PAID NEWS

The Press Council of India (PCI) defines paid news as any news or analysis appearing in print or
electronic media for consideration in cash or kind.
The Committee acknowledged challenges in defining and determining what constitutes or qualifies as
‘paid news’. It cited advertisements camouflaged as news, denial of coverage to select electoral
candidates, exchanging of advertisement space for equity stakes between media houses and corporate
and the rise in paid content as manifestations of paid news.

The Committee asked the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MoIB) to formulate a
comprehensive legal definition of ‘paid news’ in consultation with stakeholders and suggest measures for
usage of ‘circumstantial evidence’ in identifying paid news.

Reasons for rise in paid news:

The Committee identified corporatisation of media, desegregation of ownership and editorial roles,
decline in autonomy of editors/journalists due to emergence of contract system and poor wage levels of
journalists as key reasons for the rise in the incidence of paid news. It urged the Ministry of Information
and Broadcasting (MoIB) to ensure periodic review of the editor/journalist autonomy and wage
conditions.
The Committee opined that financial accounts of the media houses should be subject to examination,
especially the revenue source for a suspected paid news case. It recommended mandatory disclosure of
‘private treaties’ and details of advertising revenue received by the media houses.

Regulators lack adequate powers:

The Committee found the exiting regulatory set-up dealing with paid news as inadequate. It described
voluntary self-regulatory industry bodies like the News Broadcasting Standards Authority and
Broadcasting Content Complaints Council as an ‘eye wash’. It found the punitive powers of statutory
regulators like the PCI and Electronic Media Monitoring Centre (EMMC) to be inadequate. It also
highlighted the conflict of interest inherent with appointment of media-owners as members of the PCI or
self-regulatory bodies.

Need for regulatory overhaul:

The Committee recommended establishment of either a single regulatory body for both print and
electronic media or enhancing punitive powers of the PCI and setting-up a similar statutory body for the
electronic media. Such regulator(s) should have the power to take strong action against offenders and
should not include media owners/interested parties as members.

Inaction by the government:

The Committee censured the MoIB for its failure to establish a strong mechanism to check the spread of
paid news. It accused the government of dithering on important policy initiatives, citing the lack of action
on various recommendations of the PCI and Election Commission of India (ECI).
The PCI has sought amendment in the Press Council Act, 1978, to make its directions binding on
government authorities and bring the electronic media under its purview. The ECI has made a reference
to the Ministry of Law and Justice to amend the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (RP Act) in order
to include indulgence of an electoral candidate in paid news as a corrupt practice. It also recommended
inclusion of abetting and publishing of such paid news as an electoral offence with minimum punishment
of two years imprisonment.

Penal provisions and jurisdiction:

The Committee observed that existing penal provisions have not served as an effective deterrent for the
practice of paid news and stricter penal provisions are needed. It highlighted the lack of clarity regarding
the jurisdiction of the designated authority to penalise offenders, given existence of multiple bodies like
the MoIB, PCI, EMMC and ECI.
The Committee recommended that the ECI should have the authority to take punitive action against
electoral candidates in cases of paid news. It endorsed the ECI’s proposed amendments to the RP Act and
urged the government to provide the ECI with more powers to deal with paid news.

Concentration of media ownership:

The Committee expressed concern that the lack of restriction on ownership across media segments
(print, TV or internet) or between content and distribution could give rise to monopolistic practices. It
urged the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (currently examining the issue) to present its
recommendations and the MoIB to take conclusive action on those recommendations on a priority basis.

Distribution of government advertisements: The Directorate of Advertising and Visual Publicity

(DAVP) is the nodal advertising agency for the central government under the MoIB. It is responsible for
execution of advertisements on behalf of various ministries, autonomous bodies and PSUs. Various
stakeholders alleged that the government uses advertisements to arm-twist media houses for favourable
coverage.
The Committee found the DAVP’s existing policy on distribution of advertisements amongst various
media houses to be unsatisfactory. Hence, it recommended a transparent and unbiased policy for
distribution of advertisements by the central and state governments, with provisions for scrutiny. It
asked the DAVP to disclose details about disbursements of advertisements expenditure on its website.

