With state and national elections around the corner, election fever has hit the media and political reporting is taking centre-stage. The role the media is playing – that of an unbiased informer – is vital to any healthy democracy. One would be hard pressed to fault the media for working so hard to keep the public informed. The question though is, is this “unbiased” news? Or is it news which has been “bought” or “paid” for? If it is “paid news”, is there no one to monitor or punish offending politicians, media houses or political parties?

The Press Council of India (PCI) defines paid news as “any news or analysis appearing in print or electronic media for consideration in cash or kind”. Simply put, in a political context, paid news is the phenomenon in which political candidates or parties pay news channels to publish news reports which could further their poll prospects or to limit coverage of their rivals in order to gain a competitive advantage. The PCI cites “advertisements camouflaged as news and denial of coverage to select electoral candidates” as manifestations of the paid news phenomenon.

The phrase “paid news” was originally coined by the Andhra Pradesh Union of Working Journalists in the aftermath of the 2009 assembly and general elections to describe the conduct of some news organisations in the state. After the 2009 elections, Outlook ran a story where Haryana Chief Minister Bhupinder Singh Hooda candidly admitted to offering a news organisation money to publish content that was more favourable to him, even stating that the same organisation “returned the money taken from my rival to publish news items against me”. In the same article various other political candidates and press organisations acknowledged the existence, and even more damningly the prevalence, of paid news. Media organisations have been alleged to offer parties and individual candidates “packages” that determine the extent of coverage the media organisation will provide.

A committee constituted by the PCI to probe the issue of paid news published a report in 2010 whose findings make for uneasy reading. In the report, the PCI expresses concern over the blurring of the line between advertising and news and states that the practice misleads readers/viewers to believe that what is in fact an advertisement is independently produced news. The report also goes on to state that paid news allows aspiring electoral candidates to violate rules under Conduct of Election, 1961 which places limits on the campaign expenditure of aspiring candidates. This is possible if the media organisations take payments for paid news in cash and do not show the same on their balance sheet in violation of various laws.

Incidentally, the release of the report was delayed and eventually made way for a more watered-down version. The original report was annexed as it drew objections from news agencies – both print and electronic – that had been named explicitly in the report. However, despite recommendations by the PCI and the Election Commission of India (ECI) to make paid news a punishable offence, the Ministry of Law and Justice hasn’t taken any such measures.

In October 2011, though, Umlesh Yadav – wife of  liquor baron DP Yadav and mother of Vikas Yadav – was disqualified by the ECI because she had not disclosed how much she had spent on paid news. The charges stemmed from news reports favouring her which appeared in Dainik Jagran. It is important to note, however, that she was not disqualified for having indulged in paid news, but rather for not disclosing her expenditure on the same.

Former Jharkhand chief minister Madhu Koda also fell foul of the law when a team of Enforcement Directorate (ED) and Income Tax (IT) authorities raided his home in relation to a disproportionate assets case. They unearthed diaries in which Koda had listed details of his paid news transgressions during the 2009 Lok Sabha Elections. According to reports, Koda paid one news channel Rs 1.25 crore to telecast news which was favourable to him, and paid Rs 25.76 lakh to three other news organisations as well. This is a direct flouting of the ECI campaign spending guidelines which limits campaign expenditure to Rs 25 lakh.

Much like Umlesh Yadav, the fact that Koda had indulged in paid news is itself not considered criminal. Similarly, Ashok Chavan was also alleged to have indulged in paid news. He was charged with not submitting a correct account of his expenses, but no conclusion has yet been reached in the case.
According to the ECI, there have been 1400 cases of alleged paid news during Assembly elections in the last 4 years. The ECI also pegs the paid news market to be worth around Rs 500 crore – which constitutes a whopping 40% of the expenses of political parties. Interestingly, in March 2013, the Union Law Ministry filed an affidavit with the Supreme Court on behalf of the Union Government – which essentially states that in the government’s view the EC should not have the right to disqualify candidates for improper filing of campaign expense accounts, but only if they fail to file their expenses at all.

For its part, the ECI has been particularly vigilant and has set up district-level Media Certification and Monitoring Committees (MCMCs) and state MCMCs to monitor, report and take action against instances of paid news in the run-up to the 2014 elections. In addition, the ECI has decided to put up the names of candidates and media organisations indulging in paid news on its website.

A Parliamentary Standing Committee Report on the subject proposed much greater measures to curb the paid news issue and even rapped the I&B ministry for its inaction in reigning in this practice. Other proposals of setting up a more powerful regulator and stiffer penalties including criminal charges possibly resulting in imprisonment for those taking payment to publish doctored “news”, were also made in the same report.

Since the publishing of the report, the I &B ministry has also proposed amendments to the Press & Registration of Books (PRB) Act. The amendments to the PRB Act will introduce strict penalties for media organisations which are found to be publishing “news” in exchange for money. The amendments propose a suspension of Directorate of Audio Visual Publicity (DAVP) advertisements for first and second paid news violations, a third violation will result in the cancellation of the registration of the offending newspaper or magazine. The I&B ministry has so far only included amendments to regulate print media. There has been no mention of any amendments to regulate electronic media.

Half-baked measures or not, the Ministry’s latest steps to curb paid news might just translate into lesser instances of paid news in our papers.