ITV

Tag: News Broadcasters Association

  • Jaitley, Bar Council deplore attacks on media; SC asks police to ensure safety

    Jaitley, Bar Council deplore attacks on media; SC asks police to ensure safety

    NEW DELHI: Even as the Bar Council of India condemned the attacks by lawyers on media persons at Patiala House courts where the Jawaharlal Nehru University Students Union Kanhaiya Kumar was being produced, the Supreme Court asked the Delhi Police to ensure the security of all including media persons.

    The apex court also agreed to hear a petition by media persons in this regard. 

    Information and Broadcasting Minister Arun Jaitley, himself an eminent lawyer, also condemned the attacks in a tweet, saying: “Media has an unhindered right to report. Attack on Media persons is highly improper and condemnable.” 

    Media persons in Mumbai and Kolkata also held demonstrations in support of their Delhi colleagues. As was previously reported by Indiantelevision.com, the News Broadcasters Association (NBA) also deplored the attacks.

    Earlier reiterating that attacks on journalists discharging their professional duties was not acceptable, the Press Council of India had sought a report from the Delhi Police regarding the assault on media persons in the Patiala House Court complex.

    The events at Patiala House court resulted in a massive outrage and top editors of national media and hundreds of journalists yesterday demonstrated on the streets demanding action against those involved in beating up members of their fraternity in police presence and sought Supreme Court’s intervention in protecting freedom of speech.

  • Media protests on streets; Press Council of India demands police report on attacks on scribes

    Media protests on streets; Press Council of India demands police report on attacks on scribes

    NEW DELHI: Reiterating that attacks on journalists discharging their professional duties was not acceptable, the Press Council of India has sought a report from the Delhi Police regarding the assault on media persons in the Patiala House Court complex.

    “Our view is that attack on journalists doing professional work is not at all acceptable. I have sought a report today,” PCI chairperson Justice (retd) C K Prasad said.

    The events at Patiala House court resulted in a massive outrage and top editors of national media and hundreds of journalists yesterday demonstrated on the streets demanding action against those involved in beating up members of their fraternity in police presence and sought Supreme Court’s intervention in protecting freedom of speech.

    The journalists shouting slogans against the Modi Government and Delhi Police marched from Press Club of India to the Supreme Court and submitted a memorandum to its Registrar seeking cancellation of licences of lawyers involved in the assault.

    Earlier both the News Broadcasters Association and the Delhi Union of Journalists have issued statements condemning the attacks.

  • Media protests on streets; Press Council of India demands police report on attacks on scribes

    Media protests on streets; Press Council of India demands police report on attacks on scribes

    NEW DELHI: Reiterating that attacks on journalists discharging their professional duties was not acceptable, the Press Council of India has sought a report from the Delhi Police regarding the assault on media persons in the Patiala House Court complex.

    “Our view is that attack on journalists doing professional work is not at all acceptable. I have sought a report today,” PCI chairperson Justice (retd) C K Prasad said.

    The events at Patiala House court resulted in a massive outrage and top editors of national media and hundreds of journalists yesterday demonstrated on the streets demanding action against those involved in beating up members of their fraternity in police presence and sought Supreme Court’s intervention in protecting freedom of speech.

    The journalists shouting slogans against the Modi Government and Delhi Police marched from Press Club of India to the Supreme Court and submitted a memorandum to its Registrar seeking cancellation of licences of lawyers involved in the assault.

    Earlier both the News Broadcasters Association and the Delhi Union of Journalists have issued statements condemning the attacks.

  • Adcap case put off to 29 March; Discovery moves for intervention, Home Cable seeks early hearing

    Adcap case put off to 29 March; Discovery moves for intervention, Home Cable seeks early hearing

    NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court today adjourned the hearing of the adcap (advertising cap) challenge to 29 March, when it will also take up the application by Discovery Communications to intervene in the matter.

    While the matter was listed for today, it was put off to another date in view of pending cases before the court.

    In the last hearing on 27 November, the Court chaired by Chief Justice G Rohini said the matter had been pending for some time and therefore it will hear and conclude the case in the next hearing.

    On that day, the Information and Broadcasting Ministry had informed the Court that it was in talks with the News Broadcasters Association (NBA) and other stakeholders on the issue of the advertising cap of 12 minutes per hour. This was the first time that the Ministry had put in an appearance in the petition filed by the NBA and others against the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) and others.

