SC Directive on Online Content:
- The Supreme Court directed the Centre to propose regulatory measures to curb the use of “filthy language” and “vulgarity” in online content.
- The focus is to ensure content adheres to Indian moral standards without imposing censorship.
Relevance : GS 2(Governance, Fundamental Rights)
- Regulation vs. Free Speech:
- The Court emphasized a balance between free speech (Article 19(1)(a)) and reasonable restrictions (Article 19(2)), particularly on decency and morality.
- It seeks stakeholder input for a “healthy debate” on defining acceptable standards.
- Ranveer Allahbadia’s Case:
- YouTuber Ranveer Allahbadia had been barred from airing content due to cases in Maharashtra and Assam regarding his podcast “India Got Latent.”
- His lawyer argued that the restriction affected his livelihood and that of 280 employees.
- SC’s Modification of Ban:
- The Court allowed Allahbadia to resume his podcast, provided it maintains morality and decency standards.
- The condition ensures that content is appropriate for all age groups.
- Solicitor-General’s Remarks:
- SG Tushar Mehta remarked that humour should be straightforward and not rely on vulgarity to be entertaining.
Implications:
- Regulatory Challenges:
- Striking a balance between artistic freedom and moral regulation remains complex.
- Precedents in online content regulation could impact OTT platforms, podcasts, and social media influencers.
- Legal & Constitutional Angle:
- The move aligns with Article 19(2) restrictions on free speech but raises concerns over subjectivity in morality standards.
- Potential for self-regulation mechanisms by platforms instead of strict government control.
- Impact on Digital Content Creators:
- Might lead to increased scrutiny and possible self-censorship among content creators.
- Could push for clearer content guidelines for online streaming platforms.
