Edition 17: Govt considering ethics code for social media users, online news: MIB in Supreme Court
MIB has proposed amending the Digital Media Ethics Code under IT Rules, 2021 to that effect. It has also proposed provisions to deal with obscenity online, deriving from Section 67 of the IT Act.
The government is currently considering introducing an ethics code for social media users and online news by revamping the Digital Media Code of Ethics that was introduced via the IT Rules, 2021, the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting informed the Supreme Court in a written submission on November 20. The Centre also told the apex court that the IT Rules could be amended to include a definition for “obscene digital content”, and a code of ethics related to obscenity that covers all digital content, similar to the existing Programme Code for television.
Despite seeking to revamp the Code of Ethics under IT Rules, 2021, the MIB acknowledged in its submission that the Bombay High Court had the stayed the administration of Rules 9(1) and 9(3) of the IT Rules due to their ultra vires nature.
Rule 9(1) requires all publishers to adhere to the Code of Ethics, and Rule 9(3) is related to the three-tier grievance redressal mechanism of the publishers.
Despite the stay, in practice, publishers adhere to the Code of Ethics and almost all have set up self-regulatory bodies as level two of the grievance redressal mechanism. MIB, too, continues to give directions, including blocking directions, under this mechanism.
In light of the multiple challenges to part III of the IT Rules and the stay by Bombay High Court, MIB submitted before the Supreme Court that Part III needs to be “redrafted” to abide by the legal provisions, Article 19(1)(a) and restrictions imposed under Article 19(2).
Thus, the MIB has cited Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000, as the legal basis for proposing the guidelines on obscenity. “Section 87(1) gives the power to the Central Government to make Rules to carry out the provisions of the Act. Section 87(1) read with Section 87(2)(z) and (zg) along with Section 67 forms the basis for the publication of guidelines on obscenity,” the submission read.
As per Section 67 of the IT Act, publishing or transmitting obscene material in electronic form is punishable with a fine up to ₹5 lakh and or imprisonment of up to three years for their first conviction, and a fine of up to ₹10 lakh or imprisonment of up to five years for their second/subsequent conviction.
These proposals have been made as a part of the ongoing Ranveer Allahabadia case and the connected petition filed by Cure SMA Foundation of India. A division bench comprising Justice Surya Kant and Justice NK Singh, in March 2025, had suggested to solicitor general Tushar Mehta to draft a regulatory proposal to curtail morally offensive programmes within the ambit of Article 19(2) restrictions.
In a subsequent hearing on August 28 presided over by Justices Kant and Joymalya Bagchi, attorney general R. Venkataramani had said that the proposed guidelines would ensure “that the rights of all the parties concerned are adequately protected without impinging upon the individual rights, dignity, honour, and respect”. These guidelines were to be drafted in consultation with the News Broadcasters and Digital Association (NBDA).
Amendments proposed on obscenity, accessibility, AI and deepfakes
The MIB has proposed a definition for “obscene digital content”, based on Section 292 of the Indian Penal Code which dealt with the sale of obscene books, etc.
As per MIB, “any digital content shall be deemed to be obscene if it is lascivious or appeals to the prurient interest or if its effect, or (where it comprises two or more distinct items) the effect of any of its items is, if taken as a whole, such as to tend to deprave and corrupt persons who are likely having regard to all relevant circumstances, to read, see or hear the matter contained or embodied in it”.
Currently, the Code of Ethics, which is a part of IT Rules, is divided into two parts — the first part for news and current affairs, and the second for online curated content (covering the content on publishers of online curated content such as Netflix, Amazon Prime Video, etc.).
In its proposal to the Supreme Court, the MIB wants to revamp it and divide it into four parts.
Part 1: On obscenity for all digital content
The first part would deal with all digital content including digital news and current affairs, online curated content, and user generated content (content posted on Instagram, Facebook, X/Twitter, YouTube, etc.).
This includes a code to deal with obscenity which is similar, but not identical to the Programme Code under the Cable Television Network Act, 1995.
As shown in the comparison above, most of the content that MIB has sought to prohibit as “obscene” is the same as content prohibited by the Programme Code for TV channels as well.
