Complaint The complaint is that ABP Majha and Zee 24 Taas were repeatedly showing opinion polls in contravention of election rules and also the Guidelines for Election Broadcasts of NBSA dated 3.3.2014, which was also issued by the ECI by a Press Note dated 26.9.2019 wherein the attention of media/broadcasters were invited to the Guidelines for Election Broadcasts of NBSA. The complainant stated that there was no disclosure in the opinion polls as to who commissioned, conducted and paid for the conduct of the opinion polls and the broadcast. There was also no specific explanation about the context, and the scope and limits of such polls with their limitations, neither was it accompanied by information to assist viewers to understand the poll’s significance such as methodology used, the sample size, the margin of error, the fieldwork dates and data used. The above act on the part of the channels was in flagrant violation of election rules and the Guidelines for Election Broadcast and it may affect and prejudice the minds of viewers. Response of ABP Majha The broadcaster in its response refuted the allegations made in the complaint. It stated that the concern stems from the ABP Majha show aired on 21.9.2019 under the name and style “Koul Marathi Manacha – Mood Maharashtra cha – Opinion Poll 2019”. The broadcaster stated that ABP Majha’s anchor had requested his colleague to explain to all the viewers the procedure followed in such opinion poll. Ms. Bharati in her own words stated that,“Whenever we show such poll/survey, in that case, how such poll/survey is conducted, who has conducted such survey/poll is important to be known…” and thus she explained the procedure for such opinion poll . She stated that the Opinion Poll was conducted by C- Voter. The sample size used to arrive at the result of the Opinion Poll was 4,855, consisting of persons of age group of 18 years and above, from diverse professions so as to accommodate the opinions of each and every segment of the population and the said poll was conducted at different time intervals i.e. from 1.9.2019 to 10.9.2019. They fairly disclosed the vote shares and seat shares in the said Opinion Poll. Response of Zee 24 Taas Broadcaster in its response stated that the complaint does not mention the date and time of alleged broadcast and therefore it is difficult to understand the grievance and redress the same. However, it had made all efforts by going through the record of the telecasts and found that no such telecast was aired by Zee 24 Taas after the commencement of the elections and in violation of the model code of conduct and NBSA guidelines. NBSA noted that since Zee 24 Taas confirmed that that no such telecast was aired on the channel, there was no need to proceed further with the complaint viz a viz the channel.

6.12.2019
With regard to the complaint of ABP Majha NBSA considered the complaint, response of the broadcaster and also viewed the CD of the alleged broadcast. NBSA noted that in view of the complete details given by the broadcaster regarding the procedure followed to conduct the opinion poll, the broadcaster had not violated Rule 11 of the Guidelines for Election Broadcast, which requires that the “ Broadcast of opinion polls should be accompanied by information to assist viewers to understand the poll's significance, such as the methodology used, the sample size, the margin of error, the fieldwork dates, and data used. Broadcasters should also disclose how vote shares are converted to seat shares”. NBSA therefore decided to close the complaint and inform the Deputy Secretary & Joint Chief Electoral Officer, Maharashtra State and the broadcasters accordingly.

