If there was one thing that had remained constant — so far — in the 46-month-old Modi government, it was the steadfastness with which the government stuck to many of its controversial decisions, refusing to buckle under criticism or adverse public opinion.&nbsp;

April 3, 2018 changed that.

The government's decision to roll back a proposed crackdown on “fake news” in less than 24 hours could arguably be the first and most significant retreat of the Modi government as it nears completing four years in office and plans to get into election mode with just over a year remaining for the next Lok Sabha polls.

The crackdown — which mandated penalties ranging from the suspension to the cancellation of the accreditation of journalists found guilty of reporting “fake news” — was proposed by the Information & Broadcasting Ministry piloted by Smriti Irani. It was disposed of by Prime Minister Narendra Modi himself.

Could it be the case that the government had not factored in the furore that erupted following the I&B ministry's diktat? Unlikely. Was it an attempt at testing the waters then? One thing is clear: the speed at which the course-correction took place was unprecedented.

On the face of it, many would think that the I&B ministry erred and was set right by the Prime Minister's Office. But those who cover the government know only too well the overarching control the PMO exercises on all the ministries. Simply put, to think that Irani's ministry could have come up with the diktat without keeping the PMO in the loop is being naive at best. And the Prime Minister directing that the press release regarding fake news be withdrawn and that the matter should only be addressed by the Press Council of India is nothing more than damage control.

Now coming to the diktat itself. Was it really about fake news? That's the big question. Those who would have been impacted by the amended guidelines were journalists accredited with the Government of India — mostly working for the national media and covering the Central government. Does the government have enough reason to believe that these “accredited journalists” are peddling “fake news”? Or was it just an attempt to create a mechanism to muzzle some inconvenient voices — accredited ones, of course.

What made the I&B directive more curious was that it proposed nothing to deal with social media — the most fertile breeding ground for fake news in today's India. Instead, it proposed something bordering on the draconian — immediate suspension of a journalist's accreditation the moment a complaint is registered and sent for inquiry to the Press Council of India or the News Broadcasters Association.

As a barrage of criticism broke loose, the I&B ministry made a feeble attempt at arguing that the “fake news” cases will be determined by PCI and NBA which are not “regulated” or “operated” by the Central government. That is akin to saying the I&B ministry maintains an arm's length distance from Prasar Bharati.

Off the record, in private conversations, central bureaucrats and political insiders have often underlined how the incumbent government was not a “rollback sarkar”. Let's a take a few examples from the I&B ministry itself. Pune's FTII was on the boil for months following Gajendra Chauhan's appointment to its helm, but the government did not budge. As CBFC chief, Pahlaj Nihalani not only kept raising the hackles of the Hindi film industry but was also an embarrassment to the government. But he was persisted with. Because this was not a rollback government, the government machinery argued.&nbsp;

April 3, 2018 changed that.

And to think that Smriti Irani's I&B ministry could have come up with the diktat, proposing the cancellation of the accreditation of journalists found guilty of publishing 'fake news', without keeping the PMO in the loop is being naive at best

If there was one thing that had remained constant — so far — in the 46-month-old Modi government, it was the steadfastness with which the government stuck to many of its controversial decisions, refusing to buckle under criticism or adverse public opinion. April 3, 2018 changed that. The government's decision to roll back a proposed crackdown on “fake news” in less than 24 hours could arguably be the first and most significant retreat of the Modi government as it nears completing four years in office and plans to get into election mode with just over a year remaining for the next Lok Sabha polls. The crackdown — which mandated penalties ranging from the suspension to the cancellation of the accreditation of journalists found guilty of reporting “fake news” — was proposed by the Information & Broadcasting Ministry piloted by Smriti Irani. It was disposed of by Prime Minister Narendra Modi himself. Could it be the case that the government had not factored in the furore that erupted following the I&B ministry's diktat? Unlikely. Was it an attempt at testing the waters then? One thing is clear: the speed at which the course-correction took place was unprecedented. On the face of it, many would think that the I&B ministry erred and was set right by the Prime Minister's Office. But those who cover the government know only too well the overarching control the PMO exercises on all the ministries. Simply put, to think that Irani's ministry could have come up with the diktat without keeping the PMO in the loop is being naive at best. And the Prime Minister directing that the press release regarding fake news be withdrawn and that the matter should only be addressed by the Press Council of India is nothing more than damage control. Now coming to the diktat itself. Was it really about fake news? That's the big question. Those who would have been impacted by the amended guidelines were journalists accredited with the Government of India — mostly working for the national media and covering the Central government. Does the government have enough reason to believe that these “accredited journalists” are peddling “fake news”? Or was it just an attempt to create a mechanism to muzzle some inconvenient voices — accredited ones, of course. What made the I&B directive more curious was that it proposed nothing to deal with social media — the most fertile breeding ground for fake news in today's India. Instead, it proposed something bordering on the draconian — immediate suspension of a journalist's accreditation the moment a complaint is registered and sent for inquiry to the Press Council of India or the News Broadcasters Association. As a barrage of criticism broke loose, the I&B ministry made a feeble attempt at arguing that the “fake news” cases will be determined by PCI and NBA which are not “regulated” or “operated” by the Central government. That is akin to saying the I&B ministry maintains an arm's length distance from Prasar Bharati. Off the record, in private conversations, central bureaucrats and political insiders have often underlined how the incumbent government was not a “rollback sarkar”. Let's a take a few examples from the I&B ministry itself. Pune's FTII was on the boil for months following Gajendra Chauhan's appointment to its helm, but the government did not budge. As CBFC chief, Pahlaj Nihalani not only kept raising the hackles of the Hindi film industry but was also an embarrassment to the government. But he was persisted with. Because this was not a rollback government, the government machinery argued. April 3, 2018 changed that.

Opinion: Rollback of fake news crackdown is Modi government's first, most significant retreat

ib-0

I&b, News on I&b, stories on I&b, articles on I&b, I&b stories at Wion, I&b news, I&b latest news

ib 0

Opinion: Rollback of fake news crackdown is Modi government's first, most significant retreat