INTRODUCTION
The media has always been defined as the fourth leg of democracy[1]. It works to provide the general public with information and understanding of what is happening in the world what the government or the legislation is doing and various other topics that affect the society at large. The media is the greatest tool for democracy as it provides information to the public to judge the workings of the various institutions and scrutinize ill behaviour.
While in an ideal reality, the media would provide unbiased and unfiltered knowledge it is not so in the practical reality. It has been observed that the media can largely sway the opinion of the general public as well as the political discourse of the nation. Thus spread of misinformation or biased narratives is a huge issue.
As it is described as the fourth pillar of democracy the media has been bound by many legal regulations and laws. This blog delves into various topics like propaganda, the legal framework for the media, and the issues with the legal framework as well as discusses various cases where the judiciary has tried to balance between freedom of speech and expression in media and the censorship of media.
UNDERSTANDING PROPAGANDA
Propaganda is defined as the spreading of biased or misleading information. Its goal is to promote a particular agenda or influence public opinion. It can take many forms in the media, from overt government-backed campaigns to more subtle tactics like selective reporting, framing, and fake news[2]. In India, media propaganda often intersects with political goals, communal tensions, corporate interests, and ideological biases. This threatens journalistic integrity and public trust. In India, the media has been broadly divided into three categories – rightist, leftist, and centralist which are classified based on their ideologies which further represent their political leaning as well.
LEGAL FRAMEWORK
The Indian legal framework governing media regulation and freedom of expression is primarily enshrined in the Constitution of India, which guarantees the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a)[3]. However, this right is not absolute and is subject to reasonable restrictions, including concerns related to national security, public order, decency, and defamation[4]. Several laws and regulatory bodies play a role in overseeing media content and addressing propaganda:
- Press Council of India (PCI)[5]: Established under the Press Council Act of 1978, it serves as an autonomous body tasked with preserving the freedom of the press and maintaining high standards of journalism in India. It adjudicates complaints against the media and issues guidelines for ethical reporting, though its authority is limited only to print media like newspapers and magazines.
- Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021[6]: Introduced by the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology, these rules aim to regulate digital media platforms, including news websites and social media intermediaries, by imposing obligations related to content moderation, grievance redressal, and compliance with ethical standards.
CHALLENGES AND CONTROVERSIES
Despite the existence of regulatory frameworks and oversight mechanisms, several challenges still remain in effectively stopping propaganda through media channels in India:
- Political Interference: The politicization of media ownership and editorial control leads to bias and partisanship in news coverage with the media outlets aligning themselves with specific political parties or ideologies, thereby acting in complete contrast to journalistic independence and objectivity. It can be clearly seen that multiple news channels as well as newspapers or social media news outlets have specific political leanings and ideologies. This might be due to monetary benefits, under-the-table dealings, or just the media channels trying to stick to the TRP or trying to remain influential or relevant but either way, it greatly impacts the credibility of the news.
- Lack of Enforcement: Weak enforcement mechanisms and regulatory loopholes hamper the effective implementation of media regulations, allowing propagandistic content to proliferate unchecked, particularly in the digital sphere where jurisdictional boundaries are blurred.
- Misinformation and Disinformation: The rapid spread of misinformation and disinformation through social media platforms poses a huge challenge to media regulation, as false narratives and propaganda campaigns can spread virally, fueling polarization and undermining public trust in credible sources of information. It is a huge issue as, unlike the traditional media forms which take a great time to spread, misinformation or disinformation can spread quickly and rapidly through social media platforms. This was seen greatly during the lockdown period where a lot of misinformation about the virus and vaccine was spread.
- Legal Ambiguity: Ambiguities in existing laws and regulations, coupled with judicial interpretations that prioritize freedom of expression over concerns of propaganda and hate speech, create a legal environment conducive to the propagation of biased and inflammatory content. This is not the issue of law itself per se but rather a problem of ethics as laws in place prioritize freedom to not become a so-called oppressive and regulatory state.
LEGAL PRECEDENTS
To understand the complexities of regulating propaganda through media channels in India it is important to examine some important cases and legal precedents:
- Sakal Papers Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India (AIR 1962 SC 305): In this landmark case, the Supreme Court of India upheld the constitutional validity of certain restrictions on freedom of speech and expression imposed by the Working Journalists (Conditions of Service) and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1955. The judgment affirmed the state’s authority to impose reasonable restrictions in the interest of public order, thereby establishing a legal precedent for regulating media content.[7]
- Bennett Coleman & Co. v. Union of India (AIR 1973 SC 106): In this case, popularly known as the “Hindu Rate Card Case,” the Supreme Court upheld the validity of certain provisions of the Working Journalists (Fixation of Rates of Wages) Act, 1958, which regulated the rates of wages payable to journalists. The judgment reaffirmed the state’s authority to regulate economic aspects of media operations, thereby setting a precedent for government intervention in media affairs.[8]
- Common Cause (A Regd. Society) v. Union of India (2018) 5 SCC 1: In this case, the Supreme Court recognized the importance of freedom of speech and expression in a democracy while emphasizing the need for responsible journalism and ethical standards in media reporting. The judgment underscored the role of the media as a watchdog of democracy and called for greater accountability and transparency in media practices.[9]
CONCLUSION
Propaganda through media channels remains a huge concern for the Indian media landscape. While it may seem like the issue can be easily fixed by imposing restrictions or forming more regulatory bodies it is not so. There needs to be a balance maintained between the right to freedom of speech and expression as provided by the constitution, India is currently the world’s largest democracy and as such has to maintain its status as a just and free nation. Stringent censorship laws would be unconstitutional and unjust.
While it is necessary to maintain minimum censorship of media it is also important to keep the media in check due to its power to affect the population and in turn the whole nation. Thus it’s truly a dilemma and a herculean task to find a balance between the censorship of media and the freedom of speech and expression.
Only through concerted efforts to uphold transparency, accountability, and pluralism can the Indian media ecosystem fulfil its role as a pillar of democracy and an instrument for fostering informed citizenship.
Author(s) Name: Anmol Bansal (Vivekananda Institute of Professional Studies)
Reference(s):
[1]Pratiyush Kumar, Kujit Singh, ‘Media, the Fourth Pillar of Democracy: A Critical Analysis’ (2019), 6(1) IJRAR <http://ijrar.com/upload_issue/ijrar_issue_20543177.pdf> accessed 17 March 2024
[2]ibid
[3]Constitution of India 1950
[4]Aqa Raza, Pankaj Kumar Pandey, ‘Freedom of Speech and Expression’ as a Fundamental Right in India and the Test of Constitutional Regulations: The Constitutional Perspective’ (2016), XLIII (2) Indian Bar Review <https://www.researchgate.net/publication/306899769_’Freedom_of_Speech_and_Expression’_as_a_Fundamental_Right_in_India_and_the_Test_of_Constitutional_Regulations_The_Constitutional_Perspective> accessed 17 March 2024
[5]Press Council Act 1978
[6]The Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) 2021
[7]Sakal Papers Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India [1962] AIR 1962 SC 305
[8]Bennett Coleman & Co. v. Union of India [1973] AIR 1973 SC 106
[9]Common Cause (A Regd. Society) v. Union of India [2018] (2018) 5 SCC 1
