Author: Hitesh (Chandigarh University)
Linkedin : https://www.linkedin.com/in/hitesh-dixit-b01604349?utm_source=share&utm_campaign=share_via&utm_content=profile&utm_medium=android_app
Abstract
The news is a seriously rely on availability of truth. It is a 4th pillar of democracy which have an important role in a country and establishing the democracy. News have a responsibility to give the information fair and neutral. But the freedom of news are at risk because their money and politics both are arrived. They both are having their own advantages. Political parties provide the fund to the news maker for mislead and fake news programs. That program during election period when some political leader provide their advertisement for filling the vote bank. They also provide support for their fake propaganda. Paid new is publishing the biased or false new for parties’ benefits, in exchange of consideration. Political parties or candidate purchase the news content during the election. They receive compliments that parties who paid them. That is a corrupt party but news of journalism is not cover that news. In 2009, in report that time paid media start business. They exchange of good and shoe that political candidate as a good man or party. The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) has alerted the Press Council of India to the existence of paid news in the form of “private treaties” between corporate entities and media outlets. A private treaty is an agreement between a media company and another non-media company whereby the latter gives up a portion of the company’s shares to the former in exchange for favorable press coverage and advertising space. Additionally, it violates people’s and news organizations’ rights. People rely on the media for faith. Newspapers and television stations are frequently funded by political parties to promote and broadcast news that is biased or creates false information. The work produced by the paid media is poisonous.
To the point
Paid media is a mala fide practice where the political parties, candidate compansiate the media for favorable coverage and manipulate the information to fake new and biased information. This subversive both violation of journalism ethics and distort legal field during election, going through the free and fair election under article 324 Indian of constitution and article 14 (principle of equality). That object is manipulate the people perception and change electoral outcome. Abuse of government propaganda budgets to advertise incumbent governments, unrestricted use of social media outlets, and absence of electoral funding process transparency are responsible for the intensification of media-political nexus.
The growing influence of digital media and algorithmic content streaming, new issues of misinformation, astroturfing, and targeted propaganda have developed.
To ensure electoral integrity and credibility of the media, India needs to implement unequivocal and enforceable legislation that:
1. Declare paid news and political propaganda as certain offenses under the Representation of the People Act, 1951.
2. Enforce explicit marking and disclosure requirements for all politically funded media outputs.
3. Mandate reporting of media election expenditure by parties and candidates on a mandatory basis.
4. Enact severe legal consequences including fines, disqualification, or revocation of licenses for default.
5. Grant legal authority to statutory regulators to oversee and penalize offenses.
6. Hold digital platforms responsible for transparency in political ads and algorithmic prejudice.
Legal jargon use
• Article 19(1)(a): Freedom of Expression and Speech
This clause safeguards the right of all citizens to express and receive opinions freely. When paid news is disguised as true journalism, it interferes with this right by providing biased or misleading information.
• Article 324: Election Commission Powers
It authorizes the ECI to hold free elections. Stealth political campaigning and media prejudice deny the Commission the opportunity to provide a level playing field.
• Article 14 – Right to Equality
Paid news benefits rich political actors at the expense of others and refuses them an equal opportunity, which is against the right to equality under the Constitution.
• Representation of the People Act, 1951
• Section 77: Mandates all applicants to report their campaign expenditures. Leaving out paid news expenses is a judicial offence.
– Section 123(4): Spreading untrue statements about a competitor candidate’s personality is declared a corrupt electoral practice.
– Section 10A: Empowers the ECI to disqualify candidates who fail to properly declare their expenses.
• Press Council of India Act, 1978
This act establishes the PCI to maintain journalistic integrity, but the Council’s suggestions are not legally enforceable, restricting its powers.
• Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995
This Act regulates cable television content, including a political advertisement code. The violations take place when the parties broadcast news slots as promotional items without tagging.
• IT Rules 2021
These rules are made applicable to digital publishers and online media, with the requirement that they announce paid political content and adhere to a grievance redressal process.
The Proof
Various authentic sources and documented facts establish the fact and harmful effect of paid news in Indian elections:
• Election Commission of India (ECI) findings: The ECI has consistently pointed out the problem of paid news in several elections. For instance, in the 2014 Lok Sabha elections, the Commission found more than 900 cases of paid news, according to a report. In every case, candidates were suspected of releasing positive content that was presented as news while leaving out corresponding expenses from their respective accounts.
• Press Council of India (PCI) Reports: The PCI, the statutory regulator of media ethics, recognized that paid news is a large-scale issue. In a comprehensive 2010 report, it labeled the practice as a threat to the independence of the press as well as the purity of electoral democracy. The Council highlighted that the practice alters the content of the news and deceives voters.
• Parliamentary Standing Committee on Information Technology Report (2013): The Committee was seriously concerned about the lines getting blurred between news and advertisement. It suggested modifying the Representation of the People Act to add paid news as an explicit cognizable offense and recommended strict supervision mechanisms for media practices related to elections.
• Civil Society Interventions and RTI Exposés: A number of civil society organizations and journalists have exposed cases of paid news using investigative journalism and Right to Information (RTI) queries. Through these measures, systematic arrangements between political players and media houses designed to sway voter perception through unannounced sponsorships have been unearthed.
