News18 India Fined Rs 50,000 by Self-Regulatory Body for Platforming ‘Extreme Views’

The NBDSA said that during a debate on hijab, anchor Aman Chopra failed to stop the other panellists from crossing the boundary.

New Delhi: The self-regulatory body for news broadcasters recently fined News18 India Rs 50,000 for the way in which a discussion on the hijab ban in Karnataka was conducted, saying the channel gave panellists a platform to express “extreme views” which could adversely affect communal harmony.

The News Broadcasting & Digital Standards Authority (NBDSA), which is the self-regulatory body for all members of the News Broadcasters & Digital Association, issued the order on October 21 based on a complaint filed by an individual.

The programme against which the complaint was filed was a debate conducted by News18 India – aired on April 6, 2022 – on the controversy that emerged in Karnataka following a ban imposed by the government on wearing hijab in educational institutions. Then Al-Qaeda leader Ayman Al-Zawahiri had praised a Muslim girl who had responded to a group of boys heckling her with “Allahu Akbar”.

During the broadcast, the anchor Aman Chopra referred to the Muslim students as “hijabi gang”, “Hijabwali Gazwa Gang” and made a false allegations that they had resorted to rioting, the complaint said. He also claimed that Zawahiri and terrorist organisations were behind the hijab row in India. One panellists accused another panellist of being a supporter of terrorist groups, the complaint said.

Also Read: As TV Anchors Use Mob Attacks on Sadhus to Fuel Anti-Muslim Hate, Real Dangers Ignored

The NBDSA said that the channel was free to choose the topic of discussion “as it comes within the freedom of expression of the broadcaster” but said it is primarily concerned with the fact as to whether the broadcaster and anchor adhered to the Code of Ethics & Broadcasting Standards during the show.

“It is reiterated that NBDSA did not have any issue with the subject of the debate. However, on examination of the matter, it found that the problem lay with the narrative and the tilt that was given to the programme,” the order, signed by NBDSA chairperson and former Supreme Court judge A.K. Sikri says.

The body said that it did not find merit in the broadcaster’s submission that the terms “Hijabi Gang”, “Hijabwali Gazwa Gang” and “the Zawahiri gang” were used only in respect of the “invisible powers which were allegedly behind the controversy” and not in respect of the students who were protesting.

Muslim women in hijab participate in a candle light march during a protest rally over the ‘hijab’ ban in Karnataka, in Kolkata, February 11, 2022. Photo: PTI Photo/Swapan Mahapatra

It also “strongly deprecated” the tendency of the broadcaster to associate those panellists who were in favour of the hijab with Zawahiri and labelling them as “Zawahiri gang member”, “Zawahiri’s ambassador”,”Zawahiri is your God, you are his fan”, etc. The NBDSA said it also did not find any justification in linking those panellists or persons who were supporting the hijab with Al-Qaeda by airing tickers stating “#AlQaedaGangExposed”.

The order says that the anchor had not only acted in flagrant disrespect of the Code of Ethics & Broadcasting Standards but had also failed to abide by the decision of the Bombay high court in Nilesh Navalakha vs Union of India (2021), which enjoins an anchor to apply their mind to prevent the programme from drifting beyond the permissible limits.

NBDSA noted that even the Supreme Court has recently stressed on the role of the anchor to maintain a balance between the panellists and the crucial role they play in stopping hate speech. “However, in the instant case, not only had the anchor failed to stop the other panellists from crossing the boundary but had given them a platform to express extreme views which could adversely affect the communal harmony in the country,” the order says.

It said the programme violated the principles relating to impartiality, neutrality, fairness and good taste & decency under the Specific Guidelines Covering Reportage, apart from the Code of Ethics & Broadcasting Standards. “NBDSA stated that the broadcaster would be well advised to guide and train its anchor on how to conduct debates on such sensitive issues,” the order notes.

Keeping in mind the “repetitive nature of the above violations”, the NBDSA decided to impose a fine of Rs 50,000 on the broadcaster and admonished the broadcaster. It said if such violations are repeated in future, it may have to direct the broadcaster to ensure the presence of the anchor Aman Chopra before it. The body also directed the broadcaster to remove the video of the programme from its website and all platforms within seven days of the order.

Also Read: SC’s Words on TV ‘Hate Speech’ Strike Several Chords, But Will Govt and News Anchors Listen?

Two other orders issued

The NBDSA also issued two other orders related to News18 India on the same day, one relating to a programme on “bulldozer justice” aired on April 20, 2022 and another in which the complaint said the channel created a false narrative around the demolition of a temple in Rajasthan’s Alwar, aired on April 22, 2022.

About the demolition of alleged illegal constructions, the NBDSA “strongly deprecated the tendency of the broadcaster to generalise sensitive issues” and the use of offending tickers like “Jihadi”, which it said was totally unnecessary. “Had the debate confined to the menace of illegal constructions and the steps that are required to contain such illegal constructions, there could not have been any problem. However, the narrative of the programme gave an altogether different tilt and in the process violated the guidelines prescribed in the Code of Ethics & Broadcasting Standards which was impermissible,” the order says, asking the broadcaster to take down this video also.

