Like an employment agreement which illustrates the rights, roles and responsibilities of both the employer and the employee, there exists an artist agreement as well. An artist agreement is a contract that is executed between the artist and the production houses or a producer. These agreements help set a firm foot and assist in avoiding miscommunication and uncertainty.

One question that the readers might wonder is why an employment agreement would not satiate the purpose and how are these two agreements different from each other.

-Author (Ananya Bhatnagar)

An artist agreement caters to a specific range of clauses as opposed to an employment contract considering the nature of the work that the artist is expected to carry out. The shifts may differ from time to time, the primary focus relies on the originality of the work and it is pertinent to note that the productions houses deals with plenty of artists including, the actors, the director, cameramen, editor, dancers and the list goes on, therefore, keeping in mind these requisites it is understood that an artist agreement would be a feasible choice for the artists as well as the producers to suit their interests. 

Watch this video on YouTube.

Hereinafter, are the following things that a producer must consider before executing an artist agreement.

Details of the Parties

The details of the parties demonstrate that the parties are legally obligated by the agreement. An introduction is a definitive proof to the public about any individual.   Similar rules apply to contracts and other agreements. Therefore, the details of the party containing the name, address, email, phone number, etc., is the initial item in any agreement. An introduction is therefore crucial to understanding the parties involved.

Duration:

An artist agreement must explicitly mention the duration of the relationship between the artist and the production houses. This clause helps to deliver a clear idea of the time within which they are accepted to accomplish their responsibilities. However, this clause must be flexible in case there is a hindrance to the completion of the project. The most relevant example would be that of the ‘pandemic duration’ where the schedules of many films and albums got disturbed, and the shooting schedule had to be altered owing to the reason that many of the people on set including the actors and directors were subjected to COVID. Hence, while drafting an agreement, one must consider different probabilities from different perspectives.

Payment:

This section must first provide the cost or the budget of the project that the artist would be working on. Setting up all the costs in advance can save time later and allow the parties to concentrate more on the project. Secondly, it must also highlight the payment procedure, i.e. how the party wants its money to be processed throughout the duration of payment or final payment or anything of the kind, which should also be covered by this clause. It should outline each party’s obligations in relation to the payments that must be made by or to them. It must also include the nature in which the payment shall be done, that is, on an hourly basis, daily basis or after the completion of the project.

Intellectual Property:

This clause is profusely important in any artist agreement as it helps to safeguard the original, unfiltered work created by the artists with the production houses. It establishes that any work that has been developed and created by the artist for the production house during the term of the agreement will be the exclusive property of the production house, thereby, avoiding piracy of the content. In recent times, piracy and plagiarism of content are not something new. There have been several instances and even before the release of the movie, its pirated version becomes the talk of the market. Hence, this clause is designed to safeguard both parties against these nightmares.

Conduct of the Artist:

Since, the actors, directors, and musicians are always in the public eye, therefore, it is of utmost importance that they carry themselves with dignity and not contribute to any kind of behaviour that would tarnish or degrade the artist in front of society as their name will be associated with the production house.

Insurance:

Robust insurance coverage offers protection against unforeseen events, physical damage from theft, accidents, etc. While producing any event or a movie, there are a lot of things to cover from the insurance perspective, for example, a movie involves elaborate and expensive sets, costumes and much more, therefore, it is a rational step to include the insurance clause. Another example could be/ the action scenes in the movie where the actors and stuntmen perform and many a time sustains injuries.

Transportation:

The nature of the artist’s job requires them to travel to a variety of places, for shoots, promotions etc. The producer must clarify that the expenses of the travel like airfare, and seats (business class or economy class) shall be borne by the production house including their meals, stays and so on.

Termination:

This clause helps define alternate remedies in the event of failure to fulfil the agreement or breach of the agreement. Additionally, it shall specify the laws that would govern such agreement and provide provisions for settlement mechanisms like mediation, negotiations etc.

The capacity of the Artist:

The artist must clearly mention that he or she has entered into this agreement with their free will and he or shall not indulge in any activity that would forestall his commitments and obligations towards the fulfilment of the agreement. Moreover, it must also elucidate that the artist must not divulge the subject matter of these agreements as well as not disclose any confidential information. For example, Marvel movies have over the years succeeded in maintaining the mystery around the plot of the movie.

