News Broadcasting

NBA imposes rules for channels on terror coverage

Published

17 years ago

December 18, 2008

NEW DELHI: After facing criticism that their live TV footage helped militants in the Mumbai terror attacks, Indian news broadcasters have produced a set of rules on how to cover such events.

Under the six-point guidelines framed by the umbrella body NBA (News Broadcasters Association), the channels shouldn’t be telecasting details of identity, number and status of hostages. Nor should they provide information of pending rescue operations or details on the number of security personnel involved or the methods employed by them.

The News Broadcasting Standards Disputes Redressal Authority, constituted by the NBA, today said television TV channels should avoid any “live contact with the victims or security personnel or other technical personnel involved or the perpetrators during the course of any incident.”

Addressing a press meet, Authority Chairman Justice JS Verma also said media should avoid “unnecessary repeated or continuous broadcast of archival footage that may tend to re-agitate the mind of the viewers. Archival footage, if shown, should clearly indicate ‘file’ and the date and time should be given where feasible.”

The Authority said “no live reporting should be made that facilitates publicity of any terrorist or militant outfit or its ideology or tends to evoke sympathy for the perpetrators or glamourises them or their cause or advances the illegal agenda or objectives of the perpetrators.”

The dead should also be treated with dignity and their visuals should not be shown. Special care should be taken in the broadcast of any distressing visuals and graphics showing grief and emotional scenes of victims and relatives which could cause distress to children and families.

At the outset, the Authority said all telecast of news relating to armed conflict, internal disturbance, communal violence, public disorder, crime and other similar situations should be tested on the touchstone of ‘public interest’.

Furthermore, the media had the responsibility to disseminate information which was factually accurate and objective.

Noting that these were broad guidelines and were not meant to be exhaustive, Justice Verma urged the channels not to comment individually on them as these had been drawn up at their initiative. However, he said in reply to questions that he could not prevent anyone from speaking if he so wished. He urged the media to “keep your conduct and do not fall into traps.”

He said in reply to questions that nothing should be telecast which hampers the operation of justice. When it was pointed out that similar guidelines had been submitted to the Delhi High Court and the Government had also drawn up its own Self-Regulations Guidelines, he said all these would generally be in tune with each other.

Replying to a question on whether action was being taken by the Authority against any channel vis-a-vis coverage of Mumbai terror attacks, Verma said, “It is too early and the media should give the Authority some more time.” Asked to specify details, he said, “wait and watch.”

He said similar guidelines had also been issued in 1997 but had to be revised as some channels differed with the earlier guidelines. He also pointed out that an advisory had been issued by the Authority on 27 November, a day after the Mumbai terrorist attacks.

During a meeting convened by Minister of State for Information and Broadcasting and External Affairs on 10 December when he reprimanded the channels for their continuing broadcasts of the Mumbai terror attacks, the NBA had informed him that it was working on an Emergency News Protocol.

Justice Verma, a former Chief Justice of India and former Chairperson of the National Human Rights Commission, was accompanied at the press meet by Professor Deepankar Gupta of the Jawaharlal Nehru University and Annie Joseph of the NBA.

Verma said he had been working upon drawing up the Guidelines for telecast of news relating to sensitive matters for some time but the tragic episode of the Mumbai terror attack made it extremely urgent that such guidelines be immediately circulated at least in relation to episodes akin to the Mumbai terror attack.

Clearly alarmed by the cascading effect of what it terms as the unending coverage of the Mumbai terror attacks, the Government had on 10 December decided to set up a coordination committee with broadcasters to ensure some self-regulation to ensure balanced coverage.

Meanwhile, the Government reiterated in Parliament today that it had constituted an Inter-Ministerial Committee (IMC) to look into the specific violations of Programme and Advertisement Codes by the satellite channels at national level and to recommend action against them for such violation.

Orders for constitution of the State and District Level Monitoring Committees have been issued so as to keep a close watch on content carried by the local cable TV channels at district or State level.

