Media industry pushes back against “restrictive, heavy-handed” broadcast policy

The government's National Broadcasting Policy has come in for criticism from television broadcasters, film and TV producers, and other industry bodies over concerns about what they say are heavy-handed regulations that would restrict freedom of expression.

The policy aims to bring all forms of media, including streaming video and audio platforms, under the same umbrella.

The draft guidelines fail to address concerns that have been repeatedly brought to the government's notice, industry associations said. These bodies have now submitted their concerns to the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (Trai) that had in a consultation paper last month sought feedback on the broadcast policy.

“The present consultation paper goes beyond the power and remit of Trai, which has consistently [said] that regulation of content is beyond its scope and power," the Indian Broadcasting and Digital Foundation (IBDF) wrote in its submission, which Mint has seen.

Also read: Trai seeks inputs for broadcasting policy that aims to make India a global hub for content

Pushback

“The freedom to broadcast information or content is essential for an informed democracy and to safeguard the fundamental rights of the viewers to access what they wish to watch. Any restriction on the dissemination of content in any manner would amount to curtailment of the freedom of speech and expression,” IDBF said in its feedback to Trai's consultation paper on the broadcast policy. 

In particular, the broadcaster’s right to choose their content is not governed by the Trai Act, which is focused solely on aspects of carriage, IBDF said in its feedback. 

The consultation paper also aims to bring streaming-video platforms within the ambit of broadcasting, which is contrary to Trai's own position, IBDF said. It added that that clubbing linear television with ‘online curated content providers’ would amount to ‘reverse discrimination’.

Also read: How Trai's mandatory call ID will impact Truecaller

Among other things, the draft Broadcast Services (Regulation) Bill requires content platforms to come together to create a content evaluation committee that will pre-certify content before it can be released – essentially serving as an internal censor board. 

“IBDF submits that there should be no governmental interference in the self-regulatory structure. Given that the self-regulatory body of broadcasters is headed by a retired judge, there is no question of adding a third-tier being headed by the executive to sit in appeal over the decisions of such a judicial body. This would be in direct conflict of the doctrine of separation of powers, which is impermissible in law,” it said.

The National Broadcasting Policy should not cover aspects that apply generally to the media and entertainment sector, the News Broadcasters and Digital Association (NBDA) said. 

“Accordingly, issues about the film and music industry, online gaming, growth of animation, VFX and post-production are not within Trai's remit. These sectors do not comprise the broadcasting sector and for this reason, are not and should not be regulated under extant broadcasting regulations. Accordingly, these segments should not be included in the NBP,” it said. 

The Internet and Mobile Association of India (IAMAI) said that content regulation falls under the ministry of information and broadcasting (MIB) and should continue to do so. An orderly separation of content and carriage is critical, it added. 

“For carriage, while access technologies such as DTH/cable are governed by the MIB, wireless and wireline broadband fall within the jurisdiction of the department of telecommunications (DoT)," IAMAI said.

"Both telecom and DTH licences are granted under the Telegraph Act, but the DTH licence is governed by the MIB. This division leads to inconsistencies in policy approach and increased regulatory compliance costs. Thus, it is proposed that content regulation across all mediums should be under the MIB,” it added. 

Culver Max Entertainment Pvt Ltd (formerly Sony Pictures Networks India Pvt Ltd) said that including streaming platforms in the policy would result in “immense confusion within a well-settled environment” and make the entire digital-media ecosystem counterproductive. 

It also said the public broadcaster is in a more privileged position than private broadcasters, and that there should be more transparency in auction through which Prasar Bharati carries the channels of private broadcasters while charging a heavy slot fee. 

“Also, the Prasar Bharati channels should not be mandatorily carried by private DPOs (distribution platform operators) in the base pack,” Sony said, adding that the method of selecting events of national importance, whose feed is shared with Prasar Bharati, should be streamlined.