Promotions:

Any and every production house succeeds if there is awareness about the project that they are engaging in. Therefore, to ensure the same the agreement must mention a promotion clause making the artist aware of his or her obligations and responsibilities to promote their upcoming production.

The post 10 important clauses in an Artist Agreement appeared first on LexForti .

In this article, we get to understand, the three considerations that one should give a thought to while entering into a contract with a Social Media Influencer. Today’s post has been contributed by Nadia Bubennikova, who is the Head of influencer marketing agency at BuzzGuru who helps brands, game and app developers to reach their target audience and bring the highest ROI from their influencer marketing campaigns.

There has been a paradigm shift in the way, the brands target their desired audiences. With the increasing influence of social media influencers on their followers, brands are considering to approach Social media influencers to promote their products and services. It becomes important to know some basic ground rules before engaging an influencer. So what are those considerations?

Nadia Bubnnikova-

Here are our three things to consider:

Draft Approval Procedure:
The first clause to check when signing a contract with an Influencer is the draft approval procedure. Sometimes the advertising materials that the influencers produce do not meet our expectations regardless of how detailed the task assignment was, so it is in our best interest to make sure that the contract includes some regulations for such cases.

The best practice is to include the link to the task assignment for the integration into the agreement and clearly state that the advertising materials must be filmed according to the Task Assignment and you have 2 to 3 rounds of edits in case the influencer misses something out.

This way you will be protected from having to pay for an integration that is below your standards. Another useful point to include is the timing for the adjustment of the materials after you’ve provided feedback requesting some edits from the creator. Otherwise it may take weeks and you will go far behind schedule.

Services Description:
When entering an agreement with an influencer for a paid collaboration, you should state explicitly what is it, that you need from the creator. You should always describe the ad format, the length of the promo part, and other actions that might be a part of the services the influencer is to provide. For example, after the deal is closed and the service is provided it would be very useful to get full statistics on the publication.

After receiving the payment Influencer tend to avoid other extra actions and are very unlikely to share the stats, so our advice is to put all such details in the description of services. If something is missed out you won’t be paying for it.

Payment Procedure:
Make sure that the agreement is built around the post payment model, especially if it is your first time working with a specific influencer or their representative. This allows you to hedge all the possible risks.

Of course, some influencers and agencies insist on down payment as a deal confirmation, but it is crucial to avoid the 100% down payment. In case you are interested in a specific influencer and they do not agree to work on a post payment model in any way, try 20-30-50% down payment after you have received a draft of advertising materials from the service provider.

This way the influencer will already do some work as a proof for you and you will be able to send the down payment of 20-30-50% without any risk.

Richard Brandenstein-

Richard J. Brandenstein is a New York-based attorney, and FBR Law Partner, specializing in Administrative Law. The areas he specifically focuses on include New York State Disability and New York State Workers’ Compensation. With over 40 years of experience as an attorney, he also trains new legal staff in his company too. 

As a business, what three main considerations should be, while entering into an agreement with a Social Media influencer for product endorsement?

Here are the three things that should be considered before a brand or company decides to work with a social media influencer:

Analytics:

Influencers’ analytics are important to consider. This is because it will give you a better understanding of their audience in terms of their age, gender, and location. This will then allow you to determine whether they are suitable for your brand and whether their audience is likely going to purchase your products or use your services.

Engagement:

Engagement is another significant factor to consider. While a person may have millions of followers, this doesn’t mean that all of their followers are actively engaging with their content. As a result, you may find it more beneficial to choose a smaller influencer to work with in comparison to a larger one if it means that their followers engage with the content more. 

Compatibility:

The compatibility of the influencer and your brand is essential and something you should take into careful consideration. The influencer should be a good fit for the brand and be able to portray what you’re asking of them.

Interesting Read:  How NFTs get their value?

The post Expert Corner – Three things to consider while entering into a contract with a Social Media Influencer appeared first on LexForti .

The bench in the case of Election Commission of India v MR Vijaya Bhaskar made it clear that the freedom of speech and expression enshrined under Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution extends to reporting judicial proceedings as well.

In the instant case, ECI filed a petition and sought for a restrain against media from reporting oral remarks made by judges during a courtroom exchange. The Madras High Court, while hearing a plea, had remarked that the ECI officials are singularly responsible for the second wave of COVID and should probably be booked for the charge of murder.