Under the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995 and rules framed thereunder, the District Magistrate, Sub Divisional Magistrate or Police Commissioner have been designated as authorized officers who can immediately take action against the local cable TV channels in case of violation. As separate committees/authorities take cognizance of complaints against National or local TV channels as the case may be, complaints do not have to be routed from District to State to National level before action is taken.

Up Next

CN signs Mattel for ‘The Secret Saturdays’

Don't Miss

5th edition of Pogo Amazing Kids Awards on 28 December

Click to comment

News Broadcasting

Barc forensic audit in TRP row awaits as Twenty-Four probe gathers pace

Published

3 weeks ago

February 4, 2026

indiantelevision.com Team

KERALA: A forensic audit commissioned by the Broadcast Audience Research Council (BARC) India has emerged as the centrepiece of the government’s response to fresh allegations of television rating point manipulation involving a regional news channel in Kerala, with both the audit findings and a parallel police investigation still awaited.

Replying to a query in the Lok Sabha, minister of state for information and broadcasting L Murugan, said Barc had appointed an independent agency to conduct a forensic probe into the conduct of senior personnel allegedly linked to the case.

The move followed media reports claiming that a Barc employee had accepted bribes to manipulate viewership data in favour of a regional television news channel.

“The report from BARC is still awaited,” Murugan told Parliament, signalling that the forensic exercise remains ongoing.

Industry specialists say forensic audits are crucial in alleged TRP fraud cases, as they examine internal controls, data access trails, panel household integrity, staff communications and financial transactions. The outcome could determine whether the alleged manipulation was an isolated breach or a deeper systemic weakness in India’s television measurement framework.

Running alongside the audit, the Kerala Police has formed a special investigation team to probe the allegations. The ministry has sought a preliminary report from the state’s director general of police, including details of action taken on the first information report. That report, too, is yet to be submitted.

The episode has revived long-standing concerns over the vulnerability of India’s TRP system, particularly in regional news markets where competition for ratings is fierce and advertising revenues hinge on weekly viewership rankings.

India’s sole television audience measurement body Barc, has faced scrutiny before, most notably during the nationwide TRP controversy involving news channels in 2020. While tighter compliance norms were introduced in the aftermath, the latest allegations suggest enforcement challenges may persist.

On regulatory consequences, the government said any punitive action against television channels, including suspension or cancellation of uplinking and downlinking permissions, would be governed by the Policy Guidelines for Uplinking and Downlinking of Television Channels issued in November 2022, and would depend on investigation outcomes and due process.

The ministry also pointed to ongoing efforts to overhaul the ratings ecosystem. Television measurement continues to be regulated under the Policy Guidelines for Television Rating Agencies, 2014. Draft amendments were released for public consultation in July 2025, followed by a revised version in November 2025, aimed at tightening audit mechanisms and improving transparency and representativeness.

In November 2025, Barc said it had taken note of allegations aired by Malayalam news channel Twenty-Four, which linked an internal employee to irregularities in audience measurement. The council said it had engaged a “reputed independent agency” to conduct a comprehensive forensic audit, underscoring the seriousness of the claims.

The ratings system sits at the heart of India’s broadcast advertising economy, shaping billions of rupees in annual ad spends. With trust in audience data once again under strain, advertisers, broadcasters and regulators are closely watching the outcome of the investigations.

Barc has urged industry stakeholders and media organisations to exercise restraint while the probe is underway, calling for an end to “unverified or speculatory claims” and reiterating its commitment to integrity and accountability.

Until the forensic audit and police findings are submitted and reviewed, the government said it would refrain from drawing conclusions.