    On an oral plea by intervenor Home Cable Network Pvt Ltd counsel Vivek Sarin for early hearing, the Court directed him to file a written application with the relevant contentions for early hearing, saying that the court would consider it.

    Even as Discovery Communications sought to press its plea for being impleaded as an intervenor, the Court said this would also be considered at the next hearing.

    Home Cable Network was permitted to intervene on 5 January and the Court had agreed to consider contentions on whether pay channels should be permitted to carry commercials in view of subscription fee charged by them. Sarin had told the court that the petitioners had not disclosed that broadcasters had given their consent to observe the 10+2 ad cap rule under the Cable Television Network Regulation Rules 1994 and the Act that followed a year later and also under the Uplink and Downlink Guidelines.

    He also said pay TV broadcasters should not be allowed to take ads as they charged subscription fee.

    The case, filed by 9X Media, NBA and others against TRAI and the Union Government, has so far been adjourned from time to time on the plea that the government and the broadcasters are in talks on this issue.

    Indiantelevision.com has learnt that this comes in the wake of a statement made by Minister Arun Jaitley in January last year that there should be no ad cap in the print or electronic media. However, no instructions have been issued in this regard by the Minister so far.

    The Court has already directed that the order that TRAI will not take any action against any channel pending the petition will continue. In an earlier hearing, the Court had, at the regulator’s instance, directed that all channels keep a record of the advertisements run by them.

    The NBA had challenged the ad cap rule, contending that TRAI does not have jurisdiction to regulate commercial airtime on television channels.

    Apart from the NBA, the petitions have been filed by Sarthak Entertainment, Pioneer Channel Factory, E24 Glamoru, Sun TV Network, TV Vision, B4U Broadband, 9X Media, Kalaignar, Celebrities Management, Eanadu Television and Raj Television.

    Meanwhile, according to information available with this website, the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate in Delhi is already hearing a case on this issue against 15 broadcasters. It is further learnt that officials of these channels have obtained bail and the matter is pending before the Magistrate.

  • Adcap case put off to 29 March; Discovery moves for intervention, Home Cable seeks early hearing

    Adcap case put off to 29 March; Discovery moves for intervention, Home Cable seeks early hearing

    NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court today adjourned the hearing of the adcap (advertising cap) challenge to 29 March, when it will also take up the application by Discovery Communications to intervene in the matter.

    While the matter was listed for today, it was put off to another date in view of pending cases before the court.

    In the last hearing on 27 November, the Court chaired by Chief Justice G Rohini said the matter had been pending for some time and therefore it will hear and conclude the case in the next hearing.

    On that day, the Information and Broadcasting Ministry had informed the Court that it was in talks with the News Broadcasters Association (NBA) and other stakeholders on the issue of the advertising cap of 12 minutes per hour. This was the first time that the Ministry had put in an appearance in the petition filed by the NBA and others against the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) and others.

    On an oral plea by intervenor Home Cable Network Pvt Ltd counsel Vivek Sarin for early hearing, the Court directed him to file a written application with the relevant contentions for early hearing, saying that the court would consider it.

    Even as Discovery Communications sought to press its plea for being impleaded as an intervenor, the Court said this would also be considered at the next hearing.

    Home Cable Network was permitted to intervene on 5 January and the Court had agreed to consider contentions on whether pay channels should be permitted to carry commercials in view of subscription fee charged by them. Sarin had told the court that the petitioners had not disclosed that broadcasters had given their consent to observe the 10+2 ad cap rule under the Cable Television Network Regulation Rules 1994 and the Act that followed a year later and also under the Uplink and Downlink Guidelines.

    He also said pay TV broadcasters should not be allowed to take ads as they charged subscription fee.

    The case, filed by 9X Media, NBA and others against TRAI and the Union Government, has so far been adjourned from time to time on the plea that the government and the broadcasters are in talks on this issue.

    Indiantelevision.com has learnt that this comes in the wake of a statement made by Minister Arun Jaitley in January last year that there should be no ad cap in the print or electronic media. However, no instructions have been issued in this regard by the Minister so far.

    The Court has already directed that the order that TRAI will not take any action against any channel pending the petition will continue. In an earlier hearing, the Court had, at the regulator’s instance, directed that all channels keep a record of the advertisements run by them.

    The NBA had challenged the ad cap rule, contending that TRAI does not have jurisdiction to regulate commercial airtime on television channels.

