CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF MEDIA AS THE FOURTH PILLAR OF DEMOCRACY BY: MANISHA ADVANI
CRITICAL ANALYSIS
OF MEDIA AS THE FOURTH
PILLAR OF DEMOCRACY
AUTHORED
BY: MANISHA ADVANI
L.L.M II- SEMESTER IV (2022-23)
MODERN LAW COLLEGE GANESHKHIND, PUNE
ABSTRACT
In the Constitution of India, the words
"Freedom of the Press" are not expressly mentioned but are implied in Article 19(1)(a). a),
that is, the basic right of every citizen to freedom of speech and expression and the same right is
also exercised by the media. The Supreme Court of India has also stated that although
freedom of speech and media expression is not expressly
guaranteed as a fundamental right, it is included in the Constitution as
freedom of speech and expression.
Freedom of the press has always been considered in all democratic and civilized countries and also Edmund Burke described
the freedom of the press as the fourth estate of democracy. But recently, the fourth pillar needs urgent
restoration due to its bad effects. Once the media was highly
rated as the voice of the people
but now it has become
synonymous with lies, hatred, propaganda, blackmail etc.
one can perceive from their image that the standard of the media has deteriorated by leaps and bounds. So, new laws,
rules, framework or guidelines are a must to check the ill effects
of media and bring back its bygone
glory and bring it back to the mainstream
which seems lost in today's India.
KEYWORDS
Freedom of speech,
media, democracy, rights,
restrictions, regulations, speech,
communication.
INTRODUCTION
Media is the plural of medium that (generally speaking)
develops any channel
of communication. This can
include anything from printed paper to electronic data and includes art, news, educational content and many
other forms of information. Digital media, which is an increasingly large part of modern communications, consists of
complexly encoded signals that are transmitted over various forms of physical
and virtual media,
such as fiber optic cables
and computer networks.[1]
According
to Edmund Burke, the media is considered and regarded as the fourth estate of democracy[2]. Media has the power to influence people
with ease compared
to any other means, it has a direct impact and has a wide
appeal, it can easily change an individual's perception towards their liking. The media these days play with the
emotions of society to gain undue advantage
and make more money. It is the same media that was once the eye, ear and mouth of society,
but now society is faking
its false and fictional nature in the
form of news.
The Constitution of India has not specifically talked about the media, but that is the conclusion drawn from article: 19 paragraph 1 letter A free and fair media
is a key aspect of civil society and any oppression of the media by any means
is unjust, intolerable and a threat to freedom of speech and
expression in a civilized society. The media is the voice of the masses. It is
a platform where voices are created,
spread and heard like a jungle
fire because its surroundings are so
far away. It connects one with the other and helps in many ways.
The
medium also has its other side which is quite unrealistic in context with it
and many will never accept its ugly
side. The media can also be very cruel, competition and market control have had a major negative impact on their
reputation. Media is a big billion business and with better connectivity and reach to ugly and mysterious aspects
are in front of common people that
how media tends to create hate, provide false information, manipulated facts,
secure information to public in
public domain are few things. In context with the ugly side. Media also plays a vital role if we talk in the context
of its positivity, but the negatives have increased so much that the positives of the media
are overshadowed. Media is still considered the need of the hour and no one can deny the fact that how important
media is but the question remains the
same that will it be the same media where people say "the pen is mightier
than the sword" or the media is just a puppet of the government
in the party or those with money.
Emergence of Media
in India: A Brief History
Indian media consists of several different types of communication:
television, radio, cinema, newspapers,
magazines and internet websites/portals. Indian media has been active since the end of the 18th century, with print media
beginning in 1780, radio broadcasting beginning in 1927, and Auguste and Louise Lumière showing motion pictures in
Bombay starting in July 1895. It is
among the oldest and largest media in the world. The media in India has been
free and independent for most of its
history, even before the founding of the Indian empire by Ashoka the Great, on the basis of justice,
openness, morality and spirituality. The Emergency (1975–1977), declared by Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, was a
brief period when the Indian media faced potential government retaliation.[3]
Laws governing the media
in pre- and post-independent India Pre-Independence Legislation-
·
Censorship of the Press Act, 1799
Lord Wellesley
enacted an ordinance anticipating a French invasion
of India. It almost imposed
wartime restrictions on the press, including pre-censorship. These
restrictions were relaxed under Lord Hastings, who held progressive views, and pre-censorship was introduced in 1818.
