Why in news?
Detention of freelancers at recent protests revived debate on who is a journalist and the need for a media council. In a PIL on freedom of expression of freelance journalists and content creators, a Bench led by CJI Surya Kant wondered whether free speech makes every citizen a journalist, warning that this could create problems for others.
UPSC Relevance
Prelims: Article 19(1)(a) and 19(2), IT Rules 2021, PIB accreditation.
Mains: GS2 – Fundamental Rights; Statutory, regulatory and quasi-judicial bodies; Role of civil services and media in a democracy.
Who is a journalist?
- Constitution – There is no separate ‘freedom of press’ in the Constitution. It is part of freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a), available to every citizen. The Supreme Court read press freedom into it in Romesh Thappar (1950), Bennett Coleman (1973) and Indian Express Newspapers (1985).
- Restrictions – Only on the eight grounds in Article 19(2): sovereignty and integrity, security of State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, decency or morality, contempt of court, defamation and incitement to an offence.
- Labour law definition – Under the Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions Code, 2020 (which subsumed the Working Journalists Act, 1955), a working journalist is one whose principal avocation is journalism and who is employed in a newspaper, electronic or digital media. People in managerial or administrative roles are excluded. Freelancers largely fall outside it.
- Accreditation – Given by Press Information Bureau (PIB) (for covering the Central government) and by State Directorate of Information and Publicity (DIP). It gives access to official sources and buildings, not a ‘licence’ to practise journalism. PIB’s Central Media Accreditation Guidelines, 2022 require long experience for freelancers (15 years) and allow withdrawal of accreditation on grounds like security and public order.
- Quota problem – Accreditation depends on reach in terms of circulation (newspapers), subscribers (news agencies), uplinking licence (TV) and unique visitors (digital). So many genuine working journalists, even in recognised organisations, never get it.
- The freelancers and content creators fall outside every framework.
The proposal – National Media Council
- Idea – Like the Bar Council of India (Advocates Act, 1961) for lawyers and the ICAI (Chartered Accountants Act, 1949) for CAs, a media council could recognise all working journalists, freelancers, camerapersons and technicians.
- Suggested features – Common register of journalists, a code of ethics across print, TV and digital, grievance redressal, and possibly a degree or diploma in journalism as a condition for a licence.
- Earlier moves – The Press Club of India drafted a Media Transparency (and Accountability) Bill that provided for such a council. The Second Press Commission (1982) and some former PCI chairpersons had also suggested a wider Media Council covering electronic media.
The debate
| Arguments in favour | Concerns |
|---|---|
| Gives freelancers and independent journalists an identity and protection while reporting | Licensing journalists clashes with Article 19(1)(a), which belongs to every citizen, not to a profession |
| Separates genuine reporting from reels, propaganda and paid news | A government-linked council may become a gatekeeper that keeps out critical voices |
| One ethics code for print, TV and digital, ending the current patchwork | A degree requirement would exclude citizen journalists, local stringers and many experienced reporters |
| Brings accountability and public trust in media | Journalism is not a ‘service to a client’ like law or medicine; its harm is not of the same kind |
Wider concerns on press freedom
- Global ranking – India was ranked 151 out of 180 countries in RSF’s World Press Freedom Index 2025.
- Safety – Journalists face physical attacks, especially in small towns. Reporters covering sand mining, local corruption and conflicts in small towns are most at risk. Convictions in killings of journalists are rare and delayed, which feeds a culture of impunity, as seen in Gauri Lankesh case. Women journalists face targeted trolling, threats and doxxin
- Only Maharashtra (2017) and Chhattisgarh (2023) have special laws to protect media persons.
- Use of criminal law – Journalists have been booked under UAPA, the old sedition law (Section 124A IPC, suspended by the Supreme Court in S.G. Vombatkere, 2022) and now Section 152 of the BNS, which critics say carries the same vague idea of ‘endangering sovereignty’.
- Large companies and politicians file heavy defamation suits mainly to silence reporting, known as Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation.
- Blocking orders – Section 69A of the IT Act allows blocking of accounts and posts through confidential orders. Journalists and outlets are often not told the reasons.
- Fact Check Unit – The 2023 amendment to IT Rules for a government Fact Check Unit was struck down by the Bombay High Court in 2024 (Kunal Kamra case), noting ‘fake or false’ is not a ground under Article 19(2).
- Ownership concentration – Big corporate groups with interests in other sectors own large parts of the media. TRAI’s 2014 recommendations on media ownership warned that cross-media and vertical ownership affect plurality and editorial independence.
- Dependence on government advertising – Many outlets, especially regional ones, depend on central and State ads, which can be used as reward or punishment.
- Paid news and private treaties – News for payment, especially during elections, blurs the line between news and advertisement.
- Internet shutdowns – India has repeatedly been among the countries with the most shutdowns in the world. Anuradha Bhasin (2020) held that freedom of expression and trade through the internet are protected and restrictions must be necessary and proportionate.
Way forward
- Parliamentary Standing Committee on IT, 47th Report on Paid News (2013) – Recommended making paid news an electoral offence under the Representation of the People Act, 1951, giving statutory powers to PCI to penalise, and creating a single regulator for print and electronic media.
- Election Commission – Has repeatedly asked for paid news to be made an electoral offence with disqualification as a penalty.
- TRAI recommendations on media ownership (2014) – Suggested limits on cross-media ownership, restrictions on political parties, religious bodies and government entities owning media, disclosure of ownership, and an internal ombudsman and editorial charter in media houses.
- Press Council of India – Former Chairpersons and the Council itself have asked for amending the Press Council Act to bring electronic media under it as a ‘Media Council’ and to give it power to penalise.
- Supreme Court – In Pegasus (2021) it called for protecting journalistic sources. In Madhyamam (2023) it held that an independent press is vital for a robust democracy.
Practice MCQ
Q1. Consider the following statements regarding the Press Council of India:
1. It regulates both print and electronic media in India.
2. It can impose monetary penalties on newspapers found guilty of violating journalistic ethics.
3. By convention, its Chairman is a retired judge of the Supreme Court.
How many of the statements given above are correct?
(a) Only one
(b) Only two
(c) All three
(d) None
Answer: (a)
Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect as PCI covers only print media. Statement 2 is incorrect as PCI can only warn, admonish or censure. Statement 3 is correct.
Tell Google you want more of this.
Add Anantam IAS as a preferred sourceOne tap, and this site shows up more often in your own Top Stories, AI Overviews and AI Mode. Remove it any time.
