Look who’s lobbying against legislation on paid news

In what is a long-awaited move, the Union Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (I&B) is set to crack the whip on paid news with a new draft bill, christened Registration of Newspapers and Publications Bill, 2017.

Except that it appears that India’s largest media conglomerate, The Times Group, may not be quite as ecstatic about the idea.

In June, the Times Group’s corporate office sent a confidential email communication to the ministry pertaining to the “amendment efforts” to the Press and Registration of Books (PRB) Act. (Newslaundry has accessed the email.)

The email from a Times Group Senior Vice-President requests for a November 19, 2013, mail to be shown to the “Honourable Secretary”.

This mail from November 2013 presents the Times Group’s views on including a clause on paid news in the Registration of Newspapers and Publications Bill, 2013. It says the Bill, “is erroneously trying to regulate content like the so-called ‘paid news’ which is not in its ambit and was never intended to be.”

Helpfully, the mail also points out that the move to check paid news will only achieve “mountains of paperwork”.

It isn’t clear why the Times Group office sent the November 2013 mail to the I&B ministry again in June this year. But it could possibly be in light of the 2017 draft Bill that is more stringent in tackling paid news than the previous 2013 draft Bill.

The 2017 draft Bill replaces the 150-year-old Press and Registration of Books (PRB) Act 1867. The draft Bill exclusively focuses on the regulation of newspapers and publications and their registration. Newslaundry has accessed a copy of the draft Bill, which is not yet in the public domain.

One of the new provisions in the Bill allows for the cancellation of any publication for up to 45 days if it is found guilty of carrying paid news. Further, it states that if a publisher continues to indulge in paid news even after a suspension, the Press Registrar General, appointed by the central government, can order a cancellation of the publication. The draft Bill notes that “no order of cancellation shall be passed without giving the publisher a reasonable opportunity of being heard”. It also states that the cancellation will occur “on the basis of an inquiry held by Press Council of India under the Press Council Act, 1978, or by any other authority…”

The Bill defines paid news as “publishing of any news or analysis in any publication for a price, in cash or kind, as consideration”. This definition was given by the Press Council of India in 2010 and is accepted by the Election Commission of India. The 2013 draft Bill had the same definition and it is this very definition that is being contested by the Times Group.

In the mail to the I&B ministry, Times Group presents its explanation on why references to paid news “must be deleted” from the 2013 draft Bill:

“…it is common knowledge that all newspapers the world over publish supplements, promoting not only products and services, but also countries, achievements of governments, ministries and public bodies. It is a standard industry practice to carry these with a suitable disclaimer or use the word ‘ADVT’ to convey to the reader that these are paid for. The supplements or the relevant pages in the main newspaper contain not only pictorials and illustrations, but also write ups. Same is with advertisements for products and services where a write-up precedes or succeeds a pictorial or illustrated content. In fact, many newspapers the world over, insert a general disclaimer on the masthead of these supplements themselves, that they are advertorials or promotional features. The same disclaimer is placed at the top or bottom of advertisements, whether they contain pictorials or write-ups. There is nothing undesirable or unethical or indeed illegal, about this. To ban these, would amount to stifling the newspaper industry, thus imperilling the freedom of the Press, depriving the advertisers a right to put forth to the reading public, their case of point of view, and also depriving….

Paid News has been defined in the new Bill to mean any ‘news or analysis published for a price in cash or kind as consideration’. However, what constitutes ‘news’ or ‘analysis’ has not been dealt anywhere.

As per the Oxford Dictionary ‘news’ means ‘newly received or noteworthy information, especially about recent events’, and ‘analysis’ means ‘detailed examination of the elements or structure or something’. Now, if those meanings were to be taken, most advertisements talking about a product launch will constitute ‘news’, and reviews of movies and plays will constitute ‘analysis’. Legitimate businesses on which the publication is critically dependent will thus cease to exist.”

Evidently, the Times Group here has confused paid news with advertorials — which are legitimate means of ad revenue for many news publications. The Election Commission of India and The Press Council of India make it amply clear what paid news is — advertisements in the garb of news. This does not extend to advertorial sections like Delhi Times or marketing initiatives like the Red Initiative by The Indian Express, which are labelled as advertorials.

The Times Group’s mail also states that including paid news in the Bill will be used as a “measure of vengeance to settle scores”. They state that neither the PCI nor the Registrar General of Newspapers is competent enough to punish or judge on cases of paid news and suspend the publication or cancel its registration. “These measures, therefore, smack of an indirect Government control and fall foul of the guarantees of the freedom of the Press under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India,” the mail goes on to add.

The mail stresses that there are enough provisions to deal with paid news, including the role played by the Election Commission of India, the PCI and the “self-regulatory discipline imposed by the media by its strict codes of conduct”.

Newslaundry reached out to Times Group Chief Operating Officer Raj Jain on the email communication to know about the company’s stance on the issue. Jain said, “We are not aware of any new draft amendments to the PRB Act, hence the question of responding to government on the same, does not arise.”

He added that, “the print industry’s position as articulated by the Newspaper association and many companies in response to the previous government’s draft Bill of 2013 was that there is no need to amend the PRB Act as far as alleged ‘paid news’ is concerned.” Jain stated that there are enough “existing regulations/ laws to take care of the problem including the Election Commission’s systems (as this is really a political & election time issue). In addition to the above, self-regulation by the print industry has work[ed] well and hence no new changes are necessary or required.”

To be sure, the resistance to a legislation on paid news is something that extends across the print industry.

The Indian Newspaper Society — that represents close to 1,000 newspaper publishers — had objected to a legislation on paid news in 2016. Speaking to Newslaundry, INS President Somesh Sharma of Rashtradoot Saptahik says that proving instances of paid news is very tough and the stance of the industry body is to tackle the problem with self-regulation. “We are against paid news but implementation of a law against paid news is very dicey and can give government arbitrary powers.”

A loose definition of paid news coupled with sweeping powers to cancel registration could indeed make newspapers vulnerable. But it is telling that the Times Group would rather want the scrapping of the paid news clause altogether than give suggestions towards a more robust law in tackling the menace.

Journalist Paranjoy Guha Thakurta, who has worked on a two-member subcommittee set up by PCI to examine paid news, says that a legislation on paid news is a welcome move. “Along with the draft Bill, they will also have to change the Press Council Act to empower the council. So far the council can only make recommendations.” When asked about Times Group’s apprehensions, he said, it’s not surprising at all. “They are protecting their commercial interests. There has to be some sort of a statutory legislation with checks and balances. If the council decides to cancel a publications’ registration, they should be able to appeal to higher courts.”

Thakurta disagrees that self-regulation is the way forward and says we shouldn’t be surprised at all with The Times of India’s stance. He is on the money when he says so, considering that the owners of Times Group had famously said that they are in the business of advertising and not news. With a circulation of close to 30 lakh copies, The Times of India is the largest English-language newspaper in the world. It has achieved this by carefully demolishing the wall between the newsroom and sales department. A revealing piece in The Hoot describes how a subtle corporate plug once made it to The Times of India’s edit page and it is fairly ordinary to find pieces on the newspaper’s website that read more like PR plugs than reports. This is not to say that these cases amount to paid news but that a legal provision on paid news would mean the paper posing some tough question of itself on how far it wants to push the boundaries in blurring the line between the editorial and the marketing department.

The author can be contacted on Twitter @MnshaP.