·
Licensing Act, 1823
Acting
Governor General John Adams at the time, who held reactionary views (about
what?), enacted the ordinance.
Under these regulations it was an offense to run or use a press without a licence. These restrictions were mainly
directed against newspapers in Indian languages or those published by Indians. Rammohan Roy's Mirat-ul-Akbar had to
stop its publication with the occurrence of this act.[4]
·
Press Act of 1835 or
Metcalfe Act
Governor-General
Metcalfe (1835-36) repealed the obnoxious Ordinance of 1823, earning himself the epithet "liberator of the
Indian press". The new Printing Act (1835) required the printer/publisher to give an accurate description of the premises
of the publication and to cease operations if required by a similar
statement. The result
of the liberal press policy was the rapid growth
of newspapers.[5]
·
Licensing Act, 1857
Due to the emergency caused by the Rebellion of 1857, this Act imposed
licensing restrictions in any addition to the pre-existing
registration procedure established by the Metcalfe Act, and the Government reserved
the right to stop the publication and circulation of any
book, newspaper or printed
matter. Deemed appropriate.
This Act replaced the Metcalfe Act of 1835 and was regulatory rather
than restrictive in nature. Under the Act (i) every book/newspaper
was required to state the name of the printer and publisher and the place of publication; and (ii) a copy was to
be submitted to the local government within one month of the publication
of the book.[6]
·
Vernacular Press Act, 1878
The
bitter legacy of the 1857 rebellion was racial bitterness between the ruler and
the ruled. After 1858, the European
press always rallied behind the government in political disputes, while the popular press criticized the
government. There was a strong public opinion against Lytton's imperialist policy, contributed to on the one hand by a
terrible famine (1876–77) and on
the other by lavish expenditure on the imperial Delhi Durbar. The Vernacular
Press Act (VPA) was designed to
"better control" the vernacular press and to effectively punish and suppress
seditious writing.
·
The Newspapers (Incitement to Offenses) Act, 1908
Aimed at countering extremist nationalist activity, this law empowered
judges to confiscate the assets of a press
that published objectionable
material that could incite murder/violence.[7]
·
Indian Press Act, 1910
This
Act revived the worst features of the Voluntary Partnership Agreement - the local government was empowered to demand registration security from
the printer/publisher and forfeit/cancel
the registration if it was a dubious newspaper and the newspaper printer had to submit
two copies of each issue to
the local government free of charge.
·
The Indian
Press (Emergency Powers) Act, 1931
This Act gave
provincial governments extensive powers to suppress Civil Disobedience Movement propaganda. It was further strengthened in 1932 to
include all activities calculated to undermine government authority.[8]
Post-Independence Legislation-
·
Press Inquiry Committee, 1947
The
committee was set up to examine press laws in the light of the fundamental
rights formulated by the Constituent
Assembly. It recommended repealing the Indian Emergency Powers Act, 1931, amendments to the Press and Registration of
Books Act, amendments to Sections 124-A and 156-A of the IPC, among others.
·
The Press
(Objectionable Matters) Act, 1951
The law was adopted
together with an amendment to Article 19, Paragraph 2 of the Constitution.
The Act empowered the government to demand and forfeit securities for the publication of "objectionable
matter". Injured owners and printers were given the right to demand
a jury trial. It remained in force until 1956.
·
Press Commission under Justice Rajadhyaksha in 1954
The
Commission in 1954 recommended the establishment of an All-India Press Council,
the revision of the system of press
page schedules for newspapers, the banning of crossword competitions, the development of a strict newspaper advertising
code, and the desirability of preventing concentration in the ownership of Indian
newspapers.
Other laws passed
include the Delivery
of Books and Newspapers (Public
Libraries) Act 1954; The Working
Journalists (Conditions of Service) and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1955; The Newspapers
(Price and Page) Act, 1956; and the Parliamentary Proceedings (Protection of Publications) Act 1960.
Different media sizes
·
Media as a player
From
the time immemorial of legal history and beyond legal memory, man has expressed his thoughts through
various channels such as symbols,
signals, speech, writing,
print and now also
computer language. Because ideas and information are so important to the growth
and survival of a free and democratic society, such a goal cannot be achieved
unless every citizen has the fundamental right to
express their ideas and opinions. This came to be known as the right to freedom of speech and expression.
