A layman’s guide to GSR 139(E)

In late July this year I wrote about how much money very rich people like Mr Ambani and Mr Jeff Bezos made while their countrymen were being devastated by a hellish pandemic and how they spent it Mr Bezos took an 11minute civilian space flight to the edge of outer spaceAfter reading the edited proof I wanted to make some changes in the online edition since the paper edition had already been put to bedldquoSorry sirrdquo came the reply ldquoWe can no longer make changes in the online edition Thatrsquos the law nowrdquoThe law being referred to was General Statutory Rule 139E or in long form Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code Rules 2021 issued by the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology cutely called MeitYI was puzzled What would the law want to block me from changing my own writing for the better What if I had wrongly maligned someone or put someonersquos life in jeopardy and wanted to correct the mistake According to GSR 139E I would be stuck with itSince laws can be opaque Irsquom going to put GSR 139E into laymanrsquos English for you to clarify what can happen when you make factual errors or write things that offend othersThe social media intermediary agencymdashfor example middayrsquos online editionmdashis required to vet each piece of content to make sure it isnrsquot pornographic pedophilic and libellous doesnrsquot violate any laws is not harmful to children and so on All good We need thisThe content must also not threaten ldquothe unity integrity defence security or sovereignty of India friendly relations with foreign States or public orderrdquoExamplemdashtherersquos an article on the eight kinds of Indian biriyani How would midday figure out if this constituted a threat to Indiarsquos unity and sovereigntyA notification from MeitY could inform midday that the story seriously threatened the countryrsquos integrity by claiming that invading Mughal kings had introduced biriyanis to India and for implying that the best biriyanis are still made by Muslims The ministry finds that this offends a large number of Hindus and could cause communal violence since everyone knows Hindus invented biriyanis They could claim that it violates the publicrsquos sense of decency or morality midday could dispute it of course but under clause b of subsection 3 of section 79 of the Act theyrsquod have to take down the offending story firstAlternatively an aggrieved reader or several could complain that the article hurt their feelings by knowingly communicating information that is patently false GSR 139E requires midday to appoint a fulltime Grievance Officer who must acknowledge such complaints within 24 hours and address them within 15 daysMeanwhile the offending article must be made inaccessible though it cannot be deletedWhat if a publication or TV channel does nothing about these complaints within 15 days The grievance would be escalated to a certain ldquoselfregulating bodyrdquo headed by a retired judge of the Supreme Court or other eminent person and registered with MeitY After evaluating the complaint they may warn or reprimand midday require an apology demand changes to the content or even its deletion All this must happen with 15 daysIf this selfregulating body is unable to settle the issue to the satisfaction of the aggrieved person the matter moves one level higher to the formidable Oversight Mechanism administered by the Ministry itself The Oversight Mechanism includes an interdepartmental committee consisting of anyone from any ministry that might be offended including information and broadcasting women and child development law and justice home affairs external affairs defence and othersOf course there is the escape clause which allows all these complex measures to be bypassed Sometimes the Secretary of the Ministry of Information and Broadcast may just feel that a particular story in the media needs to be blocked right away without timeconsuming discussions GSR 139E allows him to deem it an emergency and just order the item to be removed from public view while various committees review it and the publishers contest the rulingWith GSR 139E we enter the age of ldquolawful informationrdquo in which the law decides what may be published The arbiter of lawlessness is the ministry and while elaborate paperwork and procedures are set up in three tedious tiers of administration to ensure compliance with the law the last word is the ministryrsquos which now has a direct say in the suitability of published contentBack in another era social media did not exist and things were different There was one man or woman at the helm selected for their integrity wisdom principles and professional credentials These persons highly respected almost revered decided what was publishable and what notWe used to call them editorsHere viewed from there C Y Gopinath in Bangkok throws unique light and shadows on Mumbai the city that raised him You can reach him at cygopigmailcomSend your feedback to mailbagmiddaycomThe views expressed in this column are the individualrsquos and donrsquot represent those of the paper