 |
|
The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB) has taken decisive action against 25 over-the-top (OTT) platforms, issuing a ban on their operations within India due to the dissemination of content deemed obscene, vulgar, and, in some instances, pornographic. This move underscores the government's commitment to upholding societal standards of decency and legality, particularly in the digital realm where content is readily accessible to a wide audience, including vulnerable demographics. The platforms targeted in this crackdown include prominent names like ULLU and ALTT, along with lesser-known entities such as Big Shots App, Desiflix, Boomex, NeonX VIP, Navarasa Lite, Gulab App, Kangan App, Bull App, ShowHit, Jalva App, Wow Entertainment, Look Entertainment, Hitprime, Fugi, Feneo, ShowX, Sol Talkies, Adda TV, HotX VIP, Hulchul App, MoodX, Triflicks, and Mojflix. This extensive list demonstrates the breadth of the government's concern and its determination to address the proliferation of objectionable material across various online platforms. The rationale behind the ban is rooted in the violation of several provisions of Indian law, particularly those pertaining to obscenity and the portrayal of explicit sexual content. According to sources within the Broadcasting Ministry, the content hosted on these platforms was characterized by lengthy sequences of nudity, explicit visuals, and a general lack of thematic depth or social relevance. The ministry's statement emphasized the absence of meaningful storylines, themes, or messages within a social context, suggesting that the primary objective of the content was to exploit and cater to base instincts rather than to engage in thoughtful or artistic expression. Furthermore, concerns were raised regarding the depiction of inappropriate sexual situations involving family relationships, which were deemed to be particularly egregious and detrimental to societal values. These depictions were seen as further aggravating concerns over legality and decency, prompting the government to take decisive action to protect the public from exposure to such harmful content. The government's decision to ban these OTT platforms was not taken lightly and followed a series of communications and warnings issued to the platforms over an extended period. In September 2024, all 25 platforms received official warnings regarding their content, and prior to this, in February 2025, the Ministry issued an advisory urging OTT platforms to comply with India's obscenity laws and the Code of Ethics prescribed under the IT Rules, 2021. Despite these warnings and advisories, the platforms allegedly continued to host and stream objectionable content, demonstrating a disregard for the government's concerns and a lack of commitment to self-regulation. The case of the series 'House Arrest' hosted on the Ullu platform serves as a notable example of the government's intervention in addressing objectionable content. The series was taken down in May following the Ministry's intervention, highlighting the government's willingness to take direct action to remove content that violates Indian law and societal standards. However, the government alleges that certain platforms have continued their operations by creating new domains even after previous blocking orders, indicating a deliberate attempt to circumvent the government's efforts to regulate online content. Five such platforms reportedly resumed publishing similar content after being blocked in March 2024, demonstrating the challenges faced by the government in effectively enforcing its regulations and preventing the proliferation of objectionable material online.
The latest action taken by the MIB was the culmination of collaborative efforts involving various government bodies and industry stakeholders. The decision was made in consultation with the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), Ministry of Women and Child Development (MWCD), Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY), the Department of Legal Affairs (DoLA), industry associations FICCI and CII, and subject experts in the fields of women and child rights. This collaborative approach underscores the government's commitment to addressing the issue of objectionable content in a comprehensive and multi-faceted manner, taking into account the perspectives of various stakeholders and ensuring that the ban is implemented in a responsible and effective manner. The involvement of the Ministry of Home Affairs highlights the security implications of objectionable content, particularly in relation to the potential for radicalization and the incitement of violence. The Ministry of Women and Child Development's involvement underscores the government's concern for the protection of vulnerable demographics, particularly women and children, from exposure to harmful and exploitative content. The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology's involvement highlights the technological aspects of regulating online content, including the development of tools and mechanisms to detect and remove objectionable material. The Department of Legal Affairs' involvement ensures that the ban is legally sound and complies with all relevant laws and regulations. The involvement of industry associations FICCI and CII demonstrates the government's commitment to working with the industry to promote self-regulation and responsible content creation. The involvement of subject experts in the fields of women and child rights ensures that the ban is informed by expert knowledge and best practices in protecting vulnerable demographics. The Digital Publisher Content Grievances Council (DPCGC), a self-regulatory body headed by a former Supreme Court judge, played a significant role in assessing the content on these platforms. The DPCGC found that content edited on ALTT was "totally distasteful and bizarre," with sex and nudity being shown without any contextual justification. This finding further reinforced the government's concerns regarding the quality and appropriateness of the content being disseminated on these platforms. The fact that a self-regulatory body found the content to be objectionable underscores the need for stronger regulatory oversight and enforcement mechanisms to ensure that OTT platforms adhere to ethical and legal standards.
The removal of over 100 web series from the ULLU platform further illustrates the extent of the problem and the challenges faced by regulatory bodies in enforcing compliance. The council found that the platform removed or edited the web series temporarily and then uploaded the unedited versions after a while to circumvent the warnings, demonstrating a deliberate attempt to evade regulatory scrutiny and continue disseminating objectionable content. This behavior highlights the need for more sophisticated monitoring and enforcement mechanisms to detect and prevent such practices. The government's decision to ban these 25 OTT platforms reflects a broader trend of increasing scrutiny and regulation of online content in India. As the digital landscape continues to evolve and the consumption of online content continues to grow, the government is under increasing pressure to ensure that online platforms adhere to ethical and legal standards and protect the public from exposure to harmful and exploitative content. The ban serves as a warning to other OTT platforms that the government is serious about enforcing its regulations and will not hesitate to take action against those who violate Indian law and societal standards. However, the ban also raises concerns about freedom of expression and the potential for censorship. Critics argue that the government's actions could stifle creativity and limit the availability of diverse content online. They also argue that the government should focus on empowering consumers to make informed choices about the content they consume rather than imposing blanket bans on entire platforms. The government's response to these concerns is that it is committed to protecting the rights of all citizens, including the right to freedom of expression, but that this right is not absolute and must be balanced against the need to protect society from harmful content. The government argues that the content being disseminated on these OTT platforms was clearly objectionable and violated Indian law, and that the ban was necessary to protect the public from exposure to such content. The future of OTT regulation in India remains uncertain. As the digital landscape continues to evolve, the government will need to adapt its regulatory framework to address new challenges and ensure that online platforms are held accountable for the content they disseminate. The government will also need to engage in a constructive dialogue with industry stakeholders to find a balance between protecting freedom of expression and promoting responsible content creation. The ban on these 25 OTT platforms is a significant development in the ongoing debate over online content regulation in India, and its impact will be felt for years to come.
Source: Full list of 25 OTT platforms banned by Centre over ‘obscene’ content