Preamble to the Constitution of India resolved to ensure freedom of thought, expression and belief to the citizens
of India. The Preamble, which
focuses on the main objective of the Constitution of India, ensures
freedom of speech and expression,
religious independence and the choice to follow one's own beliefs to every
citizen of India. Part III of the
Constitution of India deals with fundamental rights. The Constitution contains the right to liberty, given in
Articles 19, 20, 21 and 22, with the aim of guaranteeing individual rights which the framers of the Constitution
considered essential. The right to freedom
in Article: 19 guarantees freedom of speech and expression as the foremost of
the six freedoms.
All
Indian citizens have the constitutional right to freely express their views,
opinions and beliefs. To this end, they have the right to seek, receive and impart information and ideas. Since
the exercise of freedom of expression requires
a medium through
which information and ideas can be communicated, it naturally follows
that this medium must also be free. Our Constitution does not specifically mention freedom of the media as in the
US Constitution, it is implicitly contained in Article 19(1)(a).
(a) Constitution of India.[9] However,
the Supreme Court has very explicitly
held that the freedom of the press is included in the guarantee of freedom of expression, which also includes the
freedom to publish and disseminate. The Supreme Court ruled that there was therefore no need to create a separate
provision on freedom of the press.[10]
·
Media freedom
Freedom
of speech and expression is a vital cog in democracy. This is
ensured by the Constitution of India
as well as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as well as other international charters and treaties that
are adopted to ensure the protection of human and fundamental rights. These guarantees imply that people have the
right to receive news and opinions
without interference and to disseminate them regardless of borders, which is an integral
part of the democratic process. In practice, this right is exercised daily by the
media.
Thus, two key fundamental rights are included
in the right to freedom
of speech and expression, namely
Ø The right
to receive news and opinions,
Ø And the right to communicate
news, information and opinions.
These rights depend to a large extent on the freedom of all those engaged
in the media to exercise their role
as collectors and communicators of news and opinion without
interference.
·
The right
to freedom of speech and expression unrestricted by national borders
The
question whether an Indian citizen's right to freedom of speech and expression
extends beyond the geographical
boundaries of India was addressed by the Supreme Court in the case of Maneka Gandhi
v. Union of India.[11]
In this landmark judgment, the Supreme Court ruled that freedom of speech and expression has no
geographical limitations and carries with it the right of a citizen to gather
information and exchange ideas with others not only in India but also abroad.
The court observed:
-
Freedom of speech and expression carries with it the right to gather
information and also to speak and
express oneself at home and abroad and to exchange thoughts and ideas with
others not only in India but also
outside India. The court noted that the framers of the Constitution deliberately chose not to use words limiting the right by refraining from using the words "within the territory of India"
at the end of Article 19(1)(a).
·
The press as the mother
of all other freedoms
One
of the most comprehensive and illustrative expositions of the importance of the
press and its understanding as the
"mother of all other liberties" in a democratic society is contained
in the judgment of Venkataramiah, J. in Indian
Express Newspaper v. Union of India.[12] This case raised
important questions about the freedom
of the press in relation
to the taxing power of the state.
Several suits were filed in the Supreme
Court by newspaper-owning companies challenging the validity of the imposition of duty on newsprint under the Customs Act, 1962.
On
behalf of the petitioners, who consumed
large quantities of newsprint in publishing newspapers, periodicals, magazines, etc., it was argued that the imposition of the duty had "the direct effect of crippling the freedom of speech and expression guaranteed by the Constitution". because it led to an increase in the
price of newspapers and an inevitable reduction in their circulation”. Venkataramiah J. in this case opined that the
press plays a very important role in the democratic machinery and pointed
out the importance of freedom
of speech and expression in the following words:
"Freedom
of expression is intended to serve four broad social purposes: (i) it helps the individual to achieve self-actualization, (ii) it aids in the discovery of truth, (iii) it enhances
the individual's ability to
participate in decision-making, and (iv) it provides a mechanism by which to create an appropriate balance
between stability and social change. All members of society should be able to form their own beliefs and freely
communicate them to others. In short,
the basic principle is people's right to know. Freedom of speech and expression
should therefore receive
generous support from all who believe in people's participation in governance.
