The recent notification by the Government on bringing OTT platforms under the realm of the Information and Broadcasting Ministry seeks to have greater control over the internet content and what is broadcasted online. As per the notification, audio-visual programmes hosted by the online platforms and news and current affairs programmes posted online will come under the direct supervision of the government.
Prior to this OTT platforms were largely self-regulated while other traditional print and Television including entertainment and news media were regulated by Press Council of India and Cables Networks Regulation Act 1995, respectively. Though, the TRAI had been mulling over the idea of regulation of online content, the Telecom Regulator in the month of September discarded the idea. With this notification, such content is likely to be treated at par with each other and is likely to face stricter scrutiny than before and be open to censorship by the Government or a Government established body.
Censorship of films in India has been a slippery slope, with the Censor Board often being criticized for stifling artistic expression. The proliferation of OTT platforms on the market, provided a safe haven for artists and content creators to express themselves. The accessibility of the platform to all has also helped establish many home grown, indigenous and independent news platforms. The OTT business in India has seen consistent growth over the years and saw an added boost owing to the COVID-19 pandemic.
The impact of this move is far reaching as far as creation of new content is concerned. While the inclusion of content platforms, and news platforms within the purview of IB ministry raises concerns of censorship, the implementation roadblocks of a regulation stem from the very nature of the existing content environment. With the announcement of the move, there is evidence of displeasure among the public. Concerns raise from citizens feeling their right to choose or their freedom of expression are being stifled, that this would hamper functioning of platforms that serve an important enabler of digital rights they serve as a tool in the hands of people from the marginalised groups including women, members of the LGBTQIA+community, whistleblowers, and human rights activists amongst others to express themselves freely on the internet.
They are also concerned that this move would lead to platforms censoring or not hosting certain content to escape legal action and lead to disruption in the manner that an Indian audience interacts with creative content available globally. The move is also worrisome for small, independent or micro content creators, who relied on these platforms for exhibiting their content and earning a livelihood without having access to large capital. Such platforms have also given rise to content representing local rural indian culture and sub-urban themes and is likely to be a big blow for visibility of their culture.
Though it is unclear how the Government intends to implement this regulation, it is difficult to ascertain how it plans to vet or review the large amounts of content that is created and hosted on the internet on a daily basis. The ambiguous nature of drafting and certain terms used such as “news and current affairs”, “audio-visual programmes” and the lack of clarity with respect to the platform-intermediary dichotomy there are likely to be lot of legal implementational hazards
Though there is a need to shelter children and prevent violent or harmful content from being hosted online, censorship by the Government is not the way forward. It sends a wrong message to our public and to the international community. There are less intrusive methods such as mandating stronger and more effective age controls on platforms to protect children from age sensitive content. A citizen of India will always retain the right to approach a court of law in the event that they wish to register complaints regarding certain contents or approach the platforms that host them through their grievance redressal mechanism. Such mechanisms would help protect a user’s right to exercise choice and the freedom of expression of citizens.
Shefali Mehta is the Strategic Engagement and Research Coordinator at The Dialogue.
