The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting has advised streaming services to “look at” the Broadcast Content Complaints Committee (BCCC) and the News Broadcasting Standards Authority (NBSA) for structuring their content regulation framework, in a letter obtained by MediaNama following a RTI request. The Ministry has indicated a dislike for the current self-regulatory code that streaming services largely support, and seems to suggest that it has no problem with the Digital Content Complaints Committee, a previously proposed system that had divided streaming services. The I&B Ministry wrote in the letter:

The IAMAI had earlier suggested a two-tier structure as part of the self-regulatory regime, the second tier being the Digital Curated Content Complaints Council (DCCC) along with enumeration of prohibited content. […]

In the self-regulatory mechanism which has now been informed as having been constituted, it is observed that there is no classification of prohibited content, the second tier (the Advisory Panel) is constituted by the OCCP itself (as against an Independent Body like DCCP proposed earlier). […]

Under the circumstances the Ministry cannot support the self-regulatory mechanism proposed by the IAMAI. It is advised to look at the structures of BCCC and NBSA as guiding principles for developing a credible self-regulatory and grievance redressal mechanism for the OCCPs. [Emphasis ours]

The letter validates earlier reporting by the Indian Express that the government has refused to support the industry’s self-regulation code.

It’s not clear what legal standing the I&B Ministry has to suggest these changes in the IAMAI’s code. The ministry has no jurisdiction over streaming services yet, since there is no law that gives them that power. This month, the ministry gained administrative authority over content streamed online, but in the absence of law, it is not clear what authority it can exercise.

Nikhil Pahwa, founder and editor, MediaNama adds: It is not clear what the ministry means when it says it cannot support the current code and what law gives it the power to decide what an industry body’s self-regulatory code can and cannot contain. It’s also not clear why the IAMAI seems to be bending over backwards to accede to the I&B Ministry’s demands.

It’s very clear now that the I&B Ministry is trying to dictate what the self-regulatory code and cannot have. This is almost without having accountability for having defined the code. The I&B Ministry seems to be exerting power without responsibility and accountability to the public here.

Back to DCCC

The DCCC, unlike the current code, would set up an independent body to investigate complaints, and would have the power to penalise streaming services and order them to take content down. Delhi High Court Justice Prathiba M Singh echoed the belief that this kind of system was required in an address this month. Many streaming services opposed the DCCC because of its restrictions, and this forced the IAMAI’s Digital Entertainment Committee to come to a consensus on the current self-regulation code.

With administrative control over streaming services obtained by the I&B Ministry, this refusal to support self-regulation, and flares of seemingly manufactured right wing-led outrage cycles over online content, the industry is under increased pressure to be seen toeing the line, all of which poses significant free speech concerns, considering how comprehensively streaming services already censor themselves.

Self-censorship on streaming platforms in India

Even without a self-regulation code or stricter regulations that the I&B Ministry is seeking, streaming services in India have been censoring themselves just fine, with knee-jerk reactions that seek to soothe even inane outrage. More worryingly, the industry has also been engaging in this censorship before content is even released. And the number of reported incidents of self-censorship has only grown in recent years.

2020
2019
2018
2017
2016

Read the Ministry’s full letter to the IAMAI

Government of India
Ministry of Information and Broadcasting

September 21, 2020

To

Shri Bhanupreet Saini
Associate Vice President,
Internet and Mobile Association of India,
232B Ground floor,
Okhla Industrial Estate – Phase – III
New Delhi: 110020.

Subject: IAMAI Self-regulation Code by Online Curated Content Providers (OCCP)

The undersigned is directed to refer to communication of Internet and Mobile Association of India (IAMAI) dt. 10.8.2020 and further letter dated 4.9.2020 on the above subject requesting the Ministry for its guidance and support in implementing the Self-regulatory Code for Online Curated Content Providers (OCCPs).

2. The matter has been examined and it is stated as under:-

The IAMAI had earlier suggested a two-tier structure as part of the self-regulatory regime, the second tier being the Digital Curated Content Complaints Council (DCCC) along with enumeration of prohibited content. With regard to DCCC it had been proposed that the same would be chaired by a retired Judge of the Supreme Court or High Court.

In the self-regulatory mechanism which has now been informed as having been constituted, it is observed that there is no classification of prohibited content, the second tier (the Advisory Panel) is constituted by the OCCP itself (as against an Independent Body like DCCP proposed earlier). Further out of 3 members of the Advisory Panel, two will be from the OCCP itself, while there will be only one independent member (who will be in a minority).

3. Accordingly, the proposed self-regulatory mechanism lacks independent third party monitoring, does not have well defined Code of Ethics, does not clearly enunciate prohibited content and at the second tier level there is an issue of conflict of interest.

4. Under the circumstances the Ministry cannot support the self-regulatory mechanism proposed by the IAMAI. It is advised to look at the structures of BCCC and NBSA as guiding principles for developing a credible self-regulatory and grievance redressal mechanism for the OCCPs.

This issues with the approval of competent authority.

Yours faithfully,
sd/-
(Sonika Khattar)
Under Secretary

Also read