Press and Media is essential component of democracy. Although, the freedom of the press and media is not acknowledged as a separate
freedom under Fundamental Rights of Indian Constitution but it is folded intothe freedom of speech and expression under Article 19 (1)(a) of constitution. Supreme
Court in Bennett Coleman & Co. vs. Union of India has defined freedom of speech and expression as the ark of the covenant of democracy. The freedom of the press and
media serves huge objective of the right of the general public to be informed
of a broad spectrum of realities, opinions and views. At times the media has
played a vital role in revealing corrupt practices thereby bringing
accountability. The impact of press and media in a democracy becomes
particularly evident when it comes to challenges surrounding media and the
elections. Technology has prolonged our views, but with it new concerns such as
the explosion and subsequent curbing of social media, the paid news phenomenon,
fake sting operations, trial by media, breach of privacy, etc has extended.
As
Lord Justice Leveson wrote in his report on ‘Culture, Practice
and Ethics of the Press’, “With these
rights (of press freedoms) come responsibilities to the public interest: to
respect the truth, to obey the law and to uphold the rights and liberties of
individuals.”
Media and press percolate unrelenting exposure predominantly guides our opinion of reality, the formation of our values, our beliefs and attitudes and above all it defines society. It becomes imperative to have the complete and true reflection of the cultures. Illegal practice of paid news has become organized, with ‘rates’ for the publication of ‘news items’. Media ownership matters have been constantly raised by the TRAI. Numerous concerns have been raised about opinion polls, including bias in choosing sample sizes, the possibility of them being manipulated to favor particular political parties and the inordinate influence that they exercise on voters’ minds. In this situation, the following questions arise for attention:
- Would paid news be included as an election offence under the Representation of the People Act, 1951?
- Do opinion polls need any kind of regulation? Will such regulation be constitutionally valid?
- Is there a current need for restrictions on cross control/ownership across the media sector?
These
issues require attention with serious observation and regulation.
PAID NEWS
According to the PCI “any news or analysis appearing in any media (print and electronic) for a price in cash or kind as consideration is paid news”. It is now a common happening that poses a serious threat to democratic processes. It misrepresents audiences and undermines their freedom of choice. The Parliamentary Standing Committee on IT in 2013 has brought out its report on the fact of paid news, where it has stressed the dangerous trend of presenting paid-for information as news that has spread at remarkable tempo in some parts of the media. The Report also outlined the practice of ‘Private Treaties’, where a non-media company transfers shares to a media company in exchange for advertisements, space and favorable coverage. Sections 127A of the Representation of People Act, 1951 make it obligatory for the publisher of an election advertisement, pamphlet or other document to print the name and address of the publisher as well as the printer. Still, paid news is not expressly defined or included as an electoral offence.
OPINION POLLS
Opinion polls led by polling agencies and spread broadly by television channels and newspapers are a proliferating feature of elections in India today. Numerous concerns have been raised about such polls, including bias in choosing sample sizes, the possibility of them being manipulated to favor particular political parties and the inordinate influence that they exercise on voters’ minds underneath the guise of an unbiased study. In Indian Express v. Union ofIndia Constitutional concerns have been raised about banning such polls. Banning opinion and exit polls would be violate Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution that is public’s right to know, which has been held by the Supreme Court to be part of the freedom of speech. At present opinion polls are barred from being published in electronic media for 48 hours prior to an election in that polling area under Section 126(1) of the Representation of People Act, 1951. Also reasonable restrictions have been edged in Article 19(2) of the Indian Constitution, wherein ‘public interest’ is a ground that may be taken to restrict freedom of expression. No other restriction exists. The exponential growth of media has resulted in a corresponding decline in an individual’s privacy.
The right to privacy, not strictly enshrined in the Constitution of India, has been held to be implicit in Article 21. However, the freedom of speech and expression as guaranteed in the Constitution of India, empower the press to disclose report vital to public interest, it often results in intrusion of privacy. For Example there is a prevalent view that the difference between an accused and a convict and the basic underlying principle of ‘innocent until proven guilty’ are often overlooked by sections of the media in its coverage of ongoing trials. By conducting parallel trials, the media, it is felt, not only puts undue pressure on the judge but also creates pressure on lawyers to not take up cases of accused. Once a matter comes under extreme media glare, there is an added pressure on the prosecution to secure evidence which must incriminate an accused, lest the media build negative public opinion against the prosecution. A fair trial and investigation, which are foremost constitutional guarantees, are as much a right of the accused as they are of the victim. Instances of fake sting operations or trial by media give credibility to allegations of irresponsible journalism. Authenticity and ethical guidelines need to be exercised seriously to the propagation of content through different forms of media. The way content is spread has both positive and negative impact on different wedges of society. Henceforth, there is an urgent need to make uniform regulation the distinctions associated with the information being distributed and shared through media and press regarding the present status quo.
Thank you
ReplyDelete