Adoption of international best practices: The Committee expressed concern that the MoIB and self-
regulatory bodies have not conducted any study to evaluate the mechanism adopted by other countries
to tackle the problem of paid news. Taking note of the Justice Leveson Report on the press and existing
regulatory structure in the UK, it asked the MoIB to consider the report’s recommendations and progress
of their implementation while dealing with the issue.

More on Paid News/Case Study:

Some of journalistic jargons to indicate paid news now a days are perks and package journalism, access
journalism, suitcase journalism, exchange journalism, ad-based journalism, blackmail journalism,
campaign journalism, junket journalism, subsidy journalism and relative journalism.

Following consultations with Indian Newspapers Society, Indian Language Newspapers Association and
journalists’ bodies, Press Council Of India (PCI) decided to demand more powers to tackle the menace of
‘paid news’.
Editors’ Guild made vociferous protests against paid news after the 2009 Andhra Pradesh elections.
Noted journalists late Kuldeep Nayar, Ajit Bhatacharjee, Harivansh Narayan Sing, B G Vergeese, and
members of various organizations put pressure on the PCI to act decisively against sections of the media
personnel indulging in the harmful practice.
Noted journalist Prabash Joshi and Palagummi Sainath wrote vigorously against prevalence of paid news
in Indian media. Rajdeep Sardesai led a team of journalists to the then Chief Election Commissioner Navin
Chowla and urged him to take strong action against candidates and media persons who indulge in
violating media ethics.
Under this circumstance, Election Commission of Indian (ECI) resolved to curb the serious malpractice
called ‘paid news’. The ECI feels paid news not only violates the sanctity of freedom of speech and
expression enshrined in Article 19 (1)of the Constitution but also pauses a serious threat to our
parliamentary democracy by unjustly furthering electoral prospects of some candidates in
elections while ruining others.
ECI proposed to the Government of India to amend the Representation of the Peoples Act, 1951 related to
conduct of elections to the Parliament and the Assemblies, qualifications and disqualifications for
membership of these Houses, corrupt practices and other offences in connection with elections. It insists
incorporation of paid news as an electoral offence and punishable for a minimum of two years of
imprisonment.
While ECI has been actively contemplating stringent measures against paid news which has assumed a
serious proportion, the political parties in India also arrived at a consensus with ECI that all media be put
through maximum vigilance on the eve of Lok Sabha and Assembly polls.

PCI constituted a 12-member drafting committee to prepare a final rep

ort on the findings of select committee on the phenomenon of paid news.
They were- Kalyan Barooah (Assam), H C Cama, Lalit Mangotra, U C Sarma,Y C Halan, K Sreenivash Reddy,
S N Sinha, Anil Jugal Kishore Agarwal, Kundin R L Vyas, Puranjoy Guha Thakurta, P J Vadekar and K Rao.
The Press Council of India made a series of guidelines for the media ; inter-alia, (a)objective reporting
about elections and the candidates , (b) eschewing news reports which tend to promote enmity and
hatred among the people on grounds of caste, creed, religion, community or language (c) refraining from
publishing false or critical statements regarding personal character and conduct of any candidate, (d)
refraining from accepting any kind of inducement in cash or kind to project a candidate or party, (e) not
indulging in canvassing for a particular candidate or party, (f) the press shall not accept or publish any
advertisement at the cost of public exchequer (g) The press shall observe the
directions/orders/instructions of ECI.
It will indeed take some time more for the new specifications regarding paid news to percolate down to
the scribes in the field of this vast country and once they will be received in real earnest by all associated
with the noble profession, the socio-political scenario will definitely be far better that what it is today.