a delicate balance between regulatory oversight and preserving

Source- The Hindu