31.10.2019 Complaint dated 17.10.2019 1. Aaj Tak show aired and published on 16.10. 2019 The complainant stated that the title of the show is: Ayodhya Dispute: “??? ?? ???? ??? ????? ?? ???? ??? ??? ??????? ?? Rohit Sardana ?? ???”. In this show, an individual who was addressed as “Swami Karpatri Ji Maharaj”, expressed some controversial and abhorrent views with respect to the Ayodhya case and declared “18 November se ayodhya me Shri Ram Janmabhoomi ka nirman hoga” and “faisla nischittaur se hai, mere paksh me hai” (On November 18, the formation/birth of Ram Janmabhoomi will begin; the Judgement will undoubtedly be in our favour.). Complainant stated that this is not just a provocative statement made without a disclaimer by the channel especially when the verdict, in such a sensitive and crucial matter, from the Hon’ble Supreme Court was still awaited; such statements tend to incite public disharmony and could lead to disruption of public order; such content has been aired despite of the NBSA issuing a special advisory, dated 16.10.2019, to all news channels to be extra cautious while conducting debates and stated that “it is incumbent on the news broadcasters to take extra care and be cautious while telecasting news relating to sensitive and emotive matters”; the guidelines of the NBSA have not been followed in broadcasting this content. The show aired on news channel, Aaj Tak, has also been uploaded also on the YouTube Channel of Aaj Tak on 16.10.2019 and had more than 3 lakh views. Reply from broadcaster The broadcaster stated that any news debate telecasted by the channel is directed towards fostering civility in public discourse on the issues that are relevant in day to day lives of the people of this country. The debates aim towards bringing the people with different ideological background on one platform and put their opinion on an issue which can be solved by healthy exchange of opinion and intellectual deliberations. The debates also act as an educative tool to the masses. Swami Karpatri Ji Maharaj was one of the panelists in the debate aired by the channel who has inclination towards a particular ideology (which he represented on the panel) just like any other ideology that has been nourished in India on account of its pluralist society. The news channel promotes ideological diversity. The channel respects the freedom of speech and expression of every individual as enshrined in the Constitution of India, therefore, it was not appropriate to show a disclaimer as the same happened spontaneously. The statement of a panelist cannot be attributed to the news channel but solely to the narrator who express it. It should be highlighted that the news channel through its anchor only moderates the discourse and in no way expresses its own opinion without being meaningful and courteous Further reply from the complainant The complainant in response stated that while that is a healthy practice, the debate that is being complained against, was in clear contravention of the Important Advisory issued by the NBSA, dated 16.10.2019 regarding “Reporting of Ayodhya matter pending in the Hon’ble Supreme Court” as also NBSA’s Specific Guidelines Covering Reportage ; the broadcaster cannot resort to and misuse the freedom of speech and expression bestowed upon by the Constitution of India under Article 19(1)(a) as the same is to be read, at all times, with Article 19(2) which imposes reasonable restriction on the freedom of speech and expression; these reasonable restrictions have been embodied in the aforementioned Advisory and Guidelines issued by the NBSA; these Guidelines and Advisory have been issued by the NBSA to keep this very freedom of speech and expression in check so that such a fundamental right is not misused to serve malafide intents of any broadcaster; the broadcaster has, thus, knowingly or unknowingly, endorsed the comments of the participant in the debate in the show titled “??? ?? ???? ??? ????? ?? ???? ??? ??? ??????? ?? Rohit Sardana ?? ???” on 16.10.2019; this was not just a provocative statement made without a disclaimer by the channel especially when the verdict, in such a sensitive and crucial matter, from the Hon’ble Supreme Court was then awaited, but such statements tend to incite public disharmony and could lead to disruption of public order; the news channel has thus violated the Important Advisory issued by the NBSA, dated October 16, 2019, the principles of the Code of Conduct of NBSA which states that news shall not be selected or designed to promote any particular belief, opinion or desires of any interest group, impartiality and objectivity in reporting, ensuring neutrality, endangering national security. Additionally, the channel has violated the Specific Guidelines Covering Reportage relating to Impartiality, Neutrality & Fairness, Law & Order, Crime & Violence and Racial & Religious Harmony. 2. Complaint made with regard to the tweet that was posted through the verified Twitter account of Aaj Tak The second complaint has been made to the tweet that was posted through the verified Twitter Account of Aaj Tak on 15.10.2019 wherein the graphic complementing the tweet contains the caption: “Janmabhumi Hamaari, Ram Hamaare, Masjid Waale Kahan Se Padhare”? This particular tweet, unquestionably, has been put out to provoke negative sentiments against one community and is an attempt to sensationalize the Ayodhya case news coverage. This violates the NBSA Advisory on Ayodhya. A news channel ought to be aware of the potent influence it has on public opinion and hence be cautious while putting out content which could even slightly tend to disturb public order and communal harmony. The channel appears to have put into jeopardy the secular ethos of the country. In view of this, it is in best interest, that the channel removes the above-mentioned content on the Twitter account. Reply from the broadcaster The complaint has been made to the tweet that was posted through the verified Twitter Account of Aaj Tak on 15.10.2019 wherein the graphic complementing the tweet contains the following caption: “Janmabhumi Hamaari, Ram Hamaare, Masjid Waale Kahan Se Padhare”? It has been alleged that the tweet has been put out to provoke negative sentiments against one community and is an attempt to sensationalize the Ayodhya case news coverage and violation of the NBSA’s guidelines. The channel has been asked to retract and remove it. Broadcaster stated that the said caption “Janmabhumi Hamaari, Ram Hamaare, Masjid Waale Kahan Se Padhare” was not something that was coined and invented by the news channel especially for the purpose of telecast. Rather, the same was taken out of the discussion that took place in the courtroom during the course of hearing of the civil appeal in the Ayodhya dispute. Also, the premise of the arguments put by the Hindu Mahasabha before the Hon’ble Supreme Court was based on the same idea which the caption speaks of and that have been reiterated by them before the Hon’ble Apex Court. The channel therefore has done nothing but reproduced an argument that was already part of the record. Further the said caption was enclosed within two inverted commas (‘ ’) which affirms the fact that it was reproduction of a statement/an argument made by someone which was quoted by the channel. Further, it was just a teaser of the program and never came into picture at any time during broadcast of the said story. The intention of the channel behind the present tweet was not to induce public to form a certain opinion but to bring before them the point of view of one of the parties to a dispute that has been going on for decades. Therefore, putting an impediment on the true and fair reporting with a whip will be nothing but unconstitutional. Reply from the complainant The complainant in response stated that the broadcaster has contended that the “caption is not something that was coined and invented by the News Channel especially for the purpose of the telecast; rather the same was taken out of the discussion that took place in the Courtroom during the hearing of Civil appeal in the Ayodhya dispute”; it was submitted that it was never their contention that the caption was coined by the channel; a news channel reports news to the people and it is the moral responsibility of a channel to “seek the truth and report it fairly with integrity” and also “ensuring that controversial subjects are fairly presented” and additionally ensuring that “selection of items of news shall be governed by public interest”; even if it is assumed that the caption was a quote picked from a Courtroom discussion, the same being highlighted by the channel in its Twitter post, as an advertisement or endorsement for its programme, does not uphold any of the principles mentioned hereinabove; these are fundamental principles which news channels/broadcasters ought to follow as a matter of principle and self-regulation, as members of the NBA; further the caption does not carry any disclaimer saying that this is not a view endorsed by the channel neither is the name of the person who made the comment appearing after the caption; even if it is assumed that the channel has simply quoted someone, the same is not at all clear from the Twitter post; The channel is only trying to back track from the views it has clearly endorsed, by posting such inflammatory and inciteful content which could and must have certainly hurt the religious sentiments of the Muslim Community in a secular country like India; the impact of the telecast and the social media post cannot but have a deleterious impact; this kind of targeted hateful content keeps growing its tentacles to reach every Indian living room and due to the reach of social media, every user of social media, without any opposition and is against the preambular goal of fraternity and integrity of the nation; such contents are aimed at fueling disharmony within the nation and it undermines the promise of brotherhood, peace and inclusivity on which the Indian nation is premised.

