• UGI USER
  • Nov 16, 2023
  • 9 Likes
  • 0 Comments

Examine the challenges of regulating Over-the-Top (OTT) platforms in India. Assess the balance between freedom of expression and the need for content regulation in the digital era. Discuss. (250 words)

 

Structure of Answer

 Introduction

  • Briefly define OTT platforms and concerns surrounding regulations.

 

Body

  • Mention Challenges of Regulating OTT Platforms in India with examples
  • Suggest measures for Balancing Freedom of Expression and Content Regulation with global best practices.

Conclusion

  • Mention Regulating OTT platforms in India demands a forward-looking approach that safeguards user interests.

Answer –

 

OTT platforms refer to streaming services delivered directly to viewers via the Internet, such as Netflix, Hotstar, Amazon Prime Video, etc. These services operate independently of traditional cable broadcasts. This evolution, while enhancing accessibility, introduces challenges in regulating content, striking a balance between freedom of expression and safeguarding against objectionable material.

Source: BCG Report

Challenges of Regulating OTT Platforms in India

  • Jurisdictional Complexities: The involvement of multiple stakeholders across various jurisdictions, including content creators, platforms, and government agencies, contributes to a complex regulatory landscape. Legal intricacies arise when addressing content issues on platforms with servers located outside India, such as Netflix or Amazon Prime.
  • Diversity and Classification Complexity: The extensive diversity in content genres, languages, and creative expressions complicates the establishment of clear classification guidelines. Example web series Tandav, accused of promoting communal disharmony.
  • Dynamic Technological Environment: The rapid evolution of technology in the digital era often outpaces regulatory adaptations. Emerging formats, such as virtual reality and augmented reality content, pose regulatory challenges due to their novelty and potential impact.
  • Intermediary Status and Accountability Dilemma: OTT platforms’ intermediary status raises questions about their accountability for hosted content. Striking a balance between their role as facilitators for content creators and the need for accountability, especially for harmful or illegal content, remains a challenge.
  • Media Freedom Concerns:  Regulation efforts encounter resistance due to concerns about potential curtailment of media freedom. Critics fear that excessive regulation may impede free speech and expression, particularly within the creative content domain.
  • Content Volume and Accessibility Challenges: The vast quantity of on-demand content on OTT platforms poses a monitoring and regulatory challenge. The global accessibility of these platforms adds complexity to the regulation process, transcending geographical boundaries.
  • User Privacy Challenges: Managing data privacy issues arising from user profiling and targeted content recommendations is crucial. Instances where the handling of user data by OTT platforms raised privacy concerns necessitate regulatory scrutiny to ensure user protection.

Balancing Freedom of Expression and Content Regulation

  •  User-Friendly Age-Classification Systems: Adoption of standardised and user-friendly age classification systems for content. Example: Australia’s National Classification Scheme uses clear age categories, aiding parents and users in making informed viewing choices.
  •  Multi-Stakeholder Involvement: Involvement of various stakeholders, including industry, civil society, and regulators in policy formulation. Example: European Union’s Audiovisual Media Services Directive incorporates inputs from diverse stakeholders to shape regulatory frameworks.
  •  Industry-Led Self-Regulation: Emphasise industry-led self-regulatory bodies to set content standards. Example: The UK’s “British Board of Film Classification (BBFC)” collaborates with platforms for age-appropriate content categorization, balancing industry autonomy and public interests.
  • Adaptive Regulation Framework: Develop flexible regulatory frameworks that adapt to evolving technologies and societal norms. Example: Singapore’s “Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA)” employs a dynamic regulatory approach, adapting guidelines to technological advancements and societal changes.
  • Transparent Content Guidelines:  Establish clear and comprehensive content guidelines that articulate what is permissible, providing a transparent framework. Example: Platforms can adopt a tiered rating system like the one used by Motion Picture Association in the U.S., informing users about the nature of the content.
  • Ombudsman or Dispute Resolution Mechanism:  Establish an independent body or ombudsman to address user complaints and resolve disputes. Example: Australia’s Online Safety Act includes provisions for the eSafety Commissioner to facilitate dispute resolution.

Regulating OTT platforms in India demands a forward-looking approach that safeguards user interests, preserves cultural values, and respects the dynamic nature of digital content creation. Balancing this with the Constitutional Right to free expression (Article 19) requires an ongoing dialogue between stakeholders to evolve robust regulatory frameworks.

 

Source: https://www.communicationstoday.co.in/regulation-of-ott-platforms-in-india/