Why in the News?

Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (I&B) has banned public access to several OTT platforms, for streaming obscene content.

More on the news 

• They were banned under the Information Technology Act, 2000, and the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021.
• The Supreme Court in Ranjit D. Udeshi v. State of Maharashtra (1965) defined obscenity as a reasonable restriction to free speech (Article 19)

Need for content regulation

• Societal Reach and Influence: With more than 950 million people having access to internet, unregulated content can influence diverse section of society.
• Curbing violence and violent behaviour: E.g., A 2010 study analysed pornography videos and found almost 90 per cent of scenes contained physical aggression.
• Protecting vulnerable groups 
  • Children: Early exposure to explicit content distorts children's understanding of healthy relationships and sexuality. 
  • Women: Such content often objectifies women, perpetuating gender inequality and normalising violence against women.
  • Minority: E.g., online hate speeches can fuel societal divisions endangering minority. 
• Ethical imperative: Uncontrolled dissemination of degrading material can alter social norms, values, institution of family, etc.
  • Harm to society: E.g., the 2021 "Bulli Bai" app incident, where images of women were auctioned online
    • JS Mill's Harm Principle permits limiting individual liberty when it causes harm to others or degrades societal well-being.
  • Humans as means: Content that reduces people to objects of sexual interest violates the principle of categorical imperative of Kant which dictates against using humanity as a means to an end.
  • Unequal impact: According to Indian Policy Foundation, low-income people with poor digital literacy are more exposed to obscene content.

Challenges in regulating content 

• Regulatory challenges
  • Regulatory Overlap: The division of responsibilities between MeitY (which frames IT Rules) and the MIB  (which oversees content) creates coordination challenges.
  • Subjectivity in definitions: Eg, obscenity can be interpreted differently and can lead to arbitrary actions by the government. 
• Technological challenges -
  • The end-to-end encryption and privacy features allow the spread of illegal content without scrutiny.
  • Social media algorithms trap users in a feedback loop, i.e. accidental exposure to suggestive content triggers more such recommendations.
  • Virtual private networks (VPN) enable users to bypass regulatory oversight, allowing access to prohibited websites and content.
• Creative Freedom: Bans and strict regulation can stifle creative freedom and infringe on the constitutional right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a)
  • Eg, ban on films such as Fire (about homosexuality).

Way Ahead 

• Multi-Stakeholder consultations: Such as with digital platforms, content creators, etc must be done to strike a balance between freedom of speech and social sensitivities.
• Use of Technology: Tools such as automated profanity filters, user-report-driven content scanners, and AI-powered content analyses may be utilised by OTT platforms.
• Strengthening Self-Regulation: Empowering industry-led self-regulatory bodies to develop and enforce content standards could reduce direct government intervention.
• Learning from best Practices: European Union's Audiovisual Media Services Directive extends traditional broadcast standards to digital platforms while maintaining strong privacy protections through General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).