EGI expresses 'grave concerns' over Digital Personal Data Protection Act's impact on journalism

The Editors Guild of India has submitted a detailed representation to the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY), outlining significant concerns regarding the potential impact of the recently passed Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 (DPDPA) on journalistic endeavours.

The letter, addressed to the Union Ministry for Electronics and Information Technology, highlighted that several provisions of the bill could pose challenges to investigative journalism and jeopardise the safety of journalists, potentially curtailing freedom of the press.

According to the issued statement, the Guild is concerned about the need for consent, under Section 7 of the DPDPA, to process any personal data in the course of their journalistic activities.

“The absence of any exemptions for journalistic activities could mean that journalists would invariably have to rely upon consent to process any personal data in the course of their journalistic activities. The fundamental role of the press and its ability to ensure transparency and accountability would be severely undermined by the data principal’s ability to simply refuse consent to the processing of their data,” the statement added.

In the document, the EGI has outlined its concerns about the Data Protection Act, which was passed by Parliament in August last year and is set to come into effect sometime this year. 

As per the letter, “The DPDPA, while a laudable initiative towards protecting the personal data of individuals, if applied indiscriminately to the processing of personal data in a journalistic context, will bring journalism in the country to a standstill. This will have a long-standing impact on the freedom of the press, and the dissemination of information not just in reporting in print, TV, and the internet, but also the mere issuance of press releases by all parties including political parties.”

The letter stated, “Journalists and media organisations would consequently have to notify data principals of the proposed processing prior to or at the time of requesting consent. As indicated above, purpose specification (a necessary component of such a notice), particularly at a nascent stage in a journalistic context is infeasible, and may (in the case of investigative journalism) even defeat the purpose of undertaking such processing. Obtaining consent (including obtaining verifiable consent from the parent or lawful guardian of a child or a person with a disability) presents similar problems. For instance, when a journalist is investigating the parties involved in a fraudulent / Ponzi scheme, reporting on road accidents in a particular city, or publishing information about the achievement of an individual who is a resident of another city, the requirement to provide notice and obtain consent would not only be impractical or infeasible but will likely defeat the purpose of the journalistic endeavour, by causing inordinate delay or impeding the journalist from publishing the news report itself.”

“We have therefore urged MeitY to ensure that processing for journalistic purposes be exempted from the application of the DPDPA, and that a class exemption to data fiduciaries undertaking processing for journalistic purposes under section 17(5) of the DPDPA be provided. Such an exemption is particularly justified given that the absence of such a carve-out will have a necessarily adverse impact on the right to freedom of speech and expression, and the right of journalists to carry on their occupation,” it added.

Info@BestMediaInfo.com