Chief Justice of India (CJI) D Y Chandrachud recently questioned the adequacy of the existing penalties imposed by the News Broadcasters & Digital Association (NBDA), citing a need for proportional fines that reflect the profits earned from news channels by airing disputed news.
The Supreme Court bench noted that the penalty of Rupees 1 lakh for violations, a figure which was set in 2008, was not enough.
Stating that it is not for censorship of the media, the Supreme Court said that the self-regulatory mechanism which channels have adopted has to be made more
effective.
CJI Chandrachud reportedly remarked that not many would agree to claims that TV channels practice self-restraint. The channels go berserk whenever there is a crime-related news like murder and “pre-empt the investigation”. And the fine for it is only Rs 1 lakh, which is far lesser than what a channel earns from a single news episode, and does not act as a deterrent in preventing the channels against violating the ethical standards of broadcasting.
The Bombay High Court had said that media trials amounted to contempt of court and urged the press not to cross the “Lakshman Rekha”, as it found the coverage of actor Sushant Singh Rajput’s death case by some news channels as “contemptuous”. It had observed that existing self-regulatory mechanisms could not take the character of a statutory mechanism.
These observations by the higher judiciary of this country puts the scanner back on the news media’s conduct in providing information to the common people.
Indian channels have been clamouring to increase their TRP, resulting in degradation of news quality.
From information, national TV channels have turned to sensationalisation.
After the Pulwama attack, the anchors of all the channels started screaming that now it is necessary to teach a lesson to Pakistan. In a race to stand out from each other, these channels have left no stone unturned to defy all established standards of journalism during this period. Some newspapers also kept flowing in this flow. But there were more of them who are known to be close to the ruling BJP.
Today our media has been given different derogatory terms like godi (lapdog), bikau (saleable), dalal (agent) and bharkau (inflammatory).
Former Chief Justice of India S A Bobde had remarked that news channels have misused the right to free speech. Freedom of speech is one of the most abused rights in recent times, the former CJI had said in reaction to the Centre’s affidavit filed in response to a petition of some Muslim organisations which alleged that the community was unfairly targeted during the pandemic after a Covid cluster was found at the Tablighi Markaz held in Delhi in early 2020 March.
Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution guarantees to all citizens the right to freedom of speech and expression. The Preamble to the Indian Constitution also provides to its citizens the liberty of thought and expression.
The freedom of speech and expression as under Article 19 also includes the freedom of the press. Under the freedom of speech and expression, citizens possess the right to circulate and publish content. It also includes the right to broadcast information. They also have the right to report proceedings of a court of law, this also ensures transparency.
While the right to freedom of speech and expression is sacred to individual autonomy, liberty and democracy in the contemporary world, it cannot be absolute and indisputable.
National media moghuls have to realise that their obsession to make money and be No. 1 has put the country on the path of self-destruction. The democratic ethos is being torn to pieces.
It is unfortunate that the same press which played a huge role in the country’s social renaissance and freedom movement, has today stooped so low that its very existence is under threat.
But in this malice, there are media outlets like the Lallantop, which did a special story on farmer Rameshwar Singh, whose tears moved the entire nation. It means, all is not lost.
