Decisions

S.NO Channel Complainant Date of Broadcast Complaint Decisions
S.NO 1. Channel INDIA TV Complainant Mr. Sanjay Anand Date of Broadcast 7.5.2018 Complaint

The complainant alleged that in the programme “Aaj ki baat Rajat Sharma ke sath” telecast on 7.5.2018, Mr. Rajat Sharma said that “jo kaam BJP ken neta nahi kar sakte voh kaam BJP key neta Mani Shankar Aiyer Pakistan me kar rahe hai”. According to the complainant, India TV is misguiding the public by stating that Mr. Mani Shankar is a neta/member of BJP, as he is not a member of BJP. Broadcaster’s response dated 28.5.2018: Broadcaster stated that the complainant has misunderstood the statement made by Mr. Rajat Sharma; and that what was stated was “Waise jo kaam BJP ke neta nahin kar sakte, wo kaam BJP ke liye Mani Shankar Iyer kar rahe hain”. Broadcaster also stated that what was referred was a live broadcast, it is possible that the complainant might have incorrectly heard and misinterpreted what was stated by Mr. Rajat Sharma. It was pointed out that Mr. Mani Shankar Aiyer’s association with the Congress party is a well-known fact and hence no question of misguiding the public can arise.

Decisions

11.7.2018
NBSA at its meeting held on 11.7.2018 considered the complaint, response and also viewed the CD. NBSA found that there was no violation of the Regulations or Guidelines of NBA or NBSA. NBSA therefore decided to close the complaint and inform MoI&B and broadcaster accordingly.

S.NO 2. Channel CNN News18, Republic TV, Zee News, ABP News Complainant MoI&B [4] Date of Broadcast 10.4.2018 & 13.4.2018 Complaint

MoI&B, vide letter dated 15.5.2018 informed NBA that it came to the notice of the Ministry that while reporting about the Unnao incident that the above channels disclosed the identify of victims’ family. The Ministry pointed out that while reporting on rape victims, the channel will have to comply with the order of the Delhi Court in A.K Asthana Vs. UOI & Anr (Civil WP.787/2012), Guidelines on Media Reporting on Children, Section 74 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, Section 23 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Section 228A of the IPC, as also provisions prescribed under Programme/Advertising Codes. Response dated 12.6.2018 from CNN News18: CNN News18 vide letter dated 12.6.2018 stated that (i) The news report did not disclose the identity of the rape victim. It only shows bytes of her father and one of her uncles, without disclosing the victim’s name or identity. (ii) The footage of the victim’s father was shown without blurring the face since it was a long shot and his face was in a shadow and was not visible or recognizable in any manner. Further, the footage was used since it showed the victim’s father being beaten up without showing or making his face visible. The said footage does not disclose the face of the victim’s father or any other information which may be treated as disclosing the victim’s identity. (iii) The byte of the victim’s uncle cannot be termed as revealing the identity of the victim as the name of the victim was never revealed and, in the absence of the same, it was too farfetched to link that person to the victim. (iv) There was no intention on their part to reveal the identity or violate the privacy or dignity of the victim. The footage was shown with the sole intention to facilitate the cause of bringing the guilty to the book under the bonafide belief that this would lead to justice to the victim and her family and, consequently, be in their interest. The footage was telecast under the bonafide impression that there was nothing wrong in telecasting it. (v) As soon as they realized that their bonafide act (which was- intended to be in the interest of the child victim and her family) may be viewed by the authorities as a violation of some guidelines / statutes, they made necessary amends by immediately dropping the footage on the same day. They have since not telecast the same again and do not intend to do so. Response dated 2.7.2018 from Republic TV: Republic TV vide letter dated 2.7.2018 stated that while the victim’s images were blurred in all their telecasts, the uncle’s image was shown with a black band over the eyes in its initial broadcast at around 4:58 pm on 10.4.2018; that thereafter, the uncle began to appear voluntarily in front of television camera along with the victim to express his/their anguish and travails; that in such appearances, the victim was appearing having with her face covered and masked, but her uncle never tried to hide identity; and that these voluntary appearances were telecast without any masking or blurring of the uncle’s images, as was captured on camera. It was submitted that television being a visual medium, relies on images and visuals; and that as the victim’s uncle was not hesitating to take up the cause in public, it did not blur the image inadvertently in the rush of the moment. The channel stated that they would exercise more stringent care in future as a responsible national broadcast media. Response dated 14.6.2018 from Zee News: Zee News vide letter dated 14.6.2018 stated that in most of the telecasts on the Unnao incident, face of the victim and her family members was blurred; that they never put such content on air without proper filtration and treatment, as is required; and that however in one news report, face of one elderly lady could not be blurred due to a technical snag/glitch and not on account of malafide intention to disclose the identity of the victim. They stated that they will take additional precautions while telecasting such sensitive stories. Response dated 6.6.2018 from ABP News: ABP News vide letter dated 6.6.2018 stated that the said program was telecast on 10.4.2018 at 9:30 pm for 10 minutes and was not repeated thereafter. They stated that the footage was blurred at appropriate places, including but not limited to, blurring the face of father of Unnao rape victim. They submitted that there was no violation of either the program code or any applicable laws.

