Do you remember watching Game of Thrones on Indian TV? Not Hotstar, but on TV? If so, you will remember how each episode was condensed to about 60 or 70% of its actual length. Large bits were considered ‘unsuitable’ for our tender sensibilities and edited out. Viewers were left wondering why the narrative jumped the way it did. You may also remember how James Bond's kissing scene in a movie was deemed too long and cut down to a more ‘sanskari’ length. Now there is the real apprehension that OTT content will also be censored.
Series such as Suitable Boy, Tandav and others have been in the eye of a storm; slammed on social media for hurting ‘religious sentiments’. The claim about ‘hurting religious sentiments’ is nothing new. However, what is new is that the makers of the series had FIRs filed against them and courts that denied anticipatory bail. The prosecution against the makers has not been quashed even after the ‘offending’ scenes were deleted and an unconditional apology tendered.
In the case of streaming content, there are many who feel that adult content should be moderated and/or removed. The government certainly feels that there ought to be more curbs in place, ergo the Draft IT (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021. According to these new rules, OTT platforms will now have to set up a three-rung system for addressing ‘grievance’ or complaints. There will be a code of ethics that require classification based not only on age but on various other aspects such as theme, tone, impact etc.
The worrying thing is that even online news will come under the purview of these rules, so independent journalism could well be surveilled and censored. As of now the actual mechanisms for enforcement are unclear. And with the Information & Technology Act, 2000 already in place for regulating adult content, it is unclear as to the actual need for these additional rules except to exercise greater control.
There is one view that says these rules will not make much of a difference. There are also those who feel that some sort of control and oversight is necessary. But will these rules not negatively impact the quality, variety and creativity of content? Already, content creators are self-censoring their content with one eye on a possible backlash from some or other group that claims to take offence. Offence is a very subjective term – what offends me may not necessarily offend another and vice versa. So who will decide what offence is and what is not? Can we imagine a series such as House of Cards being made in India and the creators/actors being unscathed by the backlash that would most certainly ensue? The creator would have to be extremely courageous to do so – or do I mean foolhardy.
The arguments against censorship itself are many – firstly it is a sign of a paternalistic state that infantilises its citizenry and treats them as incapable of making their own choices. There is also the fear that any content deemed to be critical /questioning of the government may be targeted on some or other pretext. This could dilute content quality as creators would play safe and refrain from any content that engages meaningfully with important political or social issues. On the other hand, propagandist content or material that shows the government in a favourable light may be given the go-ahead. This is not only a threat to the freedom of expression guaranteed to us by the constitution, but it is also going to stifle originality and innovation.
And then what about foreign content? Do we really want to watch just 35 minutes of 50-minute long episodes from a series deemed too ‘adult’ for Indian adults to view? In the alternative do we want that our access to quality international content is altogether curtailed? Do we want authoritarian oversight and arbitrary circumscribing of our choices?
Remember, these decisions could be based upon the rabble-rousers in society – those who have the highest nuisance value. Or it could be staid government officials who may make arbitrary decisions about what is OK for you and me to watch based on their own personal yardstick. Between these, our preferences and rights could end up being completely highjacked. Right now, we opt for OTT content because of quality far superior to what is dished out by our daily soaps and because we can access a variety of international content. If we are to be denied this, there will be far more at stake than our entertainment. Our very fundamental rights as citizens could come under threat.
Do you have something interesting you would like to share? Write to us at [email protected]