6.12.2019
1. NBSA considered the complaint, response from the broadcaster, further response from the complainants and also viewed the CD of the alleged broadcast. NBSA noted that while the broadcaster may have no control on what a participant in a programme may state, it definitely can avoid inviting persons who have ideological leanings, which the broadcaster is aware may result in provocative statements being made in a “live” programme, which is likely to offend the sensitivities of any religious group or may create religious intolerance or disharmony especially when the verdict, in such a sensitive and crucial matter, from the Hon’ble Supreme Court was still awaited. NBSA decided to give a warning to the channel be more circumvent and careful in the future. In the event that such telecasts are repeated by the broadcaster, NBSA will take appropriate action under its regulations. NBSA however directed the broadcaster to remove the programme Ayodhya Dispute: “??? ?? ???? ??? ????? ?? ???? ??? ??? ??????? ?? Rohit Sardana ?? ???” from the YouTube channel and report compliance to NBSA within seven days of receipt of such direction form the NBSA. NBSA also observed that broadcasters would be responsible for violations of Broadcasting Standards and Guidelines in regard to the content of any programme aired on the channel; that neither any “disclaimers” before any programme nor the fact that offending statements/views expressed by independent anchors, invited guests or other participants, would relieve them from the liability/responsibility for violation of the Standards/Guidelines of NBA/ NBSA . NBSA, therefore decided to inform the broadcaster and the complainant accordingly. 2. NBSA considered the complaint, responses of the broadcaster and counter response of the complainant. NBSA noted that since the broadcaster had confirmed that the image reproduced mentioning “Janambhoomi Hamari Ram Hamare Masjid Wale Kahan Se Padhare” were promoted only on social media, NBSA could not proceed further with the complaint as the content available on social media did not fall in the jurisdiction of the NBSA. Therefore, it could not proceed to take action under the NBSA Regulations.NBSA, therefore decided to close the complaint and inform the broadcaster and the complainant accordingly.