Decisions

11.7.2018
NBSA at its meeting held on 11.7.2018 considered the letter of MoI&B, replies of the broadcasters and also viewed the CDs. After deliberations NBSA decided that a warning be issued to the broadcasters and that they should be more careful in airing such sensitive matters and that any future violations would be viewed seriously and action would be taken against the broadcasters. NBSA decided to inform the broadcaster and MoI&B accordingly and close the matter.

S.NO 3. Channel Aajtak Complainant Mr. Prateek Dhawan Date of Broadcast 13.4.2018 Complaint

Complaint: The complainant alleged that on 13.4.2018 (in the afternoon headlines between 2 pm-2:30 pm), the channel had falsely stated that the Jammu Bar Association President made a deplorable comment regarding youths taking up AK47 against the arrest of convicts in Kathua case. It was alleged that what was shown was a short portion of the clip and if the entire clip had been shown, it would have that the Bar Association President’s remarks were in regard to deporting of Rohingya Muslims and it was not connected to Kathua case. Response from the broadcaster: Broadcaster submitted that Mr. B.S Slathia, the President of Jammu Bar Association, had supported the Jammu Bandh (with all the other opposition parties, who were demanding CBI enquiry in the Rasana Rape case) and started giving hate speech during the bandh and provoked the youth of Jammu with the following statement: "Today we are with national flag but a day will come, when we will pick up AK- 47 and Bombs''. The broadcaster alleged that the DGP, Dr. S.P. Vaid, had also condemned the statements made by Mr. Slathia in view of Jammu Bandh. The Broadcaster stated that the telecast of the speech of Mr. Slathia during the Jammu Bandh was made in an unbiased, objective and impartial manner.

Decisions

11.7.2018
NBSA at its meeting held on 11.7.2018 considered the complaint, response and also viewed the CD and found that there was no violation of the Regulations or Guidelines of NBA or NBSA. NBSA therefore decided to close the matter and inform MoI&B and broadcaster accordingly.

S.NO 4. Channel Tez, News X, Total TV Complainant MoI&B [3] Date of Broadcast 25.4.2018 Complaint

