Ask MIB to kill the bill and #LetUsChill

A quick update from 2024: Plot twist, but the rights-infringing kind

If you think the Broadcasting Bill, 2023 shared for public consultation is bad, wait till you hear what the Ministry has been up to. The MIB has conducted 4(!!) closed door meetings (that has been reported upon so far) with selective industry representatives, without representation from civil society, journalists, or other key stakeholders. Further, each shared copy of the revised bill bears a watermark across every page that is unique to the stakeholder so that the MIB can trace leaks. Stakeholders were also asked to give an undertaking that they would not share the Bill further (a minute please… we’re left speechless).

Consultations cannot be exclusive!

Ministerial deliberations serve to inform the government about the key regulatory and policy issues, and thus should be attended by stakeholders representing diverse citizen interests and perspectives. We wrote to them demanding a broad-based, public consultation on the revised Bill given its grave implications.

Revised Bill, Renewed Threats

As per the revisions, individuals posting ‘news and current affairs’ may now be considered as ‘Digital News Broadcasters’ and may become subject to a ‘Code of Conduct’ (read Code of Content Policing) similar to the one applicable to cable TV broadcasters (that’s great because news journalism on TV is thriving).

The revised bill reportedly introduces definitions for “professional” & “systematic activity”. However, they are so ambiguous & vague that they don’t alleviate our concerns & instead amplify them - prompting us to ask if we (IFF) & YOU, as a commentator on current affairs, will end up getting covered under the Bill.

The revised definition of “news and current affairs programmes” will reportedly now also include ‘texts’! Oh and lets not forget - the Bill lays down extensive penalties for platforms for failing to take down offending content, including potential loss of safe harbour privileges – this would mean direct liability for third-party content for platforms like Twitter, Instagram, Reddit, etc.

You can see why we’re worried. However, there’s still time!! The Bill, with all of its changes, is yet to go through the Union Cabinet in order to be tabled in Parliament. Amplify & engage - ask MIB to #KillTheBill.

What are we doing about this?

1. Our public advocacy efforts on the Bill, since the day it was released to the public, have been incessant. We kickstarted the #LetUsChill campaign prompting thousands of you to write to MIB urging them to ‘kill the bill’, which included launching this website. As the list of who can be regulated under the Bill keeps ominously expanding, we have been identifying affected communities and reaching out to them with advocacy strategies. We have been joining forces with content creators to aggressively push back against the revised Bill and the secrecies around it. We will be organising a social media storm on Thursday, August 1, 2024 to increase awareness and pressure using the tags #KillTheBill #ContentBachao. Alongside MIB, participants are urged to publicly tag and invite Members of Parliament to the discussion too.
2. Letters to MIB
1. In February 2024, we wrote to MIB requesting them to make all responses received during the public consultation process on the draft 2023 Bill publicly available on their website (with personal information of responders redacted), and allow stakeholders to send counter comments.
2. In March 2024, we engaged with the Standing Committee on Communications and Information Technology (IT) on their 56th report ‘Regulation of Cable Television in India’ relating to action taken by MIB, expressing our opposition to the Bill.
3. In April 2024, upon being asked by MIB if our comments on the Bill can be made public under the Right to Information (“RTI”) Act, we provided our consent.
4. Simultaneously, we wrote to MIB noting that while seeking consent of stakeholders before sharing their response under the RTI Act is appreciated, best practice dictates that MIB must proactively publish comments publicly on their website.
5. In July 2024, noting the circulation of a new revised draft Bill, we wrote to MIB urging them to make this version publicly available and open it for meaningful public consultation.
3. Alongside advocacy and engagement, we have been relying on the RTI Act to glean information about stakeholders and their comments to the Bill. In February 2024, we filed an RTI request with MIB, seeking copies of responses received during the public consultation period (with personal information of responders redacted). After some friction and resistance from MIB, we received a limited set of responses in April 2024 (we will be publishing an analysis soon). More recently, on July 29, 2024, we filed an RTI request seeking information on the private meetings convened by MIB on the revised draft, including the number, dates, participants, agendas, submissions, and outcome documents related to each meeting. We also asked MIB why the 2024 version has not been made public, and if there are plans to open it up for public consultation.
4. We have been engaging with Members of Parliament and urging them to express their opposition against the Bill in all its forms. To this effect, we have compiled a comprehensive explainer for MPs decoding the harms of the Bill and the threats such a regime will pose to Constitutional free speech.