This includes any content that “promotes anti-national attitudes” or reflects “slandering, ironical and snobbish attitude” while portraying certain ethnic, linguistic and regional groups. To be sure, in March 2023, the then I&B minister Anurag Thakur had informed the parliament that “anti-national attitude” has not been defined in the Programme Code but is commonly understood to mean “opposed to national interest”.
There are five new types of content that all digital content publishers — from digital news publishers to streaming platforms to influencers and lay social media users — must not transmit, as per MIB’s proposal. This includes wide-ranging content that:
Derides any race, caste, colour, creed and nationality
Tends to incite people to crime, cause, disorder or violence or breach of law or glorifies violence or obscenity in any way
Presents criminality as desirable
Represent indecent, vulgar, suggestive, repulsive or offensive themes
Denigrates the persons with disabilities.
The MIB has also proposed that to ascertain whether the content in question is obscene or not, the Community Standard Test, prescribed by the Supreme Court in the Aveek Sarkar v State of West Bengal should be used.
Interestingly, the MIB has not sought to forbid any online content that encourages superstition or blind belief, something that the Programme Code for TV does.
Part 1 (continued): On AI and deepfakes
The other part of this section meant for all kinds of digital content includes a code to deal with AI and deepfakes. This could be “co-opted” from the Ministry of Electronics and Technology’s draft rules dealing with synthetically generated information that were released for public consultation on October 22.
To be sure, the draft rules proposed by MeitY are only applicable to intermediaries, not publishers, whereas here, through amendments to the Digital Media Code of Ethics, which is appended to Part III of the IT Rules, MIB can only make rules applicable to streaming platforms and digital news publishers. Governance of online content posted by lay social media users and influencers has always been a legally ambiguous territory with both ministries regulating it at different times.
Part 2: For online curated content (streaming platforms)
The second part of the revamped code would deal with online curated content and remains similar to the existing Code of Ethics for online curated content with identical requirements for content classification, display of classification, and access control measures for children.
In this proposal for revamped code of ethics, the section related to General Principles from the 2021 Code of Ethics has been scrapped. This section prohibited streaming platforms from transmitting illegal content, and directed them to exercise “due caution and discretion” about content that could affect India’s national security and public order.
MIB has proposed that the code of ethics for online curated content could include a section on accessibility that could be co-opted from the draft accessibility guidelines that MIB had released for public consultation on October 7. Amongst other things, these draft rules proposed that platforms such as Netflix and JioHotstar “shall strive” to provide at least one accessibility feature each for the hearing-impaired and the visually-impaired so that the entirety of their content library is covered within 24 months of notification of the guidelines.
Part 3: For user generated content (influencers and lay users on social media)
The third part of the revamped code will deal with user generated content. “These are under consideration,” MIB submitted.
Part 4: For digital news and current affairs
The fourth part of the revamped code will deal with digital news and current affairs. This part is also under consideration as per the MIB.
Under the current Code of Ethics, online news and current affairs content must adhere to norms of journalistic conduct of the Press Council of India under the Press Council Act, 1978 and the Programme Code under Section 5 of the CTN Act. Any content that is prohibited under any law for the time being in force cannot be published or transmitted.
MIB’s previous attempts to regulate influencers, online news, obscenity
This is not MIB’s first attempt at regulating influencers and digital news media. Both the 2023 version of the Broadcasting Services (Regulation) Bill, and the secret 2024 version had sought to do so.
The government has also been contemplating expanding the scope of the Press Council of India into a broader Media Council through either new legislation or amendments to existing laws, as Hindustan Times reported in March 2025. This expanded council could oversee news content across print, television, and digital platforms, with distinct verticals handling different media formats. Each vertical could have its own monitoring and enforcement mechanisms.
There has also been discussion around either applying the current programme and advertising codes to content on streaming platforms and influencers with followers above a prescribed threshold, or creating a differentiated programme code for each media platform.
To get “obscene”, indecent and immoral online content removed, MIB had created an inter-ministerial committee in January 2024 to issue notices under Section 79(3)(b) of the IT Act. This committee was responsible for the blocking of 18 streaming platforms, 19 websites, 10 apps, and 57 social media accounts in March 2024, and the July 2025 blocking of 26 websites and 14 apps.
“The End”