MoI&B, vide letter dated 3.5.2018 informed NBA that it came to the notice of the Ministry that the above TV channels had disclosed on 25.4.2018, the identity of rape victim's father, in the case of Asaram Bapu case. It was alleged that while carrying the said news report, the channels had carried the bytes of the victim's father talking to the media, without blurring his face. It was observed that by revealing the identity of the victim's father, the channels exposed the victim to the risk of being identified and subjected to social stigma. It also stated that in regard to reportage on rape victims, TV channels were required to ensure compliance with the Order of the Delhi High Court, in A.K. Asthana Vs. UOI & Anr (Civil WP.787/2012), the Guidelines on Media Reporting on Children, Section 74 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, Section 23 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Section 228A of the IPC, as also provisions prescribed under Programme/ Advertising Codes. Response dated 31.5.2018 from the Tez: Broadcaster submitted that the victim's father was interviewed live as soon as the decision came out in the Asaram rape case; that the victim’s father came with a towel covering his face to mask his identity; that during the live broadcast, the towel unraveled partially; and that the video revealed that the victim's father was repeatedly advised to cover his face when the towel slipped. It was submitted that being a live interview, it was not possible for the channel to monitor or control the broadcast and it was not the intention of the channel to show the face of victims' father. In so far as Aaj Tak was concerned, the broadcaster stated that the channel did not carry the news complained of. Therefore, MoI&B was requested to provide the CD of the alleged broadcast by Aaj Tak. EMMC, by letter dated 25.6.2018, confirmed that Aaj Tak did not disclose the identity of rape victim’s father who spoke to the media after Asaram Bapu verdict. Response dated 25.6.2018 from News X: Broadcaster submitted that they received a feed from ANI covering the post judgement comments/statements, which included a video containing a clip of the victim’s father; that when the said feed received from ANI was played, just for a fraction, the face of victim’s father was telecast inadvertently; and that when that was noticed, their team took remedial steps immediately and blurred the face as required under the MIB Guidelines. It was submitted that there was no disclosure of identification of any member of the family of the victim or the victim herself during that telecast; and that in all the subsequent telecasts, the face of the victim’s father was blurred. Response dated 22.5.2018 from Total TV: Broadcaster submitted that in the telecast on 25.4.2018 (at 2:54 to 2:56 PM) the byte of a person whose face was half covered with a scarf was shown for 1 minute 16 seconds. Broadcaster further submitted that ANI and other agencies also aired the story; that it was not mentioned that the byte shown was that of victim’s father; that as the anchor and the reporter were not aware of the identity of the person, they did not reveal his identity; and that as soon as it became known that the byte was that of victim’s father, prompt remedial action was taken and within 12 minutes, the story was aired with his face blurred. It was submitted that the earlier telecast was accidental without any intention to show the father of the victim.

Decisions

11.7.2018
NBSA at its meeting held on 11.7.2018 considered the letter of MoI&B, responses of the broadcasters and also viewed the CDs. NBSA was of the view that the broadcasters should have taken sufficient care in broadcasting such sensitive news. NBSA therefore decided to warn the broadcasters to be more careful in future while airing such sensitive matters and that any future violations would be viewed seriously and action would be taken against the broadcaster. NBSA decided to close the matter and inform the broadcaster and MoI&B accordingly.

S.NO 5. Channel ETV Urdu [Now News18 Urdu] Complainant Mr. Fayaz Ahmad Sodagar, Advocate [on behalf of Mr. Shabir Ahmad Shah] Date of Broadcast 3.1.2018 Complaint

Complaint: The complaint is that ETV Urdu on 3.1.2018 at 7 PM, carried a false and frivolous report (when news was being telecast in Kashmir) that Rs 62.00 lakh was recovered from Mr. Shabir Ahmad Shah by Enforcement Directorate; it was stated that even the charge sheet filed by E.D New Delhi against Mr. Shabir Ahmad Shah does not reveal anywhere that rupees Sixty lac has been recovered or seized from him, no attempt was made by the channel to verify the correctness or authenticity of the allegations that money was recovered from Mr. Shabir Ahmad Shah. Response from Broadcaster: Broadcaster in their response dated 14.3.2018 stated that the news flash was telecast in the form of a ticker “ hearing on Shabbir Shah's money laundering case from 15th January in Patiala House Court. ED attaches Rs.62 lacs”, based on a press release issued by the Enforcement Directorate. Broadcaster stated that there was no intention on its part to damage the reputation of Mr. Shabir Ahmad Shah; that its object was to inform the public about the incident; and that the channel had taken adequate precautions while reporting the news and conduct several levels of verification before actually airing a news story.

