The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Communications and Information Technology’s 22nd Report on curbing fake news was tabled in Lok Sabha on December 2. The committee had published the report in October, and MediaNama covered its key recommendations at the time. Its tabling now places it formally on the parliamentary record and allows the government to consider the recommendations for future amendments to media regulations, accreditation rules, and platform due diligence requirements.
Key recommendations in the tabled fake news curbing report
The report calls for a clear, legally backed definition of fake news and asks the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB) to incorporate this definition into the regulatory frameworks for print, broadcast, and digital media. Moreover, it recommends imposing stronger penalties for misinformation, including cancelling the accreditation of journalists or creators found guilty of creating or spreading fake news.
It also advises every news organisation to establish mandatory fact-checking systems and appoint internal ombudsmen. Furthermore, the committee stresses the need for closer coordination between the MIB and the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY), particularly in areas where digital and broadcast regulations overlap.
Additionally, the report calls for a review of safe harbour protections under Section 79 of the Information Technology (IT) Act. It says platform design and algorithmic amplification can make false or sensational content more visible than verified information, which therefore raises questions about accountability. The committee suggests that safe harbour may need re-examination in cases where intermediaries actively amplify misinformation.
Notably, the report also examines how AI-generated misinformation and cross-border content accelerate the spread of false information. It highlights the need for nationwide media literacy programmes, collaboration with independent fact-checking bodies, and a unified grievance mechanism for tracking complaints relating to misinformation.
Stakeholder submissions included in the report
The report’s stakeholder submissions highlight deep disagreement on how fake news should be defined, how much responsibility intermediaries should bear, and what safeguards are necessary across India’s fragmented media ecosystem. Moreover, several submissions raise broader concerns about overreach, due process, and the limits of government-led interventions.
How stakeholders say fake news should be defined
Several organisations urged the committee to adopt a narrow, intent-based definition that does not sweep up satire, commentary, or reporting errors. The Editors Guild of India (EGI) said fake news should mean “deliberately fabricated or manipulated content disseminated with the intent to mislead or harm”.
Moreover, the News Broadcasters and Digital Association (NBDA) and Network-18 said there is…
Source link
Disclaimer
We strive to uphold the highest ethical standards in all of our reporting and coverage. We blogs.grocliq.com want to be transparent with our readers about any potential conflicts of interest that may arise in our work. It’s possible that some of the investors we feature may have connections to other businesses, including competitors or companies we write about. However, we want to assure our readers that this will not have any impact on the integrity or impartiality of our reporting. We are committed to delivering accurate, unbiased news and information to our audience, and we will continue to uphold our ethics and principles in all of our work. Thank you for your trust and support.
Website Upgradation is going on for any glitch kindly connect at [email protected]