The bench observed that the prayer of ECI strikes at two fundamental principles guaranteed by the Constitution of India- freedom of speech and expression, and open courtroom proceedings.

The bench stated that apart from in-camera proceedings for exceptional cases, the courts are supposed to be accessible by the general public in order to safeguard the constitutional freedoms. The public domain has a right to know what transpires within a court during a judicial proceeding.

The bench highlighted the factor of “transparency in democratic institutions” and stated that in order to gather public faith, public scrutiny and public accountability is important. The system of open court ensures that judges act in a lawful manner.

The bench further stated that open court system serves educational purposes as well as desired individuals’ get to know the practical application of laws and regulations framed by executive and legislature.

The bench thus rejected the plea of ECI for a restraint on media coverage of judicial proceedings and held that such information is a part of citizens’ right to information.

The post SC upholds media’s right to report courtroom proceedings- ECI case appeared first on LexForti .

On October 6 NBSA gave the same order which was then sent for review.

Aaj tak erroneously reported certain tweet as the last tweet of Sushant Singh Rajput, just before his death.

NBSA asked Aaj Tak to apologize on Live TV, for misreporting on SSR’s death case.

Date and Time: 23 April at 8 PM.

A static text would be there on a full large screen. The font would be large and there will be a voice-over with slow speed.

Follwing text will be translated in Hindi:

Aaj Tak apologises that while reporting on the incidents relating to the suicide of Sushant Singh Rajput, we had run certain tweets on the Aaj Tak channel and wrongly reported the screenshots calling them real and attributing them as the actor’s last tweets. By doing so, we have violated Clause 1 of the “Specific Guidelines Covering Reportage” relating to “Accuracy” which states that information should be gathered first-hand from more than one source, if possible; reports received from news agencies should be attributed and where possible be verified; allegations should be reported accurately as made and errors of fact should be corrected at the earliest, giving sufficient prominence to the broadcast of the correct version of fact(s).

Channel has been asked to pay the fine of Rs. 1 Lakh.

The post APOLOGIZE! NBSA asked ‘Aaj Tak’ to apologize for misreporting Sushant Singh’s death case appeared first on LexForti .

The petition also sought for directions to the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology to regulate the contents of such songs and videos by screening them before their release on various internet platforms.

The instant PIL has been filed by Advocate Rishu Singh and through this petition, the petitioner states that many of the non-film songs and music videos contain demeaning language, inappropriate portrayal of women and that it tends to promote consumption of alcohol and drugs.

The petitioner stated that the targeted audience of such content includes kids and youngsters who are vulnerable enough to get influenced by such songs and videos and, indulge in wrongful activities.

The petitioner brought along its purview the provisions of Cinematograph Act, 1952, wherein the application of the provisions are restricted to the contents of films and songs. Because of this, non-film songs and music videos escape the screening and penalties.

The petitioner highlighted the fact that there is an absence of an authority similar to Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) for such songs and videos which are created by individual artists and directly posted on internet platforms and that is an immediate requirement for the same.

The petitioner concluded the petition by stating that the lyrics, videos, themes etc. of such non-film songs and music videos tend to instigate youth towards wrongful activities and deviate the ones who are in their tender age of learning.

The petitioner thus prayed before the High Court for constitution of a regulatory authority which would screen and limit the illicit content portrayed through such songs and videos.

The post PIL filed before Delhi HC for constitution of regulatory body for non-film songs and music videos appeared first on LexForti .

The rules have been accumulated in the Information Technology (Guidelines for Intermediaries and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021.

The Rules consist of a Code of Ethics and a three-tier content regulation mechanism. All these have been introduced under the two-decade old Information Technology Act, 2000.

All the rules would come into force when the same is notified under the Official Gazette.

The Code of Ethics would basically be applicable on the publishers of the online content. The publisher would be supposed to take due caution while posting any content on its platform, and make sure that the same does not affect the sovereignty, integrity of India or endangers and jeopardizes the security of the nation.

The Code also includes the parameters based on which U or A certificate would be granted to the content. Moreover, the Ministry has also established a grievance portal, whereby the general public could raise and redress their issues.

