The Supreme Court Wednesday criticised the manner in which television channels conduct debates, observing that a methodology should be laid down for such discussions to ensure that they do not fuel hate speech. “If the anchor is going to take a lion’s share of the time of the debate, if the question of the anchor is so longish and time given to the person responding is short and even in that short period, all the time he is run down, made some kind of a rogue, is not fair. You have to be fair to everyone. It all has to be done fairly,” said Justice Joseph, emphasising that a system should be put in place so that there is “real freedom of the press” as well as that of the “listener” so that the latter does not go astray. https://theprint.in/judiciary/govt-a-mute-witness-to-hate-speech-problem-says-sc-suggests-vishaka-like-code-for-tv-debates/1137477/ SC Says Regulatory Mechanism Needed to Curb Hate Speech on TV, Social Media
"Where is our nation headed? If it is hate speech on which we are feeding on, where is our nation headed?" asked Justice K.M. Joseph. https://thewire.in/law/supreme-court-regulatory-mechanism-curb-hate-speech-tv-social-media
When counsel for the National Broadcasting Association (NBA) informed the bench that it had a system to penalise violators, the judges remarked: “But the problem still persists. You may have given 4,000 orders, but what is the effect of such orders?”
The court added that political parties will “come and go”, but institutions like the media are there to stay. “Without a totally free press, no nation can go forward. Therefore, we should have true freedom for the press,” the court remarked.
Justice K. M. Joseph during the hearing made an observation regarding the Television Channels - "The role of the anchor is very important. Hate speech either it takes place in the mainstream television or it takes place in the social media. Social Media is largely unregulated….As far as mainstream television channel is concerned, we still hold sway, there the role of anchor is very critical because the moment you see somebody going into hate speech, it's the duty of the anchor to immediately see that he doesn't allow that person to say anything further. Unfortunately, many a times somebody wants to say something he is muted, person is not given proper time, he is not even treated courteously"
"Freedom of expression of the press, we don't have it separately unlike the US….there should be free debate no doubt about it but, you should also know where to draw the line because there is a huge influence particularly with the visual media….they produce a very serious effect on your brain. The freedom is for the listener. The freedom of speech is actually for the benefit of the listener. How would the listener ever make up his mind after listening to a debate where it is just a babble of voice, you cannot even make out what is happening", he added
Senior Advocate Sanjay Hegde stated that, "the industry is unregulated and there are no sanctions" to which Ashwini Upadhyay replied, "Until hate speech is defined this will go on."
for the Judges comment on gOVT BEING A MUTE WITNESS see https://www.emeets.lnwr.in/2969
Prime Time With Ravish Kumar | नफरती Debate को लेकर चैनलों को कब तक पड़ती रहेगी डांट https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GqwDCOT372Y
Sep 21, 2022 Prime Time With Ravish Kumar - September 21, 2022: गोदी मीडिया ने हिन्दू मुस्लिम डिबेट के ज़रिए न सिर्फ समाज में ज़हर फैलाया है बल्कि राजनीति और पत्रकारिता दोनों के आंगन को गंदा और भद्दा कर दिया है. आज पहला मौका नहीं है जब सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने हिन्दू मुस्लिम नफरती डिबेट पर सख्त टिप्पणी की है.
Supreme Court holds ‘TV debates’ responsible for rising hate speech in India | Oneindia News *News Sep 22, 2022 The Supreme Court of India on Wednesday said that the visual media is the chief medium of hate speech in the country. It also questioned the central government as to why it was just a mute witness in the whole situation.