1. Digital Media Ethics Code Relating to Digital Media and OTT Platforms
1.1. to be followed by OTT platforms and online news and digital media entities.
1.2. Self-Classification of Content
1.2.1. Content that is suitable for persons aged 13 years and above,
1.2.1.1. and can be viewed by a person under the age of 13 years with parental guidance
1.2.2. into five age-based categories
1.2.2.1. U (Universal)
1.2.2.1.1. Online curated content that is suitable for children and for people of all ages
1.2.2.2. U/A 7+
1.2.2.2.1. content that is suitable for persons aged 7 years and older, and
1.2.2.3. U/A 13+
1.2.2.3.1. Content that is suitable for persons aged 13 years and above
1.2.2.4. U/A 16+
1.2.2.4.1. content which is suitable for persons aged 16 years and above,
1.2.2.5. A (Adult).
1.2.2.5.1. Online curated content which is restricted to adults shall be classified as “A” rating.
1.3. parental locks for content classified as U/A 13+ or higher
1.3.1. Platforms would be required to implement
1.4. reliable age verification mechanisms for content classified as “A”.
1.5. display the classification rating specific to each content or programme together with a content descriptor
1.5.1. The publisher of online curated content shall display
1.6. Norms for news
1.6.1. Observance of
1.6.1.1. Norms of Journalistic Conduct of the Press Council of India
1.6.1.2. the Programme Code under the Cable Television Networks Regulation Act
1.6.2. For publishers of news on digital media
1.7. Self-regulation by the Publisher
1.7.1. a Grievance Redressal Officer based in India
1.7.1.1. To be appointed by the Publisher
1.7.1.2. responsible for the redressal of grievances received by it
1.8. Self-Regulatory Body
1.8.1. one or more self-regulatory bodies of publishers
1.8.1.1. headed by a
1.8.1.1.1. retired judge of the Supreme Court,
1.8.1.1.2. a High Court or independent eminent person
1.8.1.1.3. and have not more than six members.
1.8.1.2. Such a body will have to register with the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting
1.8.1.3. will oversee the adherence by the publisher to the Code of Ethics
1.8.1.4. address grievances that have not to be been resolved by the publisher within 15 days.
1.9. Oversight Mechanism
1.9.1. Ministry of Information and Broadcasting shall formulate an oversight mechanism
1.9.1.1. publish a charter for self-regulating bodies, including Codes of Practices
1.9.1.2. establish an Inter-Departmental Committee for hearing grievances
2. Why in news
2.1. the union government, under the ambit of the IT (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules 2021,
2.1.1. has brought in detailed guidelines for digital content
2.1.1.1. For
2.1.1.1.1. both digital media
2.1.1.1.2. Over The Top (OTT) platforms.
3. present social media usage in India
3.1. WhatsApp users
3.1.1. 53 Crore
3.2. YouTube users
3.2.1. 44.8 Crore
3.3. Facebook users
3.3.1. 41 Crore
3.4. Instagram users
3.4.1. 21 Crore
3.5. Twitter users
3.5.1. 1.75 Crore
4. Need fo regulation of OTT
4.1. Ambiguous definition of OTT/Social Media
4.1.1. no universal definition of what OTT communication services are
4.1.2. as per the old rules.
4.1.3. as per the new rules.
4.1.3.1. the term “intermediaries” is broad enough to cover all social media / content sharing platforms
4.2. Content that disrespects
4.2.1. Nationalist sentiments
4.2.2. Religious sentiments
4.3. Issues with content
4.3.1. vulgar and harmful content being streamed
4.3.1.1. On OTT platforms
4.3.2. sexually explicit content and pornography
4.3.2.1. Which is otherwise banned in India
4.4. Data Privacy
4.4.1. When an individual is using any OTT for communication services,
4.4.1.1. the data gets shared with the parent company.
4.4.1.1.1. used for commercial purposes
4.5. Data Sovereignty
4.5.1. The OTT service providers may store the personal information of the end-users in their data servers located abroad.
4.5.1.1. issues relating to data protection and national security.
4.5.1.2. endanger the sovereignty and integrity of India.
4.6. What other countries are doing
4.6.1. The digital economy regulations including OTT services are evolving across the world.
4.6.1.1. regulatory bodies to keep a check on the OTT platforms.
4.6.1.1.1. In
4.6.2. Stricter controls
4.6.2.1. Saudi Arabia
4.6.2.2. Turkey
4.6.2.3. Indonesia
4.6.2.4. Many OTT platforms including Netflix has been blocked.
5. Need for regulation of social media
5.1. Defamation
5.1.1. people making anonymous threats, bullying, harassing, and stalking others.
5.1.1.1. crimes go unpunished
5.1.2. Meaning
5.1.2.1. representing someone by hacking their social media accounts
5.1.2.1.1. and sending indecent or inappropriate messages.
5.2. Hate Speech
5.2.1. speech of aggressive nature
5.2.1.1. expressing prejudice against an individual or community based on certain features.
5.3. Harassment and cyber stalking
5.3.1. Online abuse, bullying, and harassment on social networking sites
5.3.1.1. includes the conduct of repeated harassment or threats done towards an individual.
