Towards Transparency in OTT Regulation
Context:
- The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MoI&B) was given the power to regulate content on OTT and online platforms when the government published the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Regulations, also known as the new IT Rules 2021, two years ago.
The OTT regulation:
- The approach adopted by India can be characterised as a light-touch “co-regulation” paradigm, with industry-level “self-regulation” and a ministry-level “oversight mechanism” for the outcome. A grievance procedure and an ethics code are included in the Guidelines. For programmes classified “A” (18+) and access control measures, including parental locks, for content rated U/A 13+ or above, respectively, are necessary.
- Over-the-top platforms, or OTTs, are businesses that first use them as platforms for hosting material before going on to make and distribute their own short films, features, documentaries, and web series.
- Take Netflix, Disney+, Hulu, and Amazon Prime Video as examples.
Pursuing media literacy:
- The OTT Rules were announced in 2021, but only a small number of individuals are aware of them. According to the Rules, OTT websites and interfaces must provide access to grievance officers’ contact information as well as mechanisms for resolving complaints.
- Nonetheless, extremely low compliance rates exist. It is frequently difficult for a user to immediately identify the complaint redressal information since it is either not presented or published in a style that makes it difficult to do so. The information is occasionally missing from the OTT app UI.
- This highlights how important it is for OTT publishers to consistently provide important information about their obligations, dates for complaint redress, contact details for grievance offices, etc. The manner, substance, vocabulary, and frequency with which critical information is displayed may all be governed by the Rules. It might be necessary to launch ongoing print and online advertisements from the OTT industry associations promoting the grievance process.
- Age categorizations (such as UA 13+) and content descriptors (like “violence”) may be interpreted in the video’s respective languages (apart from English). Such provisions for the inclusion of anti-tobacco messages in motion pictures are included in the law.
- In print and electronic media promotions and marketing for OTT material, the Rules may also include precise guidelines for how to make a movie’s classification or rating stand out and be simple to understand.
Clarity is necessary:
- The real availability and efficacy of access controls, age verification systems, and the disclosure of complaint information by each OTT platform may be audited periodically by an impartial authority.
- The Rules oblige publishers and self-regulatory organisations to divulge specifics of complaints; however, the reporting formats only keep track of the overall number of complaints that were received and dealt with. Instead, the whole content of any complaints that OTT providers and self-regulatory organisations receive, along with any decisions that are taken in response, may be made public.
- The Ministry should consider developing a particular website that acts as a hub for all relevant regulations, content standards, advisories, and contact details for appeals and complaints, among other things. The specifics of complaints and redressal rulings can be uploaded by OTT providers and appellate/self-regulatory organisations so that the general public and government officials can view them. This approach will increase transparency.
- According to the current Regulations, the Inter-Departmental Committee (IDC), which is composed of officers nominated by several Central government ministries and subject matter experts, is the third and last tier. The way the system is set up, even when IDC suggests a course of action for OTT content violations, the Secretary of the Ministry retains the right to make the final call.
- The Supreme Court and High Courts have emphasised the need for a formal entity to be established to oversee broadcast content. The IDC’s membership may be increased, made more representative, and provided tenure security until such a legislative regulator for the media is established.
- There is no chance for an apology, warning, or reprimand to be revealed or posted on the platform or website. This might be included in the Rules. Additionally, bad actors could face financial penalties. In the current era of media convergence, it is past time to establish a set of standards for content, categorization, age ratings, infractions, etc. so that the content on all platforms is governed similarly.
Conclusion:
- The goal of India’s OTT regulatory framework is to successfully combine self-regulation with support from the government. This is consistent with the global trend. According to the I&B Ministry, India’s OTT regulations were anticipated to “raise India’s stature at a worldwide level.”