25.10.2019 Complaint dated 17.10.2019 Ccomplaint is that the channel had broadcast the show with headline "???????? ?????, ??? ????? ?????? ???? ???? ?? ?????" on 15.10.2019 at 7.00 pm and also tweeted the same text and image. The complainant stated that this type of news seems to provoke the harmony between two sections of Indian society and can clearly create a rift between the people and showing hatred and malice towards Muslims. Reply dated 5.11.2019 by the broadcaster Broadcaster stated that the said caption “Janmabhumi Hamaari, Ram Hamaare, Masjid Waale Kahan Se Padhare” was not something that was coined and invented by the news channel especially for the purpose of telecast. Rather, the same was taken out of the discussion that took place in the courtroom during the course of hearing of the civil appeal in the Ayodhya dispute. Also, the premise of the arguments put by the Hindu Mahasabha before the Hon’ble Supreme Court was based on the same idea which the caption speaks of and which has been reiterated by them before the Hon’ble Apex Court. The channel therefore has done nothing wrong but reproduced an argument that was already part of the record. Further the said caption was enclosed within two inverted commas (‘ ’) which affirms the fact that it was reproduction of a statement/an argument made by someone which was quoted by the channel. Further reply dated 5.11.2019 by complainant The complainant stated that he was not satisfied with the response. The broadcaster did not acknowledge that using these hate speeches as headlines in shows using "quotations" is wrong or right. Freedom of press is essential but using provocative speeches as debate show headlines are clearly provocative, and is biased. No one can spread hate against anyone using freedom of speech. Even if those speeches were made in courtroom. Further reply dated 25.11.2019 by the broadcaster The broadcaster vide email dated 25.11.2019 stated that “…..with respect to the image mentioning “Janambhoomi Hamari Ram Hamare Masjid Wale Kahan Se Padhare” was promoted only on social media. With respect to the image/program “Muslim Mukt Bharat”, the complaint relates to an old feed of November, 2018 and the alleged program which was broadcast at the time when UP government was changing names of the cities e.g- Allahabad to Prayagraj, Faizabad to Ayodhya etc. In the alleged program nothing was shown against any particular religion or a community which could be termed as creating animosity or hatred towards anyone.

6.12.2019
NBSA considered the complaint and the response of the broadcaster. NBSA noted that since the broadcaster confirmed that the image mentioning “Janambhoomi Hamari Ram Hamare Masjid Wale Kahan Se Padhare” was promoted only on social media, NBSA could not proceed further with the complaint as the content available on social media did not fall within the jurisdiction of the NBSA. Therefore, it could not proceed to any take action under the NBSA Regulations. NBSA, therefore decided to close the complaints and inform the broadcaster and the complainant accordingly.