Under the three-tier grievance Redressal framework, the grievances would be addressed by three entities; firstly by the entity itself, secondly by the self-regulating bodies of applicable bodies, and thirdly by the Central Government.

Apart from this, inter-departmental committee would also be formed, constituting members from different ministries like Defence, External Affairs, Law and Justice, etc.

The intermediaries would also be required to undertake due diligence and set up requisite posts for the same.

Overall, the guidelines have been drafted, keeping in mind the grievances put by the general public. Numerous petitions had been filed before the Apex Court and the High Courts requesting the Centre to formulate rules which could regulate content on the online content curators.

The post Centre issues draft rules for regulation of content on Social Media, OTT and other Media Platforms appeared first on LexForti .

Mandeep Punia, a freelance journalist, often a contributor to the Caravan Magazine, who was on the 30^th of January detained from the Singhu Border for alleged misbehavior with an on-duty official, was presented to the Metropolitan Magistrate of Court Number 2 and has been sentenced to a 14 – day Judicial Custody.

Journalist Dharmender Singh from the Online News India was also picked by the officials along with Mandeep Punia and was later realized on showing his ID card.

Currently, Punia has been charged under for Obstructing Public servant in discharge of public functions (Section 186), Voluntarily causing hurt to deter public servant from his duty (Section 332) and assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty (Section 353) r/w Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

According to the reports of the Indian Express, an Unidentified officer also had stated that “Punia was standing with the protesters and he didn’t have a press ID card, he was trying to move through the barricades which were kept to segregate and secure the area. An altercation broke out between police personnel and him. He misbehaved…there was some manhandling as well. He was then detained”

On the 1^st of February at the Rohini Courts, the bail plea shall be heard.  

The post Journalist Mandeep Punia, detained from the Singhu Border sent to 14–day Judicial Custody. appeared first on LexForti .

The Complainant claimed that defamatory remarks were made against Arnab Goswami in connection to TRP Case.

The acts of the Accused is of blatantly twisting the facts

Complainant

This case has been filed at Patiala House Court, New Delhi.

Petitioner alleged that the Accused had been twisting facts without any proof and viciously been defaming Complainant’s company.

Complainant claimed that:

The Accused has caused immense loss of reputation of
the Complaint in public at large and has dented the long
standing reputation of the Complainant Company of
doing honest journalism working with utmost integrity
and ethics and amounts to spreading ill-will against the
Complainant Company

The complainant claimed that the Accused is Jealous of Arnab Goswami and his success.

Accused is jealous and the lack of ability of the Accused to match the success of the Complainant company

Complainant

Complainant sought Court to undertake the matter and punish the accused under Section 499 and 500 of the IPC.

Complainant submitted that, the accused had put false and malicious allegation against Arnab Goswami in the TRP Scam Case.

Complainant contended that the matter is still under the investigation and Accused had her own media trial against the Complainant.

Freedom of speech does not permit abuse and want of regard to another’s honour or reputation and the allegation made are clearly malicious and only motivated with the intent and knowledge to malign the Complainant.

Complainant

Complainant pleaded that, Article 21 of the Constitution gives the right to reputation, which has been infringed in the present matter.

Complainant prayed that:

Pass necessary orders and directions thereby taking cognizance upon the present complaint and to summon, try and punish the Accused person in accordance with law for the commission of offence under Section 499/500 IPC

The post “Navika Kumar is jealous of Arnab Goswami”, Republic TV claimed and filed a defamation case against her appeared first on LexForti .

What could lead to the obstruction to the “Administration of Justice”?

Media reports before the initiation of the trial could lead to an obstruction to the Administration of Justice.

Media trial during the continuance of Police investigation could lead to an obstruction to the Administration of Justice.

Administration of Justice is applicable to both the civil and criminal cases.

Defence of Fair reporting?

The court rejected this defence and held that this defence could not be availed for reportage of any on going investigation.

The court clarified that Judicial Proceeding initiates soon after the filing of FIR. Hence ‘Contempt of Court’ will have its ambiance on the overall proceeding.

Guidelines

The bench reiterated that the guidelines of the Press Council of India will be applicable in the Electronic media as well.

