oppn parties Test Channels Ban Legally, Do Not Spread Anarchy

News Snippets

  • NCLT initiates bankruptcy proceedings against former Videocon chairman Venugopal Dhoot for defaulting on loans of Rs 6158cr as personal guarantor in two group companies
  • LIC approves 1:1 bonus share issue
  • Gold and silver futures also go down by 0.7% and 2.2% respectively
  • Stocks tumbled again on Monday as crude prices rose: Sensex went down by 703 points and Nifty by 207 points
  • Supreme Court refuses to cancel the land-for-jobs FIR against Lalu Prasad
  • The spectre of El Nino haunts India: IMD predicts 'below normal ' monsoon this year
  • Labour protest over increase in wages by 35% (as per Haryana example) turns violent in Noida, nearly 200 were detained by the police
  • Congress leader Sonia Gandhi said that the delimitation exercise must be carried out after the Census is complete
  • PM Modi says Parliament is on the verge of creating history as the Houses get ready to take up the women's reservation bills
  • Tata Sons chairman N Chandrasekaran said that TCS COO Aarthi Subramanian is conducting a thorough inquiry to establish facts and identify individuals involved in the sexual harassment allegations at the company's Nashik office
  • Asha Bhonsle laid to rest with full state honours on Monday in Mumbai
  • AAP leader Arvind Kejriwal once again approached the Delhi HC to request the recusal of a judge from his case
  • Candidates Chess: R Vaishali on the verge of creating history, but needs two wins - one with black pieces - against formidable opponents to emerge as the challenger
  • Rohit Sharma, who retired hurt in the match versus RCB, underwent scans for possible hamstring injury
  • IPL: Abhishek Sharma fails for SRH but Ishan Kishan (91) shines. Then, Vaibhav Sooryavanshi fails for RR and SRH bolwers, especially unheralded Praful Hinge (4 for 24) and Sakib Hussain (4 for 24) win it for SRH. This was the first loss for table-toppers RR
Supreme Court questions Election Commission about SIR SOP and why logical discrepancy was introduced only in Bengal
oppn parties
Test Channels Ban Legally, Do Not Spread Anarchy

By Slogger
First publised on 2016-11-07 19:46:15

About the Author

Sunil Garodia Holding an extreme view and carting the ball out of the park is what interests him most. He is a hard hitter at all times. Fasten your seatbelts and read.
The protest against banning of two television channels – NDTV India and News Time Assam – has gained momentum with several bodies and some politicians (including Arvind Kejriwal) calling for all the channels to suspend broadcast from midnight of November 8 to midnight of November 9 to show solidarity with the banned channels. This means that all those calling for such a response think that laws are just made to be published in the official gazette and legal tomes. They are not to be followed by the citizens and enforced by the government, especially if such laws are enacted to regulate the media. This is a very absurd stand. The government has not done anything arbitrarily or in a partisan manner. Rule 6(1)(p) exists in the statute books. If a channel violates it, should the government look the other way? Then what was the use of inserting the rule? The media in India is reasonable most of the times, except when it thinks that efforts are being made to muzzle it. Then, it loses all sense of propriety and supports those among it who break the law of the country. Then, instead of being only the fourth pillar of democracy, it starts to think of itself as the only pillar.

NDTV India is guilty of violating the rule by pinpointing the location of the ammunition depot at the Pathankot air base and also broadcasting that some of the terrorists were just 100 metres away from the depot. Now NDTV India has a huge footprint worldwide. The handlers of the terrorists were probably scanning Indian news channels. The terrorists had mobile phones. Put two plus two together and you don’t need to be in the Army or be a trained security person to imagine what mischief that information could have done. If the bosses at NDTV say that they were not aware of the rule, firstly they need to be informed that ignorance of law is no excuse to escape punishment and secondly, if they are not aware of the legal bindings of their profession, they have no business to run a news channel. Their stated excuse that the print media and other channels were also publishing or broadcasting the same story is not as much an excuse as a damning admission of guilt. NDTV India admits that it broadcast what the government is punishing it for. It only disputes the punishment. But if the rule exists and if punishment is prescribed for violating it, NDTV India’s admission of violating the rule itself makes it liable for punishment.

If we take the News Time case, we have to go back in the past to see that many other channels were hauled up for similar or even lesser violations of the Programme Code and handed out stricter punishments. The picture accompanying this article shows that AXN was taken off the air for 2 months in January 2005 for screening a programme deemed ‘obscene.’ FTV was handed a similar punishment in March 2005 for another ‘obscene’ programme. Why didn’t the protestors come out of the woodwork then? Of course it was the Left-supported and ‘socialist’ UPA ruling at the Centre then and it was being advised by the same set of people who are in the forefront of the protests now. One is sure that if the same was to happen now, the Left intelligentsia would cry that the Centre is being prude and is following the RSS agenda. Why have one set of ethical standard for the bans under UPA and another set for NDA? Similarly, why have different ethical standards for entertainment channels and news channels? If the Programme Code is violated, be it by an entertainment channel or by a news channel, the punishment prescribed must be applied. Otherwise, burn the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995 and the Programme Code and give a free run to the media.

The media had allowed the UPA government to enact the above act. The print publications knew it was discriminatory and did not provide for a level playing field. Yet the media bodies, where print publications rule the roost, did not challenge it in the courts. Hence, there are different set of rules for the channels and they can be hauled up for broadcasting the same story that a print publication can get away with. If Venkaiah Naidu says that the current protests are politically motivated, he is partially correct as the law of the land has been broken and until there is an independent regulatory authority, it is the government that is going to decide who broke the rules and how it will punish it as per law. That is the job of the government and its agencies. The government is just doing its job. NDTV has appealed against the ban in the Supreme Court. In a democratic country, that is the best way to find out whether the government is acting arbitrarily or whether it has based its order on sound legal principles. Till the time the apex court decides on the matter, those supporting the channels that broke the law should refrain from creating an unholy racket.