"If you don't like them, don't watch them": Supreme Court dismisses PILs for guidelines to regulate TV news channels

The Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to entertain two petitions seeking guidelines for regulation of television news channels and an independent board or media tribunal for grievance redressal related to content on such channels..A Bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Sanjay Karol said that viewers were free to not watch such channels, and that the freedom of speech and expression of those in the industry would have be to kept in mind."Who compels you to watch all these channels? If you do not like them, then do not watch them. When some wrong thing is shown, it is also about perception. Is there not freedom of expression? Even if we say no media trials, how can we stop things on the internet and all? How can we grant such prayers? Who takes it seriously, tell us? There is freedom not to press the TV button," Justice Oka remarked.He added that those who are offended by content on TV have legal remedies available."In a lighter vein, what all is said about judges on social media, Twitter; we do not take it seriously. Who will lay down guidelines? Tell your clients not to watch these news channels, and do something better with their time.".The top court was hearing two public interest litigation (PILs), one filed by Delhi-based lawyer Reepak Kansal. He sought the formation of an independent regulatory authority for news broadcasters to address “sensational reporting”.As per the Economic Times, Kansal alleged that scandalous coverage of critical issues “just for the sake of viewership and notoriety” often results in “tarnishing” of the image of an individual, a community, or a religious or political organisation.The charged level of content on these channels has resulted in violence among the public, the petitioner alleged. Particularly, he prayed that the top court restrict the “assassination of dignity” of individuals, communities, religious saints and religious and political organisations by these broadcasting channels in the name of “freedom of press”..The other PIL, filed by filmmaker Nilesh Navalakha and activist Nitin Memane, prayed that a 'media tribunal' be constituted to hear and expeditiously adjudicate complaints against media networks and television channels.That plea claimed that the Union Ministry for Information and Broadcasting had totally failed in the discharge of its duties and in the enforcement of the Programme Code to which television channels are expected to adhere.The petitioners submitted that self-regulation of such channels cannot be the answer.The top court had issued notice in that matter in January 2021. Notice in the lead petition was issued in August 2021..While dismissing the lead plea, the Bench today noted that the prayers were too wide, and that a committee consisting of a retired judge was already in place.For the plea concerning the formation of a media tribunal, the Bench gave liberty to the counsel to move the jurisdictional High Court and also permitted him to file representations."Why can't you go to the High Court, why [Article] 32 petition? Why should every matter be dealt with by the Supreme Court? Do you think the High Courts are incompetent to hear these matters? Do not forget we are all products of the High Courts," Justice Oka remarked..A different bench of the top court had taken a very dim view of the functioning of mainstream television news channels in the country. A Bench led by Justice (retired) KM Joseph had in September stated that they often give space for hate speech and then escape without any sanctions.The Court earlier this flagged the fact that television channels in India are creating divisions in the society since such channels are driven by agenda and compete to sensationalise news..Hate speech on TV channels not dealt with firmly: Supreme Court.[Read order]