The media is known as the Fourth Estate of democracy. Media freedom varies from country to country depending on the nature of the political organisation. In Totalitarian regimes like China, it is not permitted to criticize the government while in nations like the USA media has almost unlimited freedom, to the extent of even questioning the personal lives of political leaders.
In India, mass media laws date back to the colonial period, where acts such as the ‘Vernacular Press Act’ permitted the authorities to clamp down on subversive literature, which was usually nationalistic in nature.
Independent India under Art 19 of the Constitution guarantees Freedom of Speech and Expression, which includes freedom of the press. The press in the Nehruvian era was used to propagate information about various government schemes, agricultural techniques and family planning methods. It was seen as a vehicle of social change. However, there was very limited scope for entertainment and only one major news channel, Doordarshan, which often represented the views of the ruling party.
Post-liberalisation in 1991, media has become more about entertainment and information than spreading change. Reality shows, talk shows and interviews have become popular along with the live streaming of sports programs. While the number of private news channels has mushroomed, leading to a greater diversification of opinions, and more freedom, there are also several problems associated with the media.
SOCIOLOGICAL PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH MEDIA
The Media was originally conceptualised as catering to the marginalized sections of society. Today’s media however caters mainly to elites. While the daily problems of well-to-do sections in metropolitan cities are captured by both the print and broadcast media, tier 2 cities, rural areas and suburbs receive scant attention. The way caste is portrayed in media is also problematic. As private channels rely on TRP ratings and desire more viewers, they often resort to sensationalizing violence against Dalits and lower caste individuals, however matrimonial advertisements in leading newspapers continue to be organised along caste lines. This shows that the media only offers a token attempt to change the caste structure.
Women are also represented badly in private news channels. They don’t get as much screen time as men and are also supposed to behave in a less assertive manner or be labelled ‘crazy’, as Mrs Hilary Clinton was in the US Presidential elections against Donald Trump. Women are depicted in fewer interviews and scientific programs.
LEGAL ASPECTS OF MEDIA
In India, the Press Council of India lays down guidelines for print media. It is a statutory body established under the Press Council of India Act, 1978. It aims to improve the standards of newspapers and print media in India. Broadcast media has its own set of ethical principles, encoded in agencies such as the News Broadcasting Standards Authority and the Advertising Standards Council of India, which are also not legally binding but regulatory in nature.
NEED FOR REGULATION OF MEDIA
While the Constitution of India allows the press to provide accurate and uncensored opinions and information to the public, Art 19 also provides for reasonable restrictions on freedom of speech, in the interests of public order, morality, friendly relations with other nations, national security, etc.
In this light, some problems associated with media include media trials, reporting of war and terror attacks and sexism.
As seen in the notorious Arushi Talwar Case, known as the Noida Double Murder Case, and more recently in the instance of Sushant Singh Rajput’s death, the media often vilifies the accused and tries to present evidence to prove guilt or innocence even before a trial is completed. As it is the presumption of Criminal Law that everybody is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, and a principle of natural justice that nobody should be condemned unheard, this is violative of the rights of the accused. It can influence the public and even the court officials against them. Further, the media is not expected to reveal confidential information about the accused to the public.
Another example is that of the 26/11 terrorist attacks in Mumbai when the media showed a live telecast of the terror attack even before the terrorists were apprehended. This could give the enemy an unfair advantage and jeopardize national security. In fact, in this case, terrorists also saw the footage leading to more casualties before the government struck the program down.
Media also committed a major faux pas when they revealed the name of a rape victim in the case of the infamous Kathua Incident. This was heavily criticized by the High Court of Delhi and the Acting Chief Justice of India, Justice Gita Mittal, who directed that the media houses pay a compensation amount to the victim within a week. The media houses in question included leading newspapers of India. In this case, the Hon’ble HC observed that disclosing a rape victim’s identity can lead to a term of imprisonment of six months.
NEED OF THE HOUR: REGULATION OF MEDIA
Therefore, there is a need to issue legally binding guidelines on the media, not to curtail information to the public, but to prevent the misuse of freedom such as the examples cited above, and to stem fake news and misinformation which is often used to incite religious violence. As such, it can be seen as going against public order and morality.
A recent example of this is the decision of the Central Government to ban surrogate and other misleading advertisements and to regulate ads directed at children.
CONCLUSION
Social media, OTT and other platforms that are difficult to regulate and present jurisdictional challenges further complicate the matter. Therefore, ultimately citizens need to be vigilant and question what they see or hear even through reputed media houses.
Shivani Bhargava
LLB Hons
School of Law, Sushant University
