The curious case of 'fake news' order and unprecedented retreat by Modi govt

In the 46-month-old Modi government, if there was one thing that remained constant so far, it was the steadfastness with which the government stuck to many of its controversial decisions, refusing to buckle under criticism or adverse public opinion. April 3, 2018 changed that.

The government's decision to roll-back a proposed crackdown on “fake news” in less than 24 hours could arguably be the first and the most significant retreat of the Modi government as it nears completing four years in office and plans to get into election mode with just over a year remaining for the next Lok Sabha polls.

The crackdown—which mandated penalties ranging from suspension to cancellation of accreditation of journalists found guilty of reporting “fake news”--was proposed by the Information & Broadcasting Ministry piloted by Smriti Irani. It was disposed by the Prime Minister Narendra Modi himself.

Could it be the case that the government had not factored in the furore which erupted following I&B ministry's diktat? Unlikely. Was it an attempt at testing the waters, then? One thing is clear: the speed at which the course-correction took place was unprecedented.

On the face of it, many would think that the I&B ministry erred and was set right by the Prime Minister's Office. Those who cover the government know only too well the overarching control the PMO exercises on all the ministries. Simply put, to think that Irani's ministry could have come up with this diktat without having the PMO in the loop is being naive at best. And the Prime Minister directing that the press release regarding fake news be withdrawn and that the matter should only be addressed by the Press Council of India is nothing more than damage-control.

Now coming to the diktat itself. Was it really about fake news? That's the big question. Those who would have got immediately impacted by the amended guidelines were journalists accredited with Government of India—mostly working for national media and covering the Central government. Does the government have enough reason to believe that these “accredited journalists” are peddling “fake news”? Or was it just an attempt to create a mechanism to muzzle some inconvenient voices—accredited ones, of course.

What made the I&B directive curiouser was the fact that it proposed nothing to deal with social media—the most fertile breeding ground for fake news in today's India. Instead, it proposed something bordering on the draconian—immediate suspension of a journalist's accreditation the moment a complaint is registered and sent for inquiry to Press Council of India or the News Broadcasters Association.

As a barrage of criticism broke loose, the I&B ministry made a feeble attempt at arguing that the “fake news” cases will be determined by PCI and NBA which are not “regulated” or “operated” by the Central government. This is akin to saying that the I&B ministry maintains an arm's length distance from Prasar Bharati.

Off the record, in private conversations, central bureaucrats and political insiders have often underlined how the incumbent government was not a “roll-back sarkar”. Let's a take a few examples from the I&B ministry itself. Pune's FTII was on boil for months following Gajendra Chauhan's appointment at the helm, but the government did not budge. As CBFC chief, Pahlaj Nihalani not just kept raising hackles in the Hindi film industry but was also an embarrassment to the government. But he was persisted with. Because this was not a roll-back government, the government machinery argued.

April 3 , 2018 changed that.