Skip to playerSkip to main content
  • 5 months ago
The Supreme Court on Monday pulled up YouTubers and digital influencers over derogatory content targeting persons with disabilities, directing them to issue a public apology. The bench warned that future violations could invite financial penalties. The directive follows uproar over remarks made by YouTuber Ranveer Allahbadia on his show India’s Got Latent. The court further asked influencers to submit affidavits outlining measures they would adopt to promote awareness about disability rights through their platforms.

Category

🗞
News
Transcript
00:00We're beginning the bulletin with breaking news that's now coming in.
00:04This is with regards to Supreme Court now pulling up comics.
00:07This is stand-up comics for mocking specially abled.
00:12The SC observers have observed and has said that commercial speech isn't free speech.
00:19Bare biceps in Samayarayana has been pulled up by the SC again
00:24and the Supreme Court has come out to say there is guidelines needed at this given point
00:29for social media language.
00:31This is the big breaking that we're bringing to you.
00:33A social responsibility that comes with free speech
00:38especially for personalities of the kind that we're speaking of.
00:42Stand-up comedians who in fact end up having a large audience, a large fan base.
00:48They have to be more careful.
00:50There needs to be a set of guidelines which will be in place to check what the borderline will be.
00:57Draw a red line for them which will not be crossed and in fact go on the other side
01:03when we speak of these very comments that are coming in from them
01:07that may in fact end up being vulgar at some point.
01:12So that line needs to be drawn at this given point.
01:15That is what the Supreme Court has come out to say.
01:17They've been pulled up.
01:19The stand-up comics have been pulled up.
01:20We've seen only in the past months there has been a huge uproar over a certain set
01:26that was done by these group of comedians on a show
01:29which had caused a huge uproar in the nation with regards to the things they had said
01:33in that very set of theirs on the show
01:35which in fact did not go down well with the public.
01:39And social responsibility is what needs to be looked at.
01:43Anisha Mathur joining me from the newsroom at this given point.
01:45Anisha, very good afternoon to you.
01:47You know the court has come out to say that there needs to be a set of guidelines.
01:51What will in fact define what is funny and not foul?
01:55That difference needs to be drawn somewhere.
01:57That is what the court seems to be saying.
01:59Please put it into further context and give us some more details.
02:03Well, see if you look at what has been happening in the Supreme Court
02:06in this comedians matter for the last several months,
02:08the Supreme Court has said that this is not...
02:11First of all, the big takeaway from today's hearing
02:14is the court drawing a line between free speech and commercial speech.
02:18The court has very clearly said that these comedians who are using these platforms to earn money,
02:24this is not free speech.
02:26They are not protected by free speech laws.
02:29This is commercial speech.
02:31And therefore, when there is an intersection between commercial speech and prohibited speech
02:36which is hurting somebody, these people must be hauled up.
02:40And that is why the court has asked them now to display an apology
02:44on their social media posts, on their YouTube channels.
02:47They've also warned of a financial penalty that will be there.
02:50But most importantly, the court has asked the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting
02:55to set up some sort of guidelines which will regulate the language that is used.
02:59Remember, initially the matter had come up when Ranveer Alavadiya's comedy sketch about parents
03:07had gone viral and had created a lot of uproar.
03:10Then Samai Rayana's joke about persons with disabilities
03:14prompted parents of children who have spinal muscular atrophy
03:18to come to the Supreme Court saying that their children,
03:21their disabilities are being actively mocked,
03:23which is what prompted the court to say today
03:27that you cannot use humour to hurt people.
03:30That is not where humour lies.
03:33In fact, I'm going to just read out the comment that the court has made.
03:37Justice Joy Malia Baggi, in fact, said that humour is a part of life.
03:41We can laugh at ourselves, but when we start laughing at others,
03:45and apathide claims are made on humour,
03:47that humour is generated to hurt persons, that causes a problem.
03:54Influencers must realise that when you commercialise speech,
03:59then the community at large cannot be used to hurt people or hurt sections of society.
04:05So very clearly the court now asking the IMB ministry to create guidelines.
04:10The court also noting that news media, traditional media as it is,
04:14is governed under press laws as well as the NBDSA and other organisations
04:20which regulate speech made on news media.
04:23But when it comes to social media, it is completely unregulated
04:26and that's why the court has now asked for guidelines to be made
04:29and for these persons in particular to put out an apology
04:33and tell the court what they will do to sort of raise awareness about these children as well.
04:39Back to you.
04:39Right, right.
04:40Anisha, I have two questions for you here at this point.
04:44Number one being, just for the clarity of our viewers,
04:47we are speaking of two kinds of speech here, commercial speech and free speech.
04:51How are we defining this and what exactly lies in the ambit of free speech
04:56which in fact does not end up protecting these comedians
05:00and the kind of comments they end up making in their sets?
05:04See, when you look at how commercial speech is defined,
05:07we've seen the Supreme Court and High Court verdicts coming in
05:10when it comes to movies, when it comes to documentaries, etc.
05:15Anything that is used to earn money and influence persons,
05:19it can be counted within commercial speech.
05:22And there are guidelines, there are judgments of the Supreme Court.
05:25In fact, today's hearing also, the court had cited the judgment in the Ajay Devgan case
05:33where movies were counted as commercial speech and not free speech.
05:37And therefore, the Supreme Court had in multiple cases said that there are certain kinds of language
05:43that should not be used when there is commercial speech,
05:47that there are certain responsibilities and restrictions that have to be there.
05:51In fact, that is where the Cinematograph Act, for that matter, censorship comes in
05:57because this is commercial speech, this is not free speech.
06:00So therefore, if you're earning from it, then you can be held responsible to the larger public
06:05that you shouldn't create something that either hurts someone or causes some disputes
06:10or causes inter-religious or inter-caste disputes.
06:14Right, Anisha.
06:15Thank you for bringing us those details and in fact defining what commercial and free speech respectively is.
06:21Viewers, this is all the update that we have so far on this very story
06:26and we'll keep a close track as the day proceeds.
Comments

Recommended