On the programme about the temple in Alwar, the self-regulatory body deferred its decision after the channel informed it that several FIRs were registered in respect of the programme and its anchor and that the matter is currently being investigated by Rajasthan Police and is also sub-judice before the Jaipur and Jodhpur benches of the Rajasthan high court.

Watch | ‘Why is Govt a Mute Spectator?’: SC on Indian Media’s ‘Hate for Profit’ Model

How did television news come from ‘boring yet informative’ Doordarshan to ‘entertaining and agenda driven’ Sudarshan News?

While hearing a batch of eleven writ petitions seeking directions to the Union government to regulate hate speech, a bench comprising Justices K.M. Joseph and Hrishikesh Roy made some critical oral observations regarding television news channels. It said the government has remained a mute spectator to instances of hate speech on television.

What else did the court say?

How did television news come from ‘boring yet informative’ Doordarshan to ‘entertaining and agenda driven’ Sudarshan News?

That and a lot more on hate speech in this video.

CJI Bobde Says Freedom of Speech ‘Most Abused’ in Recent Times

The CJI made the observation while hearing a petition seeking action against a section of the media’s coverage of the Tablighi Jamaat event.

New Delhi: The Supreme Court has observed that freedom of speech and expression is the most abused right in recent times, during a hearing of a petition on the media coverage of the Tablighi Jamaat event earlier this year.

A three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) S.A. Bobde was hearing pleas of Jamiat Ulama-I-Hind and others alleging that a section of the media was spreading communal hatred over the Tablighi Jamaat congregation during the onset of COVID-19 pandemic.

When senior advocate Dushyant Dave pointed out to that the affidavit filed by the Centre claims that the petition attempts to muzzle the freedom of speech, CJI Bobde responded, “They are entitled to make any argument like you people are. This freedom of speech may be the most abused freedom in recent times”.

The bench was irked over the fact that the affidavit submitted by the Centre contained “unnecessary and nonsensical” averments with regard to the media’s reporting of the Tablighi Jamaat issue. It pulled up solicitor general Tushar Mehta, who appeared for the Centre, and asked why the affidavit was filed by a junior-level officer instead of the secretary of the information and broadcasting (I&B) ministry, and termed it as being “evasive and brazen”.

The bench has sought an affidavit from the I&B secretary with details of steps taken in the past to stop motivated media reporting in such cases.

Solicitor general Tushar Mehta offered to submit a better affidavit. “I will personally vet it,” he said, according to LiveLaw.

The CJI added that the secretary must tell the court what he thinks of the incidents pointed out. “He may agree, disagree. But he must not make such unnecessary nonsensical averments as he has made,” CJI Bobde said, according to LiveLaw.

The case was adjourned for two weeks to give time to the government time to file a fresh affidavit.

The Supreme Court of India. Photo: The Wire

‘Fake news targeting Muslims’

In August, the Centre had told the apex court that the Muslim body’s attempt to obtain a blanket “gag order” on the entire media to prevent them from reporting on the event held at Markaz Nizamuddin would effectively destroy the freedom of the citizenry to know and the right of journalists to ensure an informed society.

The government had said that in the absence of any specific information about any objectionable news published or aired by a specific news channel/agency, the constitution and the applicable statutes do not give it any authority to unilaterally pass any censure order under the Cable Television Networks Rules.

Also read: The Coronavirus Spread and the Criminal Liability of the Tablighi Jamaat

The Jamiat Ulama-I-Hind filed a plea in the apex court seeking directions to the Centre to stop the dissemination of “fake news” related to the religious gathering and take strict action against those responsible for it.

It alleged that the Tablighi Jamaat event was being used to “demonise” and blame the entire Muslim community and sought to restrain the media from publishing/airing such reports.

The Tablighi Jamaat congregation at Markaz Nizamuddin in central Delhi, which was held in March, was accused of accelerating the spread of the novel coronavirus in the country. Many people who attended the congregation – including foreigners – have been arrested, but lower courts have quashed some of the cases or granted bail in others.

In August, the Aurangabad bench of the Bombay high court said that the government tried to “scapegoat” the persons who attended the Tablighi Jamaat event and quashed the FIRs registered against 29 foreign nationals and six Indian citizens.

“Trying to misinterpret petition”

In a press release, the president of the Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, Maulana Arshad Madani, said that the organisation is not against the freedom of expression but against ‘sectarian’ reporting.

He said the statements made by CJI Bobde during the hearing fully supported the Jamiat’s position. He further added that the filing of an incomplete affidavit by the Central government proves that the intention was flawed and it did not want to take any action against the biased media.

He said that the solicitor general was trying to misinterpret what the Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind had said in its petition with evidence, and there was a deliberate attempt to give a similar impression in the Centre’s affidavit that the petitioner wants to restrict the freedom of speech by filing such a petition.

“However, the truth is that there is no such thing as restricting freedom of speech in the petition. Rather, it has been said that news channels which conspire day and night to incite sectarian hatred in the country through their vicious and one-sided reporting should be banned and a complete guideline should be set for them,” he added.

Maulana Madani further said that the constitution has given complete freedom of speech to every citizen of the country and we totally agree with it. “But if this freedom of speech is deliberately made to assassinate a sect or community, or it is used to spread hatred, then we are strongly opposed to it,” he said.

(With PTI inputs)