Digital media may require regulation, TV doesn’t: Govt

Murali Krishnan

NEW DELHI: The Union government on Thursday urged the Supreme Court to refrain from laying down guidelines to regulate electronic media such as television channels, but if the court does embark on the process, suggested that it should first be undertaken for digital media including web portals and YouTube channels.

In an affidavit filed on Thursday before a bench headed by justice DY Chandrachud, the Centre said that electronic media was already governed by laws made by Parliament and previous judgments delivered by the top court. “This court may not undertake the exercise of laying down any further guidelines… it is desirable that if this court decides to undertake the exercise, it should first be undertaken with regard to digital media, as there already exists sufficient framework and judicial pronouncements with regard to electronic media and print media,” the government submitted.

The affidavit was filed in the case against television (TV) channel Sudarshan News, which came into the limelight after it telecast a show called “Bindas Bol” relating to the entry of Muslims in the civil services.

The top court on September 15 barred further telecast of the controversial programme and took strong exception to the contents of the show, observing that the first four episodes gave an impression that it was being aired with the insidious objective of vilifying the Muslim community. The bench, which also comprises justices KM Joseph and Indu Malhotra, also expressed an inclination to hold a detailed hearing to decide on regulation of TV news channels and suggested the appointment of a committee of five distinguished citizens to frame standards for regulation of the electronic media.

The case will be taken up for hearing on Friday.

Meanwhile, Sudarshan News filed its response in the matter on Wednesday defending the programme and the use of the term “UPSC Jihad” in the programme. The Noida-based channel also sought live telecast of the proceedings in the case pending before the top court against it.

“The issue the court had sought reply from the Central government was as to whether the specific programme using specific expressions like ‘UPSC Jihad’ was permissible... In this regard, the counter-affidavit appears to be evasive if not supportive of the broadcast of the programme,” Supreme Court advocate Sriram Parakkat said.