NBSA directs Republic TV to air unconditional apology

News Broadcasters Standards Authority (NBSA) has directed English news channel Republic TV to issue an unconditional apology on its channel for the use of strong language in an email exchange with the TV news watchdog.

Republic TV will have to air the text (static) on full screen in large font size with a clearly audible voice-over (in slow speed). The NBSA has asked Republic TV to air the following text as an apology on 14th October at 10 pm.

The text says: “Republic TV tenders an unconditional apology for the use of the language in the email dated 10.7.2019 which carried the words “carries no merit to warrant such intense pseudo judicial oversight”, with regard to NBSA’s decision dated 1.5.2019 at the time when it was called for a hearing on 10.7.2019 in respect of the complaint with regard to a programme titled “Congress Bharat Mata Claim” aired by Republic TV on 12.3.2019 at 10 pm. We would like to state that it was never our intention to undermine the authority of the NBSA in any manner. We have the highest regard for the NBSA, its Chairperson and Members. Kindly accept this unconditional apology for closure of the same.”

The NBSA has also directed the broadcaster to submit a CD containing the telecast with particulars of the date and time of the telecast, within one week of telecast, as proof of compliance. After such a CD is submitted by the broadcaster, the matter will be closed.

The case involves complaint filed by one Sharad Shah against the manner in which Republic TV anchor conducted a debate show titled ‘The Debate 2 – #The Congress Bharatmata Claim’. The complainant escalated the complaint to NBSA on 22.3.2019 and 10.4.2019 as the complainant did not receive a reply to his complaint dated 13.3.2019.

The complainant alleged that in the telecast ‘The Debate 2 – #The Congress Bharatmata Claim’, the anchor with ample support of RSS “ideologues” and BJP Spokesperson pilloried Karim Baig, Muslim participant in the debate, to say ‘Bharatmata Ki Jai’ implying that he was not a patriot if he did not say that on the program.

The complainant contended that such debates cannot be used for inquisition and that the program clearly. violated the following Guidelines Covering Reportage of News Broadcasters Association 9. Racial & Religious Harmony; 9.1 Racial and religious stereotyping should be avoided and 9.2 Caution should be exercised in reporting content which denigrates or is likely to offend the sensitivities of any racial or religious group or that may create religious intolerance or disharmony.

The broadcaster in its reply dated 27.3.2019 to the complainant stated that ‘Bharat Mata Ki Jai’ is a patriotic slogan which is chanted in India since time immemorial; and that it means that we are all equal irrespective of caste, creed, religion and language and are children of this country; that this chant was used during the freedom struggle against the British empire and that even today the slogan is used often by the Indian Army.

The broadcaster also stated that each anchor and news presenter have his/her own unique way of presenting news, stories or of hosting debates; and that in all debates there will always be people representing different views and the aim of the debate is to address the issues at hand and have a constructive dialogue.

On receipt of the response from the broadcaster, the complainant stated that his objection is only to the anchor insisting on one of the participants chanting a particular slogan and that it was no way to have or conduct a constructive dialogue. The reply does not adequately address his concern.

NBSA considered the complaint, response of the broadcaster and viewed the broadcast. NBSA was of the prima facie view that the anchor browbeating, hectoring and insisting that a panelist in the programme should say or repeat something stated by the anchor violated the principles of the Code of Ethics relating to “Impartiality & Objectivity in reporting” and “Neutrality”.

NBSA was also of the view that the anchor insisting that a panelist should say something particular in a programme, challenged/deprived the panelist’s right to freedom of speech and expression guaranteed by the Constitution of India to all citizens. NBSA therefore, decided to call both parties for a hearing at the next meeting of the NBSA, which was intimated vide letter dated 14.6.2019. NBSA also decided to convey to the broadcaster that in case it desired to submit any further documents in its defence, it may do so within seven days of receipt of the communication.

The NBSA noted that the broadcaster responded to the email dated 14.6.2019 and sent another email on the day of the hearing i.e. 10.7.2019 at 11:26 stating that it will not be present for this hearing as it deems “this as a scurrilous complaint tendered by a serial complainant on a matter which carries no merit to warrant such intense pseudo-judicial oversight”.

In its order, the NBSA strongly objected to the language used in the mail which it said shows scant regard to the NBSA. It further stated that the broadcaster is a member of the NBA and being its member, it is the bounden duty of the broadcaster to abide by regulations framed by the NBA. It is the NBA which has created NBSA as an autonomous independent body.

In another complain filed by the same complainant concerning the same programme, the NBSA decided that Republic TV be warned to be careful in respect of panel discussions held in future in order that it did not violate the principles of the Code of Ethics relating to “Impartiality & Objectivity in reporting” and “Neutrality”.

It also stated that the broadcaster should be cautious while holding panel discussions, make sure that no panelist is browbeaten and ensure that the panelist is given the freedom to voice his/her views.

NBSA also decided that the video of the said programme, if hosted, on the website of Republic TV or any other links should be removed immediately and this fact should be confirmed to NBSA in writing within seven days. NBSA decided to close the complaint with the above observations and inform the broadcaster and the complainant accordingly.

In its third order, the NBSA considered Ishwar Singh’s complaint against Aaj Tak.

The complainant alleged that on 23rd March 2019 at around 9.12 pm, while reporting about an incident in Gurugram, Haryana (in which, following a cricket match dispute, the family members of one group of people were beaten up with sticks by the other group), the correspondents of Aaj Tak blamed ‘Hindutva’ for this incident without any rhyme or reason.

The complainant also alleged that the channel’s correspondents used the word ‘Hindutva’ nearly a dozen times in an insulting and derogatory way, brazenly holding ‘Hindutva’ responsible for this act.

The broadcaster submitted that the programme ‘Khabardar’ aired on 23.3.2019, in fact, criticised the concept of ‘Hindutva’ which is a completely different concept from Hinduism. The term `Hindutva’ means a political movement to establish a Hindu state. The program did not disparage Hinduism at all.

It further stated that the term ‘Hindutva’ which was referred to, was used to distinguish Hinduism and Hindutva and to point out, how people in the name of ‘Hindutva’ were misusing their right and liberty. The programme also condemned such hooliganism. Furthermore, the said programme showed how the perpetrators of the violence shouted the slogan ‘Go to Pakistan’.

It also contended that the gory visuals of violence were blurred and the reporting was factual. The broadcaster clarified that its intention was not to hurt any person’s religious sentiments. The programme was telecast to inform the public and in public interest. The. broadcaster exercised its right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1) (a) of the Constitution.

After going through the complaints, the response of the broadcaster and having heard the arguments on behalf of the broadcaster, NBSA said it was satisfied with the explanation and justification put forth by the broadcaster. There was no violation of NBSA’s guidelines and the matter was closed. NBSA decided to close the complaint with the above observations and inform the broadcaster and the complainants accordingly.