Decisions

11.7.2018
NBSA at its meeting held on 24.5.2018 considered the complaint, response and the ticker text aired on the channel. NBSA was of the view that if the ticker was based on any Enforcement Directorate Press Release, there was nothing objectionable in the news ticker; NBSA decided to call upon the channel to make available a copy of the press release said to have been issued by the Enforcement Directorate and consider the matter at its next meeting. NBSA at its meeting held on 11.7.2018 considered the same and noted that the objected contents were based on the press release which was said to have been issued by the Enforcement Directorate. Since the broadcaster was merely reporting what was stated in the said press release, NBSA found no violation of the Regulations or Guidelines of NBA or NBSA. NBSA therefore decided to close the matter and inform MoI&B and broadcaster accordingly.

S.NO 6. Channel NDTV 24x7 Complainant Mr. G. Narayanan [MoI&B] Date of Broadcast 31.3.2018 Complaint

The above complaint was received from MoI&B. The complainant alleged that in the programme titled ‘Truth Vs Hype’ on NDTV 24x7 would incite communal violence by showing the attack on a mosque again and again. The broadcaster stated that the programme was in relation to a comparatively small incident where a slipper was thrown by some miscreant from a mosque, on the idol of goddess Durga during a procession. The issue was amicably settled and the procession was carried peacefully. However, the programme emphasized on the fact that how political parties, specially the local leaders, escalated an issue belatedly which resulted in violence and eventually attack on the mosque.

Decisions

24.5.2018
NBSA considered the complaint, response from the broadcaster and also viewed the contents of the broadcast. NBSA noted that the news report did not violate any NBA/NBSA Standards or Guidelines and therefore decided that no action was called for on the complaint. NBSA therefore decided to close the matter and inform the MoI&B and the broadcaster accordingly.

S.NO 7. Channel ETV-Telangana Complainant EMMC [MoI&B] Date of Broadcast 3.12.2017 Complaint

EMMC report related to the news aired on ETV Telangana regarding the physical abuse of a 4-year-old girl by her mother at the behest of her alleged lover. The child received severe burn injuries on her buttocks and feet after her mother forced her to sit on a hot pan. While reporting this story, the channel had shown the disturbing visuals of the burn injuries inflicted on the child without any editing or blurring. The EMMC Report stated that said visual is against good taste and should not have been carried. The broadcaster stated that in the opinion of the bulletin producer, the visuals did not warrant blurring or masking. It is further submitted that the editor, having taken care and caution in not showing the child, felt that the visual had to be aired without masking, to effectively convey to the public the heinous crime committed by a stone-hearted mother in connivance with her alleged paramour and to show how human relations are deteriorating in the civil society. The blurring or masking would not depict the gravity of the heinous crime; and if the image had been blurred, the report might have been taken lightly by the viewers as a trivial issue of a mother chiding her daughter.

Decisions

24.5.2018
NBSA considered the complaint, response from the broadcaster and also viewed the contents of the alleged broadcast. NBSA was of the view that this was one of the well recognized exceptions to the rule that such gory and barbaric incidents should not be shown without blurring, and that the broadcast was in public interest; and that it was the duty of the media to highlight, report and expose such brutality, to prevent such inhuman conduct being repeated by others. Reporting such incidents also facilitate the law enforcement agencies to take strict action against the perpetrators of such gruesome acts. NBSA was of the view that the broadcaster has done its duty by reporting the incident and found no violation of any broadcasting standards or guidelines in the broadcast and therefore decided that no action was called for on the complaint. NBSA therefore decided to close the matter and inform the EMMC, MoI&B and the broadcaster accordingly.

