When Hindi news channel India TV was slammed for one of its reports by the News Broadcasting Standards Disputes Redressal Authority last week, the channel was simultaneously running an apology on its website for another story that it had aired some time ago. While the Authority fined India TV for an interview of a US policy analyst (Farhana Ali) that was picked from Reuters and dubbed in Hindi giving the impression that it was given to the channel, the web apology concerned the use of a photograph of a popular Bohra community leader. “India TV wants to clarify that the use of photograph of His Holiness Syedna Mohammad Burhanuddin was not intentional and that he has no connection with the dreaded terrorist Baitullah,” says the apology on India TV’s website. 

The gaffes — and India TV is not the sole offender — certainly strengthen the case for content regulation in the broadcasting industry. However, the question is whether Self Regulation would work or does the industry need a statutory regulatory body like Ofcom in the UK or Federal Communications Commission in the US? 

Ofcom is a statutory corporation which reports to the Parliament annually. It regulates the UK’s communications industries across television, radio, telecommunications and wireless services. Among other things, it ensures optimal use of the spectrum. Its other concerns include: “Maintaining plurality in the provision of broadcasting” and “Applying adequate protection for audiences against offensive or harmful material.” Ofcom has a board with a chairman and executive and non-executive members. The board meets at least once a month. Ofcom’s Regulatory Principles state that Ofcom “will always seek the least intrusive regulatory mechanisms to achieve its policy objectives.” 

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC), on the other hand, is an independent US government agency established by the Communications Act of 1934. The FCC is directed by five commissioners appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate for 5-year terms.

However, several channel heads dismiss the relevance of either Ofcom or FCC-like bodies for India. In India, autonomy for such organisations will only be on paper. Even Prasar Bharti is supposed to be autonomous, remarked the CEO of a news network. Little surprise then, that news channel owners are keen that their Self-regulation mechanism works. The code is on the website and it is followed, they insist. In fact, an India TV executive said that it was following the code when it forwarded the Farhana Ali complaint on its own to the Redressal Authority. 

Since India’s private television industry is still young, channels are likely to make mistakes. But they will learn from them. However, it is high time that channels start accepting responsibility for the content they air – there should be strict guidelines on the use of pictures, especially, the ones that are lifted from the Internet and morphed to suit their needs. 

While opinion on whether the Redressal Authority’s Order is harsh or not may be divided, the fact remains that India TV’s withdrawal from NBA hasn’t been a gentle response either. If taken in the right spirit, the judgment could only probably lead to cleaner content.