While the court recognized the importance of the right to freedom
of the press, it held that there could be no immunity
from taxation because
the framers of the Constitution had chosen not to provide
constitutional immunity from such taxation. At the same time, they carefully protected
the press from local pressures by choosing to grant the power to levy taxes on newspapers only to Parliament, and not to state legislatures.[13]
·
Tax liability
of the media
The
newspaper industry enjoys two of the fundamental rights, namely the freedom of
speech and expression guaranteed by
Article 19(1)(a) and the freedom to exercise any profession, occupation, trade, industry or business
guaranteed by Article 19 paragraph 1. (G). While the right to freedom
of speech cannot
be taxed, occupation, profession, trade, business
and industry are taxed.
So
a tax is levied on the newspaper industry. But when such a tax enters the realm
of free speech and stifles that freedom, it becomes unconstitutional. As long as it is within reasonable limits and does not impede freedom of expression, it will not be inconsistent with the restrictions of Article 19 (2). on the
press should be "subject to judicial review in the light of the provisions of the Constitution."[14]
A constitutional perspective of the media
Freedom
of speech and expression is a fundamental aspect of liberty as stated in Maneka Gandhi v.Union
of India.[15] In Tata Press v. Mahanagar Telephone
Nigam Ltd.[16] It
was argued here that commercial speech is part of
freedom of speech and expression. The Fundamental Rights Chapter, Part III in the
Constitution of India was not incorporated as a popular
concession to the international human rights sentiment
and thinking in vogue after the conclusion of the Second World War. The
demand for constitutional guarantees of human
rights for Indians was raised as early
as 1895 in the Constitution of India Act, popularly called the Swaraj
Bill, which was inspired by LokmanyaTilak, a jurist and a great freedom
fighter. This Act envisaged a constitution for India guaranteeing to every citizen,
among other freedoms, the freedom of the press.
It
can be said that the debut of printing in India was made with commercial
interests in mind. It was the contribution of the first
British multinational company
- The East India Company.
It was one of those tools of
the British that was later manipulated by the Indians to serve their interests; the role of the press underwent a major change
and soon proved to be one of the most
effective weapons available to Indians during their struggle for freedom
from the British. The press was
always under the control of the company, but after the reversal of its role as
a press, there was an urgent need
to clamp hard curbs. Oppressive laws were passed and judgments were passed restricting the freedom of the press. The "Founding Fathers and Mothers" of the Indian Constitution attached great importance to freedom of speech and expression and freedom
of the press. They believed that freedom of speech and freedom of the press
were indispensable to the functioning
of a democratic system. They believed that central to the concept of a free press was the freedom of
political opinion, and at the core of that freedom was the right to criticize the government. They supported the
thinking of Jawahar Lal Nehru who
said: "I would rather have a
completely free press, with all the dangers involved in the misuse of that freedom, than a suppressed
and regulated press.[17]
The Constitution of India provides
this freedom in Article: 19(1) (a) which
guarantees the right
to freedom of speech and expression. It has been held that this right to
freedom also includes freedom of the
press. It is an implied or implied right. The economic and commercial aspects of the press are regulated in Article:
19(1) (g), which provides for freedom of occupation, profession, trade or business, which is limited by Article:
19(6), which includes provisions relating
to public interest, professional and technical qualification and state
nationalization - full or partial.
Reasonable restrictions on media under the
Constitution of India.
The
right to freedom of speech and expression is limited by the restrictions that
this right imposes, and the restriction imposed
by the state is also limited by the factor of proportionality. So, even if the state is entitled to restrict freedom, this
restriction is not absolute and is subject to
the limitation of reasonableness. So any restriction must be a reasonable
restriction to be valid under the
Constitution. The Supreme Court in PapnasamLabour
Union v Maduracoats Ltd[18] laid
down the reasonableness of
restrictions under Articles: 19(2)
to 19(6).
i.
A restriction, to be reasonable, must not be
excessive, that is, it should not go beyond the need to avoid mischief or injustice. It should not be arbitrary.
ii.
The restriction should have a direct or close or
reasonable connection or link between it and the objective to be achieved.
iii.
A reasonable limitation should not be abstract.
However, no hard and fast principles can be laid down and the standards of reasonableness would vary from case to case and from time to
time.
iv.
When interpreting the concept of reasonable, the court should
keep in mind the complex
issues of society and the
intention of the legislator of the law in question.
v.
The concept of reasonable is dynamic in nature, and
therefore the judiciary should maintain a flexible and practical approach when interpreting this concept.
vi.
It is essential that the court conducts a social control
analysis before any restrictions on fundamental rights can be imposed.