Following were some of the guidelines Court issued:

Holding interviews with the victim, the witnesses, and/or any of their family members and displaying it on screen

Analyzing versions of witnesses, whose evidence could be vital at the stage of trial;

Publishing a confession allegedly made to a police officer by an accused and trying to make the public believe that the same is a piece of evidence which is admissible before a Court and there is no reason for the Court not to act upon it, without letting the public know the nitty-gritty of the Evidence Act, 1872;

Printing photographs of an accused and thereby facilitating his identification;

Criticizing the investigative agency based on half-baked information without proper research;

Pronouncing on the merits of the case, including pre-judging the guilt or innocence qua an accused or an individual not yet wanted in a case, as the case may be;

Recreating/reconstructing a crime scene and depicting how the accused committed the crime;

Predicting the proposed/future course of action including steps that ought to be taken in a particular direction to complete the investigation; and

Leaking sensitive and confidential information from materials collected by the investigating agency;

Acting in any manner so as to violate the provisions of the Programme Code as prescribed under section 5 of the CTVN Act read with rule 6 of the CTVN Rules and hereby inviting contempt of court;

Indulging in character assassination of any individual and thereby mar his reputation.

The court clarified that the above-mentioned guidelines are not exhaustive but only indicative.

Court’s verdict

Court asked the media houses to not cross certain boundaries (Lakshman Rekha)

It is pertinent to note that, one of the PILs was filed by the group of eight ex-police officers of the Mumbai Police.

The group cited that the Criticism that was made against the city police was unfair.

Court held that the media reportage by the Times Now and Republic TV in the present case is prima facie contemptous.

Read the Guidelines here

The post Do not cross the “Lakshman Rekha” or else face Contempt of Court Bombay HC on Media Trial : [Read Guidelines] appeared first on LexForti .

The freedom of electronic and print media is an integral part of freedom of speech and expression. Without a free and fearless press, the truth cannot be told and so the circulation of all sides of information, ideas, perspectives and bringing different kinds of issues and developments in focus is necessary.

This also maintains a healthy democracy. However, when journalists engage in roles they aren’t supposed to or qualified to take up, we mislead the society on topics like mental health, the concept of justice, fair trial and many other social and legal issues. While freedom of the press is important to uphold the spirit of democracy, this ‘freedom’ doesn’t legitimise the violation of someone’s right to privacy, fair trial and reputation.

The media has a responsibility towards its viewers and the thirst for sensational news should not interfere with the police investigation, nor should it invade court affairs. For the same, media ethics need to be adhered to. Media ethics includes specific ethical standards which it requires to follow be it print media, broadcast media or social media.

Media ethics promotes and defends values such as a universal respect for life and the rule of law and legality[1]. To ensure that the media doesn’t drift away from its objectives and report as long as it is in the public interest, certain standardized principles need to be followed by them.   

Active reporting leads to an informed society and helps keep a check on the government. In this age of digitalisation, we get news in seconds from multiple sources like TV, applications and social networking sites. The competition to be first in reporting events for TRP can sometimes degrade the quality of research and method of delivering information.

This competition is also what leads to trial by media. The term ‘media trial’ is not explained in any law books or acts.  However, it is understood as a term used for the publication of unauthentic and subjective presentation of facts by the media. This also includes declaring someone guilty or innocent regardless of the judgment of the court.

While media can expose problems in the society and bring issues to light, it could also at times, make unverified claims and disregard ethical and professional standards. Media trials can create prejudice against the accused and also facilitate the circulation of false information.

We have seen this in happen in the Uma Khurana case[2], an example of attack journalism, where an innocent school teacher faced defamation and harassment due to a fake sting operation conducted by the media in which she was accused of forcing students into prostitution. As a result, Khurana was manhandled by a mob, she was assaulted and her clothes were stripped off. 

Another such incident is the case of Saravjeet Singh[3]. Saravjeet was labelled a ‘pervert’ and a ‘molester’ by the media based on an allegation made on a social media post. The media circulated his photos without blurring his face and declared him guilty without even listening to what he had to say.

After four years of public shaming, he was proven not guilty by the court. This is what happens when the media publishes its own version of the facts and declares someone guilty regardless of the verdict of the court. While exercising their freedom, the media shouldn’t do anything by which the investigation becomes prejudiced against the accused.

