Regulating the Media

This last year has been witness to some particularly interesting debates on regulation of various professional bodies in the country. The Medical Council of India, a statutory body consisting of mainly professional doctors, which regulated standards in medicine and medical education, was dissolved by the President due to rampant corruption and colossal inefficiency in regulating the standards of medical education in the country. Similarly the Bar Council of India, a statutory body consisting of practicing advocates, which is responsible for regulating the legal profession in India, is under pressure to accept an over-arching regulator – The National Legal Services Authority (NLSA). Then of course there is the ‘holy cow’ of India – the Indian Judiciary – which is currently in the throes of an ‘accountability initiative’.

What then of the only other completely unaccountable institution in this country – the fourth estate – the media?

The print media is regulated by the Press Council of India, a statutory, quasi-judicial body which is all bark but no bite because the statute has not provided the PCI with powers to pass binding orders. The PCI’s authority is therefore limited to only moral judgments. The recent ‘paid news’ controversy led the PCI to request Parliament to provide it with binding powers to regulate the print media. The question however that we need to ask is whether self-regulation by peer-led bodies such as the Press Council of India are the best models of regulation today. All the above example of the Medical Council of India, the Bar Council of India, the Higher Judiciary all indicate that regulation by peer-led bodies is usually suspect. The need of the hour is therefore an independent regulator who is free from any kind of peer pressure but who is at the same time also free from governmental interference.

Regulation of the broadcast media however is a completely different animal.  The recent ‘Niira Radia Tapes’ controversy have exposed a startling conversation between Niira Radia and Jehangir Pocha, the owner of NewsX, wherein the owner is negotiating with her to release money in time to the channel so as to ensure the channel employees are paid on time. The conversation is available over here on the website of Outlook. NewsX is owned by the media company INX News Pvt. Ltd. whose website lists Mr. Vir Sanghvi as the CEO and Jehangir Pocha as one of the co-owners of the company. The tapped conversation establishes beyond doubt that NewsX is in effect controlled by Niira Radia, either directly or through a front company. The problem over here is not with Ms. Radia owning a media company but the fact that as a citizen I find it extremely difficult to identify the actual owners of most media companies and be appraised of the conflict of interest that they face in reporting certain events. Of course it may be possible to approach the Registrar of Companies to inspect documents and identify the share-holders for myself but given the way most Indian companies are held through a number of shell companies it is virtually impossible for a lay-man to identify the actual ownership of any company. As a citizen I believe it is important that media companies be subject to much higher disclosure norms so as to allow citizens to make fully informed decisions while viewing information being broadcasted by such companies.

As of now the only so-called regulator of the broadcasting sector is the Information and Broadcasting Ministry, which till date has rarely gone beyond moral policing and even that is limited to banning Fashion TV or AXN or pushing the timing for Big Brother. A government which does not interfere with the media is a government which respects core fundamental rights. However things are going out of hand with the Indian media especially at the regional level where several broadcast media companies cross the lines of legal and ethical journalism with increasing impunity.

In 2007 the Government sought to introduce the Broadcasting Services Regulation Bill which had been languishing in the I&B Ministry since 1997. Apart from establishing an autonomous body to regulate the media sector the legislation also provided for limits on cross-holdings between various mediums i.e. a company with a stake in a television broadcast company could not hold a controlling stake in a radio company. This was proposed in order to limit the growth of media monopolies which would end up having a disproportionate impact on shaping and forming public opinion in India.

As can be expected the Indian media lashed out at the bill as an attempt at censorship and in the process left the government with virtually no room to negotiate. The I&B Minister of that time was equated to V. C. Shukla, the infamous Minister from the Emergency era who was responsible for censorship of the media in those days.

The developments of the recent past i.e. ‘paid news’ and the Niira Radia tapes may have strengthened the government’s hands to re-introduce the bill, albeit with some major modifications.