The complaint was regarding telecast of a debate programme on News 24 on 1.8.2019, in connection with a controversy relating to a Zomato delivery boy.

23.9.2019
NBSA considered the complaint, response from the broadcaster and counter responses of both the broadcaster and the complainant and also viewed the footage of the alleged broadcast. NBSA noted that while persuing the footage , it did not find the words “khalid tum muslman ho aur q ki tum muslamn ho esleye pandit ajay gautam tumhe dekhnge nahe aur apne aako per petti band lenge” in the footage of the programme. NBSA observed that the complaint related to observations made after the broadcast of the programme and was not part of the broadcast, which is admitted by the complainanat in his reply, he states “ it is further submitted that under the impression that program was over and finished, in response of the fun/joke made by the anchor I covered my eyes and show was finished. It is further submitted that after finish the show normally all guest and anchor make little bit fun and talk about the debate in healthy atmosphere’. NBSA further also noted that contents of a tweet does not fall in the jurisdiction of NBSA. After consideration of the above, NBSA decided that it only deals with complaints with regard to violation of the NBA Code of Ethics and Regulations and that its scrutiny is limited to content broadcast on the member channels. Since the alleged observations were made after the broadcast, NBSA was not in a position to ascertain the authenticity, vericity of the complaint and proceed under its regulations. NBSA decided to close the complaint with the above observations and inform the MoI&B, complainant and the broadcaster accordingly.

NBSA considered the letter forwarded by the MoI&B and noted the suggestion given by Mr. Sharad C. Kapadia, President, Surat Citizens’ Council Trust, Surat “that the source of every news item should be compulsorily disclosed along with the name of reporter/agency and his/its email id .’

23.9.2019
NBSA considered the letter and concluded that the suggestion cannot be agreed to. NBSA noted that the broadcaster/s, prior to airing contents received from third party source/s, are required to verify the contents. In the event unverified content is aired by the broadcaster, and complaints are received, action is taken under the NBSA regulations against the broadcaster/s. NBSA decided to close the complaint with the above observations and inform the MoI&B accordingly.