S.NO 8. Channel Zee Rajasthan News Complainant EMMC [MoI&B] Date of Broadcast 6.12.2017 Complaint

EMMC report related to a news from Dev Nagar in Rajsamand District of Rajasthan which showed a person killing another in connection with the issue of Love Jihad and patriotism. The channel has shown a video related with this news without blurring the visuals of the said incident. The video showed a killing by a person attacking another with an axe and burning him alive. The channel ran the video recording of the incidence for more than 14 minutes. In the later broadcasts, the images were dimmed. The visuals that were shown in the broadcast were terrifying, repulsive, shocking, wrenching the viewers’ hearts and triggering revulsion. It was stated that broadcast of such visuals should be avoided. Broadcaster stated that initial part of video could not be blurred due to the fact that broadcaster encountered major technical snag. Broadcaster regretted the technical snag and assured that there was no deliberate attempt or mala fides on their part in initially showing the visuals without blurring. They assured NBSA that they shall take additional precautions while telecasting such sensitive stories and requested that the proceedings be dropped.

Decisions

24.5.2018
NBSA considered the report of the EMMC, response of the broadcaster and also viewed the contents of the alleged broadcast. NBSA found that the submission made by the broadcaster that they had encountered a technical glitch was not acceptable. It was of the view that the broadcaster owed a duty to take all steps necessary to scrutinize a third-party video before airing it on their channel, that too for more than 14 minutes. NBSA noted that most of the broadcast showed the gruesome killing of a man by attacking him with an axe and later burning him alive. NBSA noted that reporting of such gruesome acts by the channel could certainly become a source for communal violence and would create undue fear in the minds of the people and communities. The media owed a responsibility to ensure that its reporting and airing the visuals did not incite communal violence/disturbances. NBSA was concerned with the frequent airing of gory violence which may have the effect of disturbing communal harmony. NBSA therefore decided to warn the broadcaster to be more careful in future while reporting about sensitive issues. NBSA decided to inform the EMMC, MOI&B and the broadcaster accordingly and close the matter.

S.NO 9. Channel ABP News Complainant Mr. Pawan Kapoor, Mr. Hrishikesh Kumar Chaudhary and Ms. Priyadarshi India [3] [MoI&B] Date of Broadcast 12.2.2018 Complaint

The complainants alleged that ABP News Channel had reported a statement made by Shri Mohanrao Bhagwat during his trip to Bihar, in a distorted manner, thereby bringing disrepute for RSS. According to the complainants, Shri Bhagwat only compared the general public with Swyamsevaks and not the Army with the Swyamsevaks and had stated that if the need ever arose, it would take mere three days to prepare Swyamsevaks of the Sangh for offering their services to the Army; and on the other hand, if members of the public are to be prepared for defence services, it would take a time of more than six months. The complainants alleged that when making the Mr. Bhagwat’s statement a topic of discussion in a programme aired by the channel, objectionable statements were made against Shri Bhagwat. The complainants contended that when there was not even a trace of any insult to the Army in the statement of Shri Bhagwat, an attempt was made to bring RSS into disrepute by attributing a wrong statement to Shri Bhagwat. The broadcaster stated that the channel ran the bytes of Shri Mohan Bhagwatji the way he had stated and had not in any way tampered with it. It was stated that the channel had given due opportunity to all participants to articulate their viewpoints and had also telecast the viewpoint of the representative of Rashtriya Swyamsevak Sangh.

Decisions

24.5.2018
NBSA considered the complaints, response from the broadcaster and also viewed the contents of the alleged broadcast. NBSA noted that the broadcast was a factual reporting and there was no violation of the Regulations or Guidelines of NBA or NBSA. NBSA also noted that the content of a 'report' or 'story' fell within the editorial discretion and an individual's (complainant’s) view or perception of an issue cannot be a ground to take action against a channel, unless there was a violation of the Guidelines. NBSA therefore decided to close the matter and inform MoI&B and broadcaster accordingly.