    Apart from the NBA, the petitions have been filed by Sarthak Entertainment, Pioneer Channel Factory, E24 Glamoru, Sun TV Network, TV Vision, B4U Broadband, 9X Media, Kalaignar, Celebrities Management, Eanadu Television and Raj Television.

    Meanwhile, according to information available with this website, the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate in Delhi is already hearing a case on this issue against 15 broadcasters. It is further learnt that officials of these channels have obtained bail and the matter is pending before the Magistrate.

  • Adcap case on 11 February to consider if pay channels have right to show commercials

    Adcap case on 11 February to consider if pay channels have right to show commercials

    NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court, which is slated to hear the advertising cap (adcap) challenge case on 11 February, today agreed to consider contentions on whether pay channels should be permitted to carry commercials in view of subscription fee charged by them. 

     

    In a brief hearing, counsel Vivek Sarin on behalf of Home Cable Network Pvt. Ltd, which has come as an intervenor in the case, also told the Court that the petitioners had not disclosed the fact that broadcasters had given their consent to observe the 10+2 minutes ad cap rule under the Cable Television Network Regulation Rules 1994 and the Act that followed a year later and also under the Uplink and Downlink Guidelines.  

     

    Defending the plea that pay TV broadcasters should not be allowed to take ads as they charged subscription fee, Sarin wanted the Court to order that offending pay TV broadcasters should deposit the advertisement revenue earned during the period from 17 December, 2013 onwards in the Consumer Welfare Fund maintained by the Union Government.

     

    He said the Standard of Quality of Services Regulation 2012 and the subsequent amendment of December 2013 was clear that all channels had to observe the adcap.

     

    However, Sarin also sought to argue that since pay channels charge a subscription fee, they should not be permitted to air ads and even if they do so, then the subscription charges should be adjusted accordingly. He said that the amendment of 17 December, 2013 to the Standard of Quality of Services Regulation should be modified accordingly and the protection given by the subsequent order of 27 November last should also be modified.

     

    The case, filed by 9x Media, News Broadcasters Association (NBA) and others against the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) and the Union Government, has been adjourned from time to time on the plea that the government and the broadcasters are in talks on the issue.

     

    Sarin wanted issuance of directions to the TRAI to enforce the 2012 Standards of Quality of Service (Digital Addressable Cable TV Systems) Regulations as amended in 2013 and the provisions of rule 7(11) of the Cable TV Network Rules 1994 against the offending pay TV broadcasters.

     

    He also sought directions to TRAI and the Union Government to enforce the Clause 5.1 of the Down Linking Guidelines and the undertakings given by the Pay TV Broadcasters under Form A 1 against the pay TV broadcasters.

     

    In the last hearing in November 2015, the Information and Broadcasting Ministry informed the Delhi High Court that it was in talks with the NBA and other stakeholders on the issue of the advertising cap of 12 minutes per hour on television channels.

     

    Consequently, the Court put off hearing of the matter to 11 February, 2016 but observed that the matter had been pending for some time and therefore it will hear and conclude the case in the next hearing.

     

    The intervention application by multi system operator (MSO) Home Cable Network and its head Vikki Chaudhary said it wanted to intervene as it was directly affected by the outcome of the present petition and “the ordinary subscribers are unduly burdened with unjustified charges when the cost of operating the channels can be recovered from the advertisement revenue. The said cost includes notional profits also.”

     

    The application wanted the NBA petition to be dismissed and added, “The pay channel broadcasters are profiteering at the expense of subscribers and the DPOs. There is no justification for changing monthly subscription when commercial advertisements are inserted. The Standards of Quality of Service (Digital Addressable Cable TV Systems) Regulations 2012 (with Amendments thereafter) is justified to the extent they are applicable to pay channels. The pay channel broadcasters cannot charge the subscription fee while inserting commercials into the content or in the alternative, the subscribers have to be compensated for the revenue earned on the basis of their being subscribers of the channels.”

     

    In the last two hearings on 8 and 23 September, the NBA had sought the adjournment on the ground that the matter was under discussion with the Ministry to seek certain clarifications.

     

    It is learnt by Indiantelevision.com that this comes in the wake of a statement made by I&B Minister Arun Jaitley in January last year that there should be no ad cap in the print or electronic media, However, no instructions have been issued in this regard by Jaitley so far.