• Law Commission of India’s 255th Report (2015): This report recognized the urgency of addressing paid news and political advertising. The Commission proposed that paid news be treated as an electoral offense under the RPA and recommended enhanced transparency norms for media funding and political advertisements.
Case Laws
1. Ashok Chavan v. Madhav Kinhalkar & Ors. (2014)
Facts: Former Maharashtra Chief Minister Ashok Chavan was accused of not disclosing paid news expenses incurred during his 2009 Assembly election campaign.
Legal Issue: Whether the non-disclosure of the said expenses amounted to an offense under Section 77 of the Representation of the People Act.
Observation: The Election Commission brought proceedings under Section 10A. Although the case was subsequently quashed, it threw light on the procedural shortcomings in provinpg paid news.
Impact: The case focused national attention on the unreported expenses of the media and the necessity for legislative clarity.
2. Union of India v. Association for Democratic Reforms (2002)
Legal Principle: Voters have a constitutional right under Article 19(1)(a) to be informed about the background of candidates who are in the running for elections.
Relevance: Upgrades the principle that hidden paid-for content erodes voter rights and information integrity.
3. Common Cause v. Union of India (2015)
Facts: PIL was filed accusing misuse of taxpayers’ money on government advertisements promoting political leaders.
Court’s Guidance: The Supreme Court provided guidance to government advertising and held that taxpayer funds cannot be utilized for political benefit.
Relevance: Though not directly paid news, the ruling dealt with related issues of political content being disseminated in biased media.
4. Tehseen S. Poonawalla v. Union of India (2018)
Background: The Court reflected on the role of the media in checking fake news and hate speech.
Significance: The decision emphasized that the media must act ethically and avoid content that distorts public order or misinforms.
Conclusion
The so-called phenomenon of paid news and political propaganda touches at the very core of democratic value by undermining the right to free and informed choice in elections. It not only mislead the voter but also undermine the constitutional values of equality, transparency and accountability. The emerging sophistication of political communication – particularly through digital and social media – render the onerous more urgent and harder to regulate through outdates or fragmented provisions of law.
Notwithstanding the availability of broad framework like representation of public Act, Press Council of India guideline, and the IT Rules, there is an urgent necessity for enforceable and well-defined statutory mechanism specifically criminalize undisclosed paid content in election. Regulatory agency like the Election Commission of India needs to be empower with stronger legal tools and investigation mechanism to identify and penalize the offender. Likewise, there needs to be more accountability placed upon media house and internet websites so as not to act as conduit of convert political advertising. In addition, public awareness and media literacy of voter must be encouraged to counter the power of deceptive narrative. Judicial rulings have established a robust platform of openness and impartiality in polling communication, yet it is responsibility of the legislature to continue that platform with aim the legislation.
FAQS
Q1. What is ‘paid news’ and how does it differ from political advertising?
Answer: Paid news is news-type material that is released or aired in exchange for compensation but presented like ordinary editorial content without notice. Political advertising, however, is explicit and identified as such. Paid news deceives the public with the line between objective reporting and pitch material blurred, while political advertising is usually distinguishable by disclaimers or sponsorship identifiers.
Q2. Is paid news a punishable offense as per Indian law at present?
Answer: Indian criminal law does not have any specific provision to prosecute paid news as a separate crime. Nevertheless, if the candidate does not mention such expenditure, it can attract punishment under Section 10A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, for submitting false election expenditure returns. Such conduct can be condemned by the Press Council of India, but it has no penal powers.
Q3. In what way is paid news a violation of constitutional provisions?
Answer: Paid news violates Article 19(1)(a), which promises the freedom of speech and expression, encompassing the right to receive truthful information. It also violates the directive of Article 324, which confers the Election Commission with the duty of holding free and fair elections. It also promotes inequality in political competition, which violates Article 14.
Q4. What is the role of the Election Commission of India in controlling paid news?
Answer: The Election Commission keeps an eye on election day media content and has the authority to serve notices on candidates accused of indulging in paid news strategies. It may order such candidates to make these expenditures as part of their election expenses and advise disqualification under Section 10A of the RPA. Its authority is, however, administrative and not judicial.
Q5. Are there any landmark judicial pronouncements on paid news?
Answer: Yes, instances such as Ashok Chavan v. Madhav Kinhalkar and Common Cause v. Union of India have touched upon similar issues. The courts have recognized the gravity of paid news but also noted that there has to be more explicit legislative provision. The judiciary in general has favored transparency and voting rights, leaving the door open for future legal changes.
Q6. What reforms must be made to genuinely address the phenomenon of paid news?
Answer: Reforms must encompass:
• A legal definition of paid news and political propaganda
• Criminalisation of undisclosed paid content
• Spending disclosure requirements on a mandatory basis
• Media house accountability measures
• Tighter enforcement powers for bodies like the PCI and ECI
• Algorithmic transparency by digital platforms
Q7. How can voters safeguard themselves against paid news influence?
Answer: The electorate should critically analyze the origin of information, search for disclaimers, check facts from more than one credible source, and be wary of news that largely supports one political party. Encouraging media literacy and awareness drives can enable the voter to recognize and reject paid or biased content.