Complaint dated 20.6.2019: The Delhi Medical Association (DMA) in its complaint stated that it was extremely pained by one of the stories telecast by Aaj Tak news channel on the issue of brain fever at the Muzaffarpur Hospital with sole intention to malign the medical profession.The complainant alleged that the channel has added fuel to already increased incidence of violence at hospitals and against doctors; the telecast only indulged in distortion and mudslinging on doctors fraternity; the reporter was seen snubbing and shouting at the attending doctor and other ICU staff. The DMA alleged that broadcaster had violated the “NBSA, Specific Guidelines for Reporting the injured and the ill” where in “a broadcaster should obtain consent from the team attending on the person/patient or any other responsible person concerned”. In this case the doctors on duty/ICU in charge/MS of the hospital. “No broadcaster shall enter any casualty, intensive care unit, ward, room or other medical section of any hospital or other places without the express consent of the concerned persons”.The reporter and the team failed to understand the sanctity of ICU. The reporting further exposed the sick children to their unsterilized mike, camera & footwear. Response dated 2.7.2019 from the broadcaster: Broadcaster stated that the program was telecast with the legitimate motive to unmask the failures of a healthcare system, which led to the loss of lives of about 60 – 70 children within a week. The intent was to highlight the poor conditions and bring in the State government to take swift action on the deteriorating condition of the children. The channel covered all human elements of this incidence, hence the ward boy, nurse and doctor were also interviewed, so as to get the background & factual status of the situation which Muzaffarpur was facing since 20 years. The broadcaster stated that the hospital was open and the reporters of the other channels and newspapers were constantly reporting from both ward and ICU. Thus, the allegation of barging in and heckling the doctors or hospital staff is denied The reporter went inside and met the Medical Superintendent of the hospital in his office and further, conveyed to him that they will be covering the ground situation. Therefore, the allegation of entering without consent was denied by the broadcaster. The broadcaster stated that the reporter and the team had changed their footwear to the ICU slippers available there. The reporter and the cameraman had in fact, asked for masks from the hospital authorities; however, the same were not available with the hospital staff. Therefore, the allegations of making the children susceptible to further sickness was also denied by the broadcaster. The broadcaster submitted that the reality of an ICU of a government hospital was an expose worth highlighting on national media, so that all relevant authorities responsible for this condition may take cognizance of the situation; answers from the doctor were important to fix the responsibility of the concerned authority as to why there was just a junior resident even in an ICU; if the doctors was facing any support crunch, it was essentially in public interest to keep the public informed about the malpractices in government hospitals and bring it to light before the public. The broadcaster submitted that the reporter also found that there was delay in the treatment due to the doctor: patient ratio in the ward, even after the death toll had reached almost 100; the ward was in a mess with patients and their guardians all over the floor as the beds were being shared by 2-3 children at the same time. Therefore, the allegations that the coverage violated the Specific guidelines for reporting the injured and the ill is denied; pursuant to the broadcast, large funds were sanctioned by the Bihar Government for this particular hospital, additional 900 beds, an air conditioner was provided in the general ward where these children were being treated for heatstroke; sudden inspections led to the suspension of night duty doctors, who were found to be missing from the ward while they were to be on duty; this was a story to bring about a massive change in the health ecosystem, wherein the broadcast, clearly established that guidelines of an ICU were not adhered in the hospital; the visuals clearly showed that the ICU had overworked doctors and nurses working under immense pressure amidst the lack of facilities & procedural guidelines.

23.9.2019
NBSA considered the complaint, response from the broadcaster and also viewed the CD of the alleged broadcasts. NBSA noted that the broadcast was certainly in public interest as it highlighted the lack of facilities in the hospital, which made the authorities take immediate action to improve the facilities/ condition in the hospital. While making the said observations, NBSA noted that it is equally important to present the news in a manner that the institution/ persons (in this case doctors and staff of the hospital) must not be subjected to unnecessary media glare. NBSA noted that the anchor while trying to expose the shortcomings in the hospital, was aggressive and was constantly questioning the doctor and seeking immediate answers, which prevented him from performing his duties inside the ICU and the wards where children were admitted in critical condition. The anchor should have interacted with the doctors and the staff in the hospital in a sober manner and not in manner as seen in the programme. NBSA decided to close the matter with the above observations and inform the MoI&B, broadcaster and the complainant accordingly.

Complaint : The complainant alleged that Sun News had carried a news about the Pulwama attack. The news was aired for ten minutes stating that India has shot down its own aircraft leading to the death of seven soldiers and the news was hidden to protect the Prime Minister’s reputation. Response from the broadcaster: The broadcaster denied the allegations made in the complaint. The broadcaster stated that it had reviewed the alleged content aired on 23.5.2019 at 6.40 p.m to 6.50 p.m, which was based on election results discussion in the live programme titled “Therthal 2019, which had three guests. One of the guests, a journalist, was sharing his individual opinion about the reasons for the victory of a political party in the election and made a passing reference on Pulwama attack for 7 seconds and stated that “For me, it appears even the Pulwama could have been an advantage… he… it could have been an advantage, I feel” ( translated text from Tamil ) . It was the individual opinion of the panelist in the live programme and Sun News had not opined anything in this regard. Other than the above, there is no reference to Pulwama attack in the programme.

23.9.2019
NBSA considered the complaint, response from the broadcaster and also viewed the CD of the alleged broadcast including the translated text. NBSA found no violation of its Regulations or Guidelines in regard to the said broadcast. NBSA therefore decided to close the matter and inform the MoI&B and the broadcaster accordingly.