5.3.2. Cyberbullying and harassment can include
5.3.2.1. threatening or harassing email messages, text messages, or uploading information online.
5.3.2.1.1. their private and sensitive information, to cause distress, fear, and anger.
5.4. Privacy breach
5.4.1. harvesting of fake news widely through WhatsApp
5.4.1.1. resulted
5.4.1.1.1. in mob violence
5.4.1.1.2. and more than three dozen deadly lynchings in 2017 and 2018.
5.4.2. WhatsApp declined the government’s demand to disclose the source of the rumours,
5.4.2.1. stating its pledge of anonymity and privacy towards its users done
6. What are the new rules
6.1. Due Diligence To Be Followed By Intermediaries
6.1.1. safe harbour provisions will not apply to them if they dont follow
6.1.1.1. Safe harbour provisions
6.1.1.1.1. exempts them from liability for the actions of users if they adhere to government-prescribed guidelines.
6.1.1.1.2. Section 79 of the Information Technology Act
6.2. Grievance Redressal Mechanism:
6.2.1. for receiving resolving complaints from the users or victims.
6.2.2. All intermediaries have to set it
6.3. Ensuring Online Safety and Dignity of Users, Especially Women Users
6.3.1. Intermediaries shall remove or disable access within 24 hours of receipt of complaints of contents that erodes individual privacy and dignity.
6.4. Enabling Identity of the Originator
6.4.1. Significant social media intermediaries providing services primarily in the nature of messaging
6.4.1.1. shall enable identification of the first originator of the information.
6.4.2. Required only for the purposes of
6.4.2.1. prevention, detection, investigation, prosecution or punishment of an offence
6.4.2.1.1. Related to
6.5. Removal of Unlawful Information:
6.5.1. An intermediary should not host or publish any information which is prohibited under any law in relation -
6.5.1.1. In relation to
6.5.1.1.1. to the interest of the sovereignty
6.5.1.1.2. integrity of India,
6.5.1.1.3. public order,
6.5.1.1.4. friendly relations with foreign countries etc.
6.6. chief compliance officer resident in India
6.6.1. responsible for ensuring compliance with the rules
6.6.1.1. They will be required also to appoint a nodal contact person for 24×7 coordination with law enforcement agencies.
6.7. a monthly compliance report
6.7.1. the platforms will need to publish
6.7.1.1. mentioning
6.7.1.1.1. the details of complaints received and action taken on the complaints,
6.7.1.1.2. details of contents removed proactively by the significant social media intermediary.
7. Advantages offered by these rules
7.1. Effective checks and balances
7.1.1. ensure that social media platforms have to keep better checks and balances over their platforms.
7.1.2. This will ensure the data is not shared unlawfully
7.2. Enhanced accountability
7.2.1. The new IT rules enhance government regulation over social and digital media.
7.3. Citizen empowerment
7.3.1. mechanism for redressal and timely resolution of their grievances
7.4. Maintenance of public order
7.4.1. Disinformation (Fake and wrong information) of data can be controlled
7.4.1.1. This will reduce instances of fake news incited violence
7.5. India’s digital imprints
7.5.1. It will strengthen India’s position as a leader in digital policy and technological innovation.
7.5.1.1. Something China has not been able to do for global companies operating in digital space
8. Punishments for not following the guidelines
8.1. In case an intermediary fails to observe the rules
8.1.1. it would lose the safe harbour,
8.1.2. will be liable for punishment
8.1.2.1. “under any law for the time being in force including the provisions of the IT Act and the Indian Penal Code”
9. Current law in India wrt to data privacy on the internet and social media users
9.1. no specific provisions under the IT Act of 2000 that define privacy, or any penal provisions relating to privacy
9.2. some sections of the Act deal with very specific cases of data breaches and privacy
9.2.1. Section 43A
9.2.1.1. provides for compensation
9.2.1.1.1. if an intermediary is negligent in using reasonable and good quality security and safety parameters, which can protect the data of their users and citizens
9.2.2. Section 72 of the IT Act
9.2.2.1. penal and imprisonment provisions
9.2.2.1.1. if a government official in the course of his or her duty, gets access to certain information, and leaks it subsequently.
9.2.3. Section 72A provides for criminal punishment
9.2.3.1. if a service provider, during the course of providing the service or during the contract period,
9.2.3.1.1. discloses personal information of the user without them being aware of it.
10. The bigger debate
10.1. Who is to decide what is free speech: The Government or the Companies
10.1.1. Offensive content
10.1.1.1. Arguments for Government intervention
10.1.1.1.1. Big companies will not remove offensive content coz its not in their interest
10.1.1.2. Arguments for Big companies
10.1.1.2.1. Big companies are aware of the risks of offensive content on their platforms hence they themselves are removing it
10.1.2. Allowing speech or disallowing it
10.1.2.1. If there’s choice to be made between allowing free speech and disallowing it
10.1.2.1.1. One argument
10.1.2.1.2. Other argument
10.1.3. Bargaining power of both
10.1.3.1. Government
10.1.3.1.1. Can take down social media platforms in their countries
10.1.3.2. Big companies
10.1.3.2.1. Are so big now that if they are banned in a particular country