Yellow journalism[4] a concept developed by Joseph Pulitzer in the United States is a form of journalism that uses illegitimate sources or not well-researched news and this is now becoming rampant in India.  Media has to maintain objectivity and present all sides of the story to the public. It is their duty to ensure that they do not engage in presenting selective narratives to gain popularity. They have to present the truth, irrespective of how undesirable it is to the viewers.

With the Rhea Chakraborty case being broadcasted for over two months now, media’s responsibility towards their work is being questioned.[5] The media is now the self-proclaimed court and the journalists are the judges.

With a woman being declared guilty of witchcraft and murder by the media for political and personal reasons; truth, honesty and nationalism are being sold. The more you buy into their propaganda, the more nationalist you are.

As Dr Eric Louw has written in his book titled- ‘The Media and Political Process’, “the line between news and entertainment, and journalism and anchorman performances, becomes blurred as stories are geared to entertainment, conflict, drama or titillation.”[6] Media should be giving us an accurate reflection of reality, but what we see today is only the spread of misinformation and the brainwashing of the masses.

There is a requirement to regulate and filter what the media can show us, considering the increased level of toxicity generated by media in the present times.

To keep their prestige and independence, media needs a deep awareness of their primary responsibility to provide a good public service[7] and this will happen only when we as citizens ask legitimate questions and refuse to adjust to whatever they try and feed us with. Media, to a great extent, is nothing but a reflection of what we wish to see and hear and what we demand from them. Therefore, poor journalism changes when we change and when we become aware and fact-check.

Now, the question that arises is that since freedom of media comes under the freedom of speech, is there no legal remedy available against fake and outrageous news?

To answer that we shall refer to Article 19(1) (a) of the Indian constitution[8] which states that everyone has freedom of speech and expression and the media has right to share their opinion. But this right is restricted through article 19(2) of the Indian constitution.[9]

This keeps a check on provocative speech and hates speech. Anything that disturbs public peace does not fall within the scope of this article. Moreover, Media trial is a form of criminal contempt,[10] that is, once a case has reached the court, nobody is allowed to publish their own version of facts.

In a case related to the rape of a girl which received unnecessary publicity, the Supreme Court stated that a trial by media or by public agitation is the very antithesis of the rule of law and that it can also lead to a miscarriage of justice[11].

We would also like to refer to section 3(2) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971[12]  which states that there should not be any media trial done until full immunity is not granted for publication and the case is pending.

In the ongoing case of Sushant Singh’s alleged suicide, the media, even before filing of the charge-sheet, announced that Rhea Chakraborty was guilty of murder. As a result, we saw the beginning of a nation-wide witch-hunt and songs written to slut-shame her.  

This worsened when the media reached Rhea’s house and started harassing the neighbours. We also get to see the media hounding her with their microphones forced onto her face with the hope of getting a little more entertainment for the day. This raises an important question- is she not entitled to her personal space and social distancing norms during a pandemic?

Further, in the case R.K. Anand v. Delhi High Court[13], the constitutionality of media trial was questioned and Supreme Court observed that media trial can be harsh by just questioning and advertising the reputation of a person in their media channel.

The court further stated that Media trial also interferes in one’s right to a fair trial which is a part of the right to life[14]. Careless journalism can very well lead to a miscarriage of justice which will deprive an individual of their right to live[15] with dignity.[16]

The significance of fair trial becomes an important topic of discussion every time media sensationalizes any incident. Articles are written on how this interferes in the procedure of the court but like every other news, this too fades away and the whole discussion is revived once again when we witness a similar case.

Media trials also violate the principle of presumption of innocence mentioned under the Evidence Act. [17] It has been stated by the Supreme Court judges that they are likely to be influenced by media trials and their focus point, as seen in the case Reliance Petrochemicals v. Proprietor of Indian Express.[18]

A judge presiding over a matter that has gained media hype is likely to be influenced subconsciously if not consciously. This may manifest in either the judge being apprehensive about the public reaction after he passes a judgment against the “media verdict” or when he feels pressurized to act according to the story of the media, gravely wrecking the impartiality that he/she is expected to uphold. 

Some instances of court regulations and the government’s timely intervention could be seen in the Nirbhaya gang-rape case[19] where, in order to protect the identity of the victim, the Indian govt. directed the media to address her as Nirbhaya only.