In order to interpret the concept of
reasonable, it is necessary for the court to examine the social welfare
and the need for prevailing social
norms and values.
vii.
The word reasonable must meet the test of procedural
reasonableness as well as substantive reasonableness.
viii.
For a restriction to be reasonable, it must comply
with the test of Article 14 of the Constitution. It means that the restrictions should not be unreasonable or discriminatory.
ix.
When interpreting the concept of reasonableness, courts
must keep in mind the guiding principles of state policy.
Below are the reasonable restrictions laid down by the Constitution of
India under Article: 19(2) regarding freedom of speech and expression:
·
Sovereignty and integrity of the
state
This
reason was inserted by amendment to curb the tense reaction of people who
demanded separate entities of different regions of India.
·
State security
Freedom of expression cannot
be exercised in such a way as to threaten
the security of the state
in any way. In State of Bihar v.
Shailabala Devi,[19]
the Supreme Court held that speech by individuals
who encouraged and incited people to commit crimes like murder, theft, robbery, etc. would definitely threaten the integrity of the state.
·
Public order
The
word public policy was inserted by the Constitution (First Amendment) Act,
1951. This clause was inserted to reduce the effect of RomeshThappar v. State of Madras[20] where the court held that the right
of circulation is part
of the right to freedom of expression. and expression.
·
Decency or morality
The
elaboration of this ground is reflected in Sections 292 to 294 of the Indian
Penal Code. in In RanjitUdeshi v. State of Maharashtra,[21]
the Supreme Court held that Section 292 of the
Indian Penal Code is constitutionally valid as it prohibits obscenity
and promotes public decency and morality.
·
Contempt of Court
In
C.K. Daphtary v. O.P. Gupta,[22]
it was held that Section: 228 of the Indian Penal Code and Article: 129 of the Constitution are valid
and fall within the scope of reasonable restrictions under Article: 19(2) of the Constitution. So freedom of speech
and expression is governed by Articles: 19(2), 129 and 215 of the Constitution
of India.
·
Defamation:
The
right to freedom of speech and expression does not include harming a person's
reputation in any way. Causing
damage to a person's reputation is called defamation and is a serious restriction on the right to
freedom of speech and expression.
·
Incitement to commit a crime:
In
State of Bihar v. Shailabala Devi, it was held that any speech which amounts to
incitement to any offense can be
prohibited and the order of prohibition will fall within the reasonable limits
of Article 19(2) of the Constitution of
India.
·
Other media restrictions in India:
There are various laws in India which govern
the media and control their
functioning and style of
work, be it print or electronic media. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India
recently on 11th September 2012
pronounced the judgment in Sahara India Real Estate Corp. Ltd. & Ors. v. Securities and Exchange Board of India &Anr. He focused on finding an acceptable constitutional balance between a free press and the administration of justice. It sparked a debate over whether the concept of prior
restraint on media coverage of court proceedings is valid under constitutional principles. The most
significant aspect of the judgment relates to the doctrine of stay, where the relevant High Court or Supreme Court can order that the publication of the court proceedings be postponed for
a certain period of time. The 56-page judgment, written by the Chief Justice of India, is premised on the
premise that under the Indian Constitution, arguably, no values are
absolute and that it also follows that, in an appropriate case, one right [say, freedom of expression] may have to yield to another right,
such as the right to a fair trial. Based on the above
statement, the court further added that even the concept of "open judiciary" is not absolute and therefore the courts can limit it in the interest of justice. It also includes Press Council of India Act 1978, Prasar Bharti Act 1990.[23]
Media as a problem
We have a rich tradition of fiercely independent journalism. In fact, most of the big frauds were busted
by the press. Law enforcement only watched them. A poorly paid journalist is to
be credited for extracting the
information that seemed to be unavailable to the country's top security teams.[24]
Media plays a pivotal role in the society and this statement can hardly be denied but it is also right that there is
a problem within their own fraternity at the same time. Because sometimes media shows inaccurate news, opinions and
reports just to get TRPs for their
own channels. Most of the public reports had prior knowledge of the news even
if they were not part of this story.
Sometimes the lack of
proper editing has also led to a downfall and gives
a bad name to the media. Media houses are not focused on major issues and
rather they emphasize entertainment issues much more to gain market share. Some of the biggest
fallacies in the context of
the media include defamation, contempt of court and media trail, which actually
limit the credibility of the
media to a great
extent.
