The recent versions of the Personal Data Protection Bill (DPDP) have raised concerns among media bodies regarding the removal of exemptions provided for journalistic purposes. The 2018, 2019, and 2021 versions of the bill have all removed the exemptions previously granted to media organizations, leaving them vulnerable to legal action for the collection and processing of personal data.
This move has sparked widespread debate and criticism from media bodies, who argue that the removal of exemptions goes against the principles of press freedom and the right to information. They argue that journalists and media organizations play a vital role in society by providing information and holding those in power accountable. The removal of exemptions for journalistic purposes could have a chilling effect on the media’s ability to perform its role effectively.
In the 2018 version of the DPDP bill, exemptions were provided for the collection and processing of personal data for journalistic purposes, as long as it was in the public interest and did not violate the rights of individuals. However, this exemption was removed in the 2019 version of the bill, which stated that all personal data must be processed in accordance with the provisions of the bill, without any exceptions. This was seen as a major setback for media organizations, who argued that it would hinder their ability to carry out investigative journalism and report on matters of public interest.
The 2021 version of the DPDP bill has also not provided any exemptions for journalistic purposes, despite calls from media bodies to reinstate them. This has raised concerns about the impact it will have on the media’s ability to report on sensitive issues without fear of legal repercussions. Media bodies have also expressed concerns about the lack of clarity in the bill regarding what constitutes “journalistic purposes,” leaving room for interpretation and potential misuse of the law.
The removal of exemptions for journalistic purposes has been met with strong opposition from media bodies, who argue that it goes against the principles of a free press and the right to information. They have called for the reinstatement of exemptions in the bill, with proper safeguards in place to prevent misuse. Media bodies have also suggested that a separate law should be enacted to govern the collection and processing of personal data for journalistic purposes, in order to protect the freedom of the press.
It is important to note that the DPDP bill aims to protect the privacy and personal data of individuals, which is a commendable goal. However, media bodies argue that there should be a balance between data protection and press freedom. They believe that exemptions for journalistic purposes are necessary to ensure that the media can carry out its role effectively, without fear of legal repercussions.
The removal of exemptions for journalistic purposes in the DPDP bill has also been met with criticism from international media organizations. The International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) has expressed concerns about the impact it will have on press freedom in the country. The IFJ has called on the government to reconsider the removal of exemptions and ensure that the bill does not hinder the media’s ability to report on matters of public interest.
In conclusion, the removal of exemptions for journalistic purposes in the 2018, 2019, and 2021 versions of the DPDP bill has raised concerns among media bodies. They argue that it goes against the principles of press freedom and the right to information. Media bodies have called for the reinstatement of exemptions with proper safeguards in place, in order to strike a balance between data protection and press freedom. It is important for the government to consider these concerns and ensure that the bill does not hinder the media’s ability to carry out its role effectively.
