TV Regulation and its impact

The T.V business in India today is a profitable and lucrative industry. Television in India has come to the forefront only in the past two decades or so with most of the action in the last 10 years. From two channels prior to 1991, Indian viewers are now exposed to at least 375 channels with multiple operators and niche channels. Multiple owners with multiple interests have posed challenges for ethics, accountability and transparency across the industry
Cable T.V in india is one of the most widesread means of communication and is a thread that unites the country in the bond of togetherness. Be it the cricket world cup or the famous saas bahu sagas, its the cable T. V that helps us witness all of these. Also it is an easy and convenient means of entertainment and creating awareness among the masses considering the increase in the amount of T.V sets and the ever increasing cable connections in the country. Since the reach of cable T.V is increasing it is essential to put some kind of regulation on the type of content that is aired on the channels. Although it is difficult to manage a wide array of channels but small steps in the direction would make a huge difference. On these cable television networks lot of undesirable programmes and advertisements are also being screened without any fear of being checked.
Meanwhile, with all the growth there is still no specific single national media policy as such. Existing regulations that govern broadcast content (including programme or advertising codes in the Cable Television Networks [Regulation] Act, 1995) are either irrelevant or inadequate to tackle or address the issues arising today, particularly in relation to satellite channels, music channels, news channels and the direct-to-home platforms. Its a common thought that due to the lag of regulation the television business has grown manifolds in the past decade.  But shouldn’t there be standards to help guide new and emerging players? Most responsible media organizations have some content guidelines and content quality maintenance practices—at least on paper.
The government’s first attempt to regulate the non-governmental broadcast media focused on cable operators and resulted in the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995, framed after the government reached an understanding at the all-India level with the Cable Operators Federation of India in 1993. The new law was an attempt to regulate the burgeoning cable market that had emerged a few years earlier by enabling some control of the cable system that enabled mass distribution of television signals.  The Cable Television Networks Rules include a Programme Code that imposes some restrictions on the content of both programmes and advertisements shown on cable TV.  These Rules were amended in March 2008 and there is talk every now and again of further amendments. However, the Union Ministry of Information and Broadcasting has periodically attempted to introduce legislation to regulate the rapidly growing broadcast sector.   

The Broadcast Bill of 1997 was one such attempt. Its statement of objects and reasons observed that its purpose was “to establish an autonomous Broadcasting Authority for the purposes of facilitating and regulating broadcasting services in India so that they become competitive in terms of quality of services, cost of services and use of new technologies”.

The government’s next attempt at regulation took the form of the Communications Convergence Bill, 2000, which aimed to create a single regulatory authority (the Communications Commission of India) to deal with advancements in information and communications technology. It proposed to repeal the Indian Telegraph Act 1885, the Indian Wireless Telegraphy Act 1933, the Telegraph Wire Unlawful Possession Act, 1950, and the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act, 1997. This legislation, too, remained a dead letter. 

The Broadcasting Services Regulation Bill, 2006, which came to public notice in July of that year, was widely criticised for draconian provisions that gave sweeping powers to the government and its representatives to cripple the media through pre-censorship and a particularly severe and potent form of ‘inspector raj’.  No process of public consultation and discussion preceded the drafting of the legislation. The setting up of an Electronic Media Monitoring Centre (EMMC) by the government to monitor the content of all news channels and FM radio stations was also widely reported in the media in mid-June 2008.  Much of the coverage conveyed the impression that the EMMC was linked to the deferred Broadcast Bill and Content Code and implied that its establishment was proof of the government’s lack of commitment to self-regulation. The News Broadcasters’ Association (NBA) submitted two documents to the government in April 2008:  a draft Code of Ethics and Broadcasting Standards, and draft regulations for the setting up of a News Broadcasting Standards Disputes Redressal Authority. In August 2008 the NBA announced the setting up of the News Broadcasting Standards Disputes Redressal Authority, as required in the regulations.

But even after all these bills, their amendments and the acts the condition is still not very clear as to how the regulation should be managed. Whether it should be under the govenment or a self regulatory body should constantly monitor the contents? Theses questions have remained a matter of concern ever since and will always be a matter of debate.