Self-regulation for online media ineffective, need independent body: Supreme Court

Expressing dissatisfaction with the efficacy of self-regulatory mechanisms, the Supreme Court on Thursday emphasised the need for a neutral, independent and autonomous body to regulate obscene, offensive or illegal content on online platforms, Live Law reported.

A bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi was hearing petitions filed by podcaster Ranveer Allahabadia and others challenging the first information reports against them for making sexually explicit remarks during an episode of the YouTube show India's Got Latent in February.

The bench had expanded the scope of the matter to consider guidelines against obscenity on online platforms.

Attorney General R Venkataramani and Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told the court that the Union government has proposed to introduce new guidelines, Live Law reported. The government is consulting the stakeholders, they submitted.

Mehta was quoted as saying that the matter was not only about obscenity but perversity in user-generated content that is posted on persons on platforms such as their own YouTube channels.

The chief justice expressed surprise that there is no regulation of content creators. “So I create my own channel, I am not accountable to anyone...somebody has to be accountable!” Live Law quoted Kant as saying.

The counsel representing the Indian Broadcast and Digital Foundation said that regulations are in place in the form of the 2021 Information Technology Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code Rules.

The rules have been challenged before the Delhi High Court.

The counsel said that despite the stay of some of the provisions of the rules, the video streaming platforms had been voluntarily following the Digital Media Ethics Code by labelling the nature of content and giving age classifications, Live Law reported.

There is also a body headed by retired Justice Gita Mittal to deal with complaints against content, he added.

The chief justice expressed reservations about the self-regulatory model and said that there is a need for statutory regulations.

“Self-styled bodies will not help…” Kant was quoted as saying. “Some neutral autonomous bodies, which are free from the influence of those who exploit all of this and the state also, is needed as a regulatory measure.”

Kant questioned how there were repeated instances of violations if self-regulation was indeed effective.

Bagchi asked whether the creator would take responsibility if the content is “perceived as anti-national or disruptive of society's norms”.

“Will self-regulation be sufficient?” he was quoted as having asked. “The difficulty we are facing is the response time. Once the scurrilous material is uploaded, by the time the authorities react, it has gone viral, to millions of viewers, so how do you control that?”

During the hearings earlier this year, the court had said that it intended to do something to regulate allegedly obscene content on YouTube and social media platforms. It had in March urged the Union government to formulate guidelines.

Kant had told the attorney general during an earlier hearing that guidelines framed by the government to regulate online content must balance freedoms and duties.

Also read: Why the Supreme Court's new push to regulate social media threatens free expression

Source: Scroll
Related Posts: SEBI prioritises reducing regulatory costs to enhance market competitiveness Takeovers, regulatory pressure, criminal cases Regulatory changes may raise payment firms’ operating costs MeitY blocked 87 illegal loan apps after regulatory review NSE IPO Nears Regulatory Clearance As Sebi Chief Signals NOC HDFC Bank faces ban from Dubai Financial Services Authority over regulatory non-compliance Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang in Shanghai amid China regulatory headwinds Regulatory clarity key for crypto adoption Blow to self-proclaimed Vishwaguru's self-boastful diplomacy Why Self-Care Rituals Should Include A Breast Self-Exam