     

    The Court in an initial hearing of this case directed that TRAI will not take action against any channel violating the ad cap rule until the hearing of petition is over. The Court has since reiterated that this order will continue. In an earlier hearing, the Court had, at the regulator’s instance, directed that all channels keep a record of the advertisements run by them.

      

    The NBA had challenged the ad cap rule, contending that TRAI does not have jurisdiction to regulate commercial airtime on television channels. Apart from the NBA, petitions have been filed by Sarthak Entertainment, Pioneer Channel Factory, E24 Glamour, Sun TV Network, TV Vision, B4U Broadband, 9X Media, Kalaignar, Celebrities Management, Eenadu Television and Raj Television.

  • Should the Press Council govern TV and Internet?

    Should the Press Council govern TV and Internet?

    MUMBAI: Is there a need to create a Media Council of India? We already have the Broadcast Complaints Council of India (BCCI) and the News Broadcasters Association and the Broadcast Editors Association (BEA) which act as the conscience keepers of the entertainment channels and of the news broadcasters respectively.

     

    But CK Prasad chief of the nearly 50 year old Press Council of India  (PCI) believes its ambit needs to be extended to cover television and the internet. 
    Speaking on the occasion of National Press Day the retired chief justice today said  “It is necessary for society and government to recognise that the noble objectives behind setting up the Council can never fully be realised if its activities are restricted to the print media…. the Council as a body made up of different groups of informed stakeholders, is best placed to play such a regulatory role.”

     

    He added that suggestions to give the PCI more teeth have been made in the past but it has not been followed up with legislative changes. “It must possess the powers to tackle aberrations by the press to ensure that members maintain the highest professional standards. In the absence of such powers, the Council is forced to act more on the basis of moral persuasion than legal persuasion.”

     

    “Our democracy and our media have evolved significantly… legislation has kept pace with developments in other areas vital for the functioning of our democracy such as electoral reforms, attempts to update the Press Council Act to bring it in tune with contemporary realities have until now only been academic exercises,” he pointed out.

     

    He stated that the PCI gets its funding through private sources as annual subscriptions from registered newspaper organisations and as grants from government. This needs to be relooked at. The government’s share of this needs to go down while the print media’s share needs to go up to ensure its autonomy in a new media dynamic.

     

  • Rajat Sharma re-elected president of News Broadcasters Association

    Rajat Sharma re-elected president of News Broadcasters Association

    NEW DELHI: India TV chairman and editor-in-chief Rajat Sharma has been re-elected as president of the News Broadcasters Association (NBA) for 2015-16, while ABP News Network CEO Ashok Venkataramani has been elected as the vice president.

     

    On the other hand, News24 Broadcast India chairperson and managing director Anurradha Prasad was reappointed as honorary treasurer. 

     

    The other Members on the NBA Board are: NDTV Group executive vice chairperson K V L Narayan Rao, TV Today Network CEO Ashish Bagga, Times Network MD and CEO M K Anand, Zee Media Corporation CEO Ashish Kirpal Pandit, TV18 Broadcast group CEO A P Parigi and Mathrubhumi Printing & Publishing Co. Ltd. whole-time director M V Shreyams Kumar.

  • News Broadcasters Association roots for freedom to proceed against TV channels

    News Broadcasters Association roots for freedom to proceed against TV channels

    NEW DELHI: The News Broadcasters Association (NBA) has expressed deep concern over the show cause notice sent to three Indian news broadcasters by the Information and Broadcasting (I&B) Ministry pertaining to their coverage of stories linked to Yakub Memon’s hanging.

     

    This comes close on the heels of the statement put out by the Broadcasters Editors Association, wherein it expressed concern over the “apparent tendency among governments, both at the centre and in some states, to serve notices on media organisations in a selective manner.”

     

    As was reported earlier by Indiantelevision.com, the I&B Ministry had sent notices to three channels namely NDTV 24×7/NDTV India, Aaj Tak and ABP News relating to Memon’s execution coverage.

     

    The NBA notes that the notice was for reportedly having aired phone-in interviews of underworld gangster Chhota Shakeel on two channels, which according to the I&B Ministry casts aspersions against the integrity of the President and the Judiciary; and can incite violence and lead to law and order problems. In light of this, NBA has urged the Ministry to withdraw the show cause notices issued and refer them to the News Broadcasting Standards Authority (NBSA) instead, which would consider it under its regulations.