Another instance is of the Aarushi Talwar murder case[20], where the Supreme Court passed a controlling request criticizing the media for reporting unverified facts during the trial. As stated above, such actions lead to contempt of court and aren’t protected under the freedom of media.

Despite all the existing provisions and judgments, as mentioned before, there have been instances of violation of privacy and damage to reputation and this is happening even today because the law doesn’t prohibit it in the abstract.

We as viewers are equally responsible for the degradation of the quality of journalism in this nation and this will, unfortunately, continue to happen until we decide that it won’t. Media can function well and do justice to society only when it is independent and doesn’t function based on the special interests of the rich and powerful.

It ought to maintain accuracy, objectivity and accountability. There has to be an adequate representation of all sides and perspectives of any incident. What would be ‘adequate’ can be decided based on the harm-limitation principle[21].

This principle is based on two questions- if every information gathered needs to be presented? If yes, how will it be done? The meaning is that some weight is required to be given to the negative consequences that could come out of full disclosure, creating again a possible ethical dilemma[22]. 

Therefore, the media needs to do reporting with great sensitivity and in such a way that it does not harm the people involved and concerned. This includes suspects before they are criminally charged, juvenile suspects the accused, victims (especially of sex crimes or any violent crimes) and their family members.

As per this principle, while gathering information, conducting interviews and reporting the same, the anchors and journalists need to be considerate.

[1] Deepshikha- Media ethics and Responsible Journalism (2020).

[2] TV sting victim Khurana gets bail, Hindustan Times (2007), https://www.hindustantimes.com/delhi/tv-sting-victim-khurana-gets-bail/story-IBOhls9rGaiLoyiLjMt7aP.html (last visited Sep 25, 2020).

[3] The Logical Indian, After 4 Years Of Public Shaming & Struggle, Saravjeet Singh Finally Proven Not Guilty On Jasleen Kaur Case (2019), https://thelogicalindian.com/news/saravjeet-singh-jasleen-kaur/ (last visited Sep 25, 2020).

[4] Milestones: 1866–1898 – Office of the Historian, https://history.state.gov/milestones/1866-1898/yellow-journalism (last visited Sep 25, 2020).

[5] Distasteful Media Trial Of Rhea Chakraborty, https://thelogicalindian.com/humaninterest/rhea-chakraborty-media-trial-23559 (last visited Sep 25, 2020).

[6]Dr. Eric Louw- The Media and Political Process, (2005) Pg. 67, Para 3.

[7] Claude-Jean Bertrand- Media Ethics and Accountability Systems, Pg. 6, Para 5. 

[8] Constitution of India, https://www.constitutionofindia.net/constitution_of_india/fundamental_rights/articles

/Article%2019 (last visited Sep 25, 2020).

[9] Id.

[10] 200Th Report On Trial By Media Free Speech And Fair Trial Under, https://indiankanoon.org/doc/42810882/ (last visited Sep 25, 2020).

[11] State of Maharashtra v. Rajendra J. Gandhi (1997) 8 SCC 386.

[12] Section 3(2) in the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1689734/ (last visited Sep 25, 2020).

[13] R.K. Anand v. Delhi High Court, (2009) 8 SCC 106.

[14] Article 21 in The Constitution of India 1950, 21, https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1199182/ (last visited Mar 14, 2020).

[15] State of Maharashtra v. Rajendra Jaunmal Gandhi, (1997) AIR SC 3986.

[16] TV sting victim Khurana gets bail, Hindustan Times (2007), https://www.hindustantimes.com/delhi/tv-sting-victim-khurana-gets-bail/story-IBOhls9rGaiLoyiLjMt7aP.html (last visited Sep 25, 2020).

[17] Section 4 in The Indian Evidence Act, 1872, https://indiankanoon.org/doc/750738/ (last visited Sep 25, 2020).

[18] Reliance Petrochemicals v. Proprietor of Indian Express, (1988) 4 SCC 592.

[19] Mukesh & Anr. v. State for NCT Delhi and Ors. (2017) 6 SCC 1.

[20] Nupur Talwar v. CBI and Anr. (2012) 11 SCC 465.

[21] Harm-Limitation Principle in Journalism

[22] Deepshikha- Media Ethics and Responsible Journalism.

The post Investigative Journalism and Trial by Media appeared first on LexForti .