NBSA considered the a email dated 4.9.2019 addressed to the Chairperson, NBSA, complaining against participation of Pakistani nationals on debates on TV channels.

23.9.2019
23.9.2019 NBSA noted that the guests invited for panel discussions and the contents of a news broadcast are matters of editorial discretion and no action can be taken on the basis of an individual’s view or perception on such issues. NBSA therefore decided to close the matter and inform complainant accordingly. However, the NBSA noted that if there are specific violations of the Code of Ethics, Regulations , Guidelines , the complainant may give the details of the broadcast i.e the date, time and title of the broadcast/s and may point out the violations of the Code of Ethics & Specific guidelines etc, which are all available on the website of NBA http://www.nbanewdelhi.com/whom-to-complaint-broadcasters,for consideration by the NBSA .

Complaint: The complainant alleged that in the programme, the anchor gave several, false information regarding the abrogation of Article 370. The complainant drew the attention to a sentence in the broadcast “ It is worrying that the new BJP government is making the idea of unifying India from Kashmir to Kanyakumari a reality". The complainant demanded an apology for the above statement . Response from the broadcaster: The broadcaster in its response dated 2.9.2019 submitted that “Parayathe Vayya” is a show wherein the host presents the social and political issues faced by the common man and attempts to put it in perspective. Episode telecast on 17.8.2019 dealt with the manner in which Article 370 that gave special status to Jammu and Kashmir was revoked. There was a view that the removal of the special status of Kashmir was carried out in an arbitrary manner without taking into confidence those residing in the state or considering the larger interest of the population; for the purpose of filing the complaint only a sentence from the particular paragraph was taken in isolation which is uncalled for. To understand the real meaning, the paragraph as a whole should be read. The broadcaster stated that the translation of the headline is as follows: “Realize and recognize the change happening to the people of India. Change is immediate. Due to which you and I need to realize what’s happening at the earliest. Realize what are the effects and how does it affect us. We need to introspect whether the vision “from Kashmir to Kanyakumari “is becoming meaningful or whether it’s enough to sit idle.” Complainant did not agree with the translation given by the broadcaster and disputed the translation of the words “becoming meaningful” in Malayalam as “?????????” “Anuvarthan”. According to the complainant the right Malayalam word for "becoming meaningful is “????????” “Sarthakam”.

23.9.2019
NBSA considered the complaint, response from the broadcaster , further reply by the complainant, viewed the broadcast and the translated text of the script. NBSA noted that the content of a broadcast had to be seen in its entirety and the word used in the programme had to be seen in the context it was used in the broadcast . NBSA found no violation of the Code of Ethics and Guidelines in the broadcast. NBSA therefore decided to close the complaint and inform the complainant and the broadcaster.

The MOI&B vide letter dated 11.6.2019 forwarded 21 complaints. The complaints are that the channel ran a news regarding the killing of dreaded Maoists by Indian Army in an ambush in Jharkhand and addressed the killed Maoists as “Martyrs”. Broadcaster stated that while reporting the news of the killing of dreaded Maoists, inadvertently in the graphic card shown along with the news the Maoists were mentioned as “martyrs”. This particular graphic card was only shown once in the news bulletin aired @ 9 AM on 2.6.2019. No subsequent news bulletins carried the said graphic card. On noticing the inadvertent error, as a responsible news channel and as per NBSA regulations, in the first instance they immediately removed the graphic card. Thereafter, they expressed regret in the news bulletins aired @ 12 noon and 1 PM respectively on the same day i.e. 2.6.2019 on Asianet news channel. In addition to the above action, for wider publicity they also posted the regret footage on the official Face Book page of Asianet news and also on their online news portal.

10.7.2019
NBSA considered complaints, response of the broadcaster and also viewed the broadcast. NBSA decided that in view of the broadcaster having taken immediate corrective action to get the error rectified, no further action was called for. NBSA decided to close the matter and inform MoI&B and the broadcaster accordingly.