S.NO 10. Channel Aajtak Complainant Dr. Neha Singh [MoI&B] Date of Broadcast 27.1.2018 Complaint

The complaint was received from the MoI&B which stated that some wrong information was conveyed by the channel in its program ‘Dangal’ on 27.1.2018 relating to Kasganj (U.P.) violence and the unauthorized rally. The anchor had no concrete information and the manner in which he questioned the police authorities indicated that he was trying to target a particular community and provoke people to indulge in violence; and that in spite of ADG Law and Order (Mr. Anand Kumar), who appeared live on the programme for some time, clearly informing the anchor that the police did not have full information and refused to comment on the incident, the anchor persisted with his agenda which clearly appeared to be communal in nature. Broadcaster stated that the programme did not show any bias or intention on the part of the anchor to incite a feeling of hatred, communal tension and violence; and that the telecast was in the larger public interest and to show the lackadaisical attitude of Uttar Pradesh administration and to impress upon the Government about the serious state of affairs.

Decisions

24.5.2018
NBSA considered the complaint, response from the broadcaster and also viewed the CD of the broadcast. NBSA noted that one of the participants in the debate was, ADG (Law and Order), Uttar Pradesh and the anchor, through his questions, was trying to elicit details from the ADG in regard to the violence that took place in Kasganj, the number of persons arrested and the current situation, etc. NBSA found that the ADG had adopted a very balanced approach in his answers, clearly intended to bring peace and harmony. On the other hand, NBSA found the “ Title” of the programme, the taglines used and the questions posed by the anchor to be provocative. The excerpts of texts displayed alongside the news anchor’s commentary from the telecast were as follows: Title: ???? : ???? ??? ?????? ?????? ?? '????' ? Taglines: ?????? ?? ???????????? ?? ?? ??????? ????? ? ???? ??? ??????????? ????? ???? ?? ??? ?????? ? ??????? ???? ?? ?????? ???? ?? ????????? ????? ? ???? ?????? ?? ???? ???? ?? ?? ??????????? ???? ? ?????? ???? ??? ???? ?? ????????? ??? ???????? ? Questions posed by the anchor during the debate to the ADG (Law & Order) (In Hindi ) ???? : ???? ??????? ????? ??? ???????? ??? ?? ??? ?? ?????? ?????? ???? ?? ?????? ??... ???? : ?? ?? ??? ?? ????? ??? ??????... ????: ???? ????? ???? ??? ?????? ?????? ?????? ?? ??? ?? ???? ????? ????? ??? ??? ??? ?? ???? ???? ?? ?? ???? ????? ?? ???? ??? ?? ????? ????? ?? ???? ?? ???? ???? ?? ?? ??? ?? ????????? ???????? ?? ???? ???? ???... ????: ?? ?? 9 ??? ????? ?? ?? ??? ??? ???? ??? ??? ???? ??? ??...?? ???? ????? ?? ???... ????: ???? ??? ????? ??? ??????? ?? ?? ??? ???? ???...?? ????? ??????? ??? ??? ??? ??... ????: ?? ?? ????????? ?? ???? ?? ?? ?? ?? ???? ????? ?? ?? ?? ??????? ?????????? ?? ??????? ?? ????? ?? ??? ?? ????? ???? ?? ??? ???? ??? ???? ??? ????? ???? ????... ????: ???? ????? ???? ?? ?? ??? ??? ???? ???? ???? ?? ??? ?????? ????? ?? ?????? ?? ????? ?? ???? ?? ?? ??? ??? ????? ?? ???? ??? ??? ???? ?? ??????? ????? ?? ????? ?? ???? ?? ?? ??? ??? ????? ?? ???? ??? ?? 26 ????? ?? ??? ?????? ???? ?????? ??????? ???? ??? ?? ???? ???? ?? ???? ?? ???? ????????? ?? ????? ?? ?? ???? ???????? ???? ???? ?????? ????? ?? ???? ?? ??? ???... NBSA noted that while media has a duty to elicit information in public interest, it also owes a responsibility, and in fact a duty, to exercise restraint and avoid provocative comments and use of communally charged taglines, so that in a troubled situation, confidence and harmony can be created between the communities. NBSA was of the view that the anchor could have avoided such provocative/leading questions. NBSA decided to issue a warning to the broadcaster to be careful in future while reporting on such communally sensitive incidents and close the matter. NBSA decided to inform the MoI&B and the broadcaster accordingly.