News Broadcasting

Rajat Sharma defamation row: Delhi court summons Congress leaders Ragini Nayak, Pawan Khera and Jairam Ramesh

Published

3 weeks ago

February 4, 2026

indiantelevision.com Team

NEW DELHI: A Delhi court has ordered the summoning of senior Congress leaders Ragini Nayak, Pawan Khera and Jairam Ramesh in a criminal case filed by veteran journalist Rajat Sharma, sharpening a legal battle over alleged defamation and doctored digital content.

The order was passed on Monday by Devanshi Janmeja, judicial magistrate first class at Saket Courts, after the court found prima facie grounds to proceed under multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code, including forgery, creation of false electronic records and defamation.

Sharma, chairman and editor-in-chief of India TV, had approached the court over allegations made in June 2024 that he had used derogatory language against Congress spokesperson Ragini Nayak during a live television debate. He denied the charge, claiming it was fuelled by a manipulated video circulated online.

According to the complaint, a clipped version of the broadcast carrying superimposed captions, which were not part of the original programme, was first shared on social media platform X by Nayak and later amplified through retweets and public statements by Khera and Ramesh. Sharma said the viral spread caused serious reputational harm and personal distress.

The court took note of forensic science laboratory findings that pointed to visible post-production alterations in the video, including added titles and captions. It also cited witness testimonies from those present during the live broadcast, who stated that no abusive or objectionable language had been used.

In a related civil matter, the Delhi High Court had earlier observed a prima facie absence of abusive remarks and directed the removal of the disputed social media posts.

With criminal proceedings now set in motion, the case adds to mounting scrutiny around political messaging, digital manipulation and accountability on social media platforms.

News Broadcasting

Mukesh Ambani, Larry Fink come together for CNBC-TV18 exclusive

Reliance and BlackRock chiefs map the future of investing as global capital eyes India

Published

3 weeks ago

February 4, 2026

indiantelevision.com Team

MUMBAI: India’s capital story takes centre stage today as Mukesh Ambani and Larry Fink sit down for a rare joint television conversation, bringing together two of the most powerful voices in global business at a moment of economic churn and opportunity.

The Reliance Industries chief and the BlackRock boss will speak with Shereen Bhan, managing editor of CNBC-TV18, in an exclusive interaction airing from 3:00 pm on February 4. The timing is deliberate. Geopolitics are tense, technology is disruptive and capital is choosier. India, meanwhile, is pitching itself as a long-term bet.

The pairing is symbolic. Reliance straddles energy transition, digital infrastructure and consumer growth in the world’s fastest-expanding major economy. BlackRock, the world’s largest asset manager, oversees more than $14 tn in assets and sits at the nerve centre of global capital flows. When the two talk, markets tend to listen.

Fink’s appearance marks his third India visit, a signal of the country’s rising strategic weight for the Wall Street-listed firm, which carries a market value above $177 bn. His earlier 2023 trips included an October stop in New Delhi, where he met both Ambani and Narendra Modi.

India is now central to BlackRock’s expansion plans, notably through its joint venture with Jio Financial Services. Announced in July 2023, the 50:50 venture, JioBlackRock, commits up to $150 mn each from the partners to build a digital-first asset-management platform aimed at India’s swelling investor class.

The backdrop is robust. BlackRock ended 2025 with record assets under management of $14.04 tn, helped by $698 bn in net inflows, including $342 bn in the fourth quarter alone. Scale gives Fink both heft and a long lens on where money is moving.

He has been openly bullish on India. At the Saudi-US Investment Summit in Riyadh last year, Fink argued that the “fog of global uncertainty is lifting”, with capital returning to dynamic markets such as India, drawn by reforms, demographics and durable return potential.

Expect the conversation to range beyond balance sheets, into technology’s role in finance, access to capital and the mechanics of sustainable growth in a fracturing world order. For investors and policymakers alike, it is a snapshot of how big money is thinking about India.

At a time when capital is cautious and growth is contested, India wants to be the exception. When Ambani and Fink share a stage, it is less a chat and more a signal. The world’s money is still looking for its next big story, and India intends to be it.