·
Defamation: Derogatory aspect of media
In India, defamation is both a civil and criminal offense and
can be defined as writing, publishing
and uttering a false statement that causes injury to reputation and good name
in private interest. The law of torts applies to the remedy
of civil defamation. In civil defamation, the victim can approach the High Court or subordinate courts to
seek damages in the form of monetary
compensation from the accused.
Section: 499 and 500 of the Indian
Penal Code, 1860 provides
an opportunity for the victim to file a criminal defamation case against the
accused. The punishment for a person guilty
of the offense of defamation is simple imprisonment which may extend to
two years or fine or both. According to the Criminal Code, it is a bailable,
non- cognizable and complex crime.
The constitutional validity of defamation was explained
by the Supreme Court in Subramanian
Swamy v. Union
of India[25], in which the constitutional validity
of defamation laws and rules were held to be inconsistent with the right to free speech. The Supreme Court
also said that one is bound to tolerate criticism, dissent and disagreement, but one is not expected to tolerate defamatory attacks.
·
Contempt of Court: Crossing
the line of freedom of expression in the
media
The
media is considered one of the four pillars of democracy. The media play a
vital role in shaping
society's opinion and can change the entire point of view with which
people perceive various events. The media can be commended for starting the trend of the media playing an active role in attracting the accused. But when the limit of freedom of expression is crossed, it amounts to contempt of court and in the case of Perspective
Publications (P) Ltd v. The State of Maharashtra[26] and C.K. Daphtary
and others v. O.P. Gupta and others. Thus, notwithstanding the fact that a particular statement is
offensive, it may amount to criminal contempt if the imputation is such that the same may diminish the authority of
the Court. The seriousness of the above
statement is that the same
would scandalize the court.
Commenting on pending cases or abusing a party can amount to contempt
only if the case is being heard by a
judge. No editor has the right to assume the role of an investigator to try to preempt
a trial against any person.
·
Media trial
In recent times, there have been many cases where
the media has held court with an
the accused and passed judgment even before the court passed sentence. Trial by
Media is the impact of television and newspaper coverage
on a person's reputation by creating a widespread perception of guilt regardless of any
verdict in court. This phenomenon is popularly called media court.
In State of Maharashtra v. RajendraJawanmal Gandhi,[27] the Supreme Court observed: “There
is a procedure laid down by
law which governs the conduct of a trial of a person accused
of an offence. A process
in the press, electronic media
or public agitation is the very antithesis of the rule of law. It may well lead to a
miscarriage of justice. Again, it cannot be ruled out that the public's habituation to the regular
spectacle of pseudo-trials in the news media could, in the long term, have adverse consequences for
the acceptance of courts as a proper forum for the resolution of legal
disputes."
Conclusion
The
way Indian media is facing the wrath of the society is undeniable. The media
sector used to be considered the most important
aspect to raise voice and be heard too, but with changing
values and investment of
money, it limits its credibility to a great extent. Laws and regulators seem a bit over the top to curb the negative
aspects of the media. Media has the power to change a person's view of anything circulates. It has great potential to influence individual thoughts and can change the entire dynamic
through people who perceive different perspectives from it. The bad must be condemned and the good must be appreciated by the media on merit,
it should put more
emphasis on honest reporting to regain its lost credibility. Media is a vital
wheel for the masses and therefore it
should give more emphasis on the basic problems of the society and present
them to the society in a better way which should be more realistic
and free from all the ill
effects of the media., nowadays, a bear. The media must realize their basic
freedom and should follow the law,
the media should not usurp the functions of the state and the judiciary and deviate from their objective and
unbiased reporting. While they must also understand that any unwanted control of the media in a democracy will also
threaten the society as a whole, the law must be interpreted in accordance with the change
in the society that ensures
the people that the media is aware of their rights
and entitlements. Obligations without prejudice to any provisions of the applicable law of the country.
Suggestions
From the discussion above mentioned, it is
suggested that
v the new and strict
rules need to be incorporated to limit the harmful effects
of the media.
v the regulatory body should consist of well-known experts in the field of law and mass communication to control the functioning of the
media.
v the media
should be limited
to the extent that there is a threat to national security.
v the media should put more emphasis on core issues rather than giving importance to absurd or illogical
issues that have no relevance to current issues.
v that he should provide
real information and avoid all kinds of TRP
ratings.