     

    In a statement, the NBA said, “The present Government has gone on record to state that it believes the media should be independent without any government interference and it should self regulate itself.”

     

    Now it remains to be seen whether the Ministry hands the matter over to the NBSA to look into.

  • Ad Cap: Broadcasters buoyed by Arun Jaitley’s comment

    Ad Cap: Broadcasters buoyed by Arun Jaitley’s comment

    MUMBAI: While delivering speech at the first Justice J. S Verma Memorial lecture Information and Broadcasting Minster of India Arun Jaitley opposed the concept of Ad Cap in channels. He termed this concept as a contradiction to the Article 19 (i) A of Indian constitution. 

     

    Jaitley had said, “With the growth of digital platforms, news channels are going to find it immensely difficult to survive. The definition of news has changed; it was accuracy then and spontaneity now.” 

     

    With this Jaitley stressed on the fact that as news is now immediately available on the digital platforms, lesser people will tune into the television for the same.

     

    NDTV executive vice-chairperson KVL Narayan Rao said, “If this development turns real it will put an end to the lengthy sustaining debate. We will be extremely delighted and grateful to the government as we have been campaigning for this since a long time now. It will strengthen the development and bring a balance as the distribution charge is very high and the major source of revenue is advertisement.”

     

    The Minister, during his speech also noted how distribution costs were “phenomenally high.” He was of the opinion that low revenues in the media industry is a threat as it leaves direct effect on quality in terms of news gathering and reporting. “Low revenue will result in numerous amalgamations and takeovers,” Jaitley had said.

     

    Speaking to Indiantelevision.com on Jaitley’s remark on Ad Cap, Multi Screen Media president Rohit Gupta said, “We were never in favour of ad cap and see this comment of the Minister as a positive step. This will enable us to develop and hence I appreciate and welcome the statement.”

     

    The I&B Minster had also mentioned that many a times he come across speeches that he actually never delivered. According to him, these things happened due to two reasons: 1) Misinterpretation by the reporter in charge, and (2) In order to generate more TRP both are directly proportional to revenue. “If adequate revenue is generated then companies will have better reporters and there will be less thrive for TRP and hence the final product will be more credible,” he said.

     

    Appreciation also came from India TV editor in chief and chairman and News Broadcaster’s Association president Rajat Sharma. “News broadcasters have been raising this issue for more than a year now, I am happy that Arun Jaitley has understood the problem. He has realised that ad cap will make news channels unviable but more important is the minister’s view that the ad cap is against freedom of expression provided in the Constitution of India.”

     

    Focus News managing editor Shailesh Kumar termed it as a move in the right direction. He said “If the remark of I&B Minister on Ad Cap turns into a decision, it will be a blessing for the channels. Most of the channels are going through a tough time and need to generate more revenue.”

     

    On the other hand, Zeel MD and CEO Punit Goenka was of a slightly different opinion. While speaking to Indiantelevision.com, Goenka said, “It is a good move for news and music channels.” Separating his channel from the others, he further added, “Zee will continue to follow the ad cap. The ministry comes up with such statements and many fall for the trap.” 

     

    Jaitley concluded his speech by saying, “It will be music to Rajat (Sharma) and other media person’s ear on hearing this view from me. My I&B Ministry, a couple of years ago came out with a statutory amendment to law saying no channel will telecast advertising beyond so many minutes, since then I am struggling in my own mind as how this meets the challenge of Article 19 (i) A (of Indian Constitution). Is the government suppose to say how much news and how much advertisement or it should be viewers prerogative to switch when it turns monotonous.”  

     

    The controversial law was invoked by the Authority in May 2012 and it was disputed by television broadcasters, who had also challenged the jurisdiction of Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) in this regard before the Telecom Disputes Settlement & Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT).

     

    The News Broadcaster’s Association (NBA) along with others had challenged the ad cap rule, contending that TRAI does not have jurisdiction to regulate commercial air time on television channels. The Delhi High Court panel led by Chief Justice G Rohini and Justice Rajiv Sahai adjourned the petition till 24 March, 2015. 

     

    Meanwhile TRAI gave assurance of taking no action against any channel till the matter is resolved in court. The regulator’s instance, directed all channels to keep a record of the advertisements run by them. It can be noted that the ad cap case was adjourned to 21 January, 2015 when it last came up for hearing on 20 November, 2014.