One important aspect which is perhaps easy to lose sight of in this debate is that the Supreme Court did not weigh in on the guilt or lack of it in this case, but on the fact that the person could not shy away from the responsibility to face the charges in a court. What should also be noted is that the underlying case is a criminal case and not for civil liability or libel.

Dhananjay Nene examines few implications of the recent Supreme Court ruling against the 19-year-old Orkut user. He identifies several ways by which ‘offended’ plaintiffs can intimidate bloggers by merely filing suit.

My concern is the frivolity of claims that might pop up on grounds of ‘hurting public sentiment’. As the recent Billu Barber issue shows, it doesn’t take much to offend someone from a billion-plus population. Will valid criticism against political parties or companies be squelched under this pretext?

Bloggers may no longer express their uninhibited views on everything under the sun, for the Supreme Court said they may face libel and even prosecution for the blog content.

It will no longer be safe to start a blog and invite others to register their raunchy, caustic and even abusive comments on an issue while seeking protection behind the disclaimer — views expressed on the blog are that of the writers.

This chilling warning emerged as a Bench comprising Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan and Justice P Sathasivam refused to protect a 19-year-old Kerala boy, who had started a community on Orkut against Shiv Sena, from protection against summons received from a Maharashtra court on a criminal case filed against him [source].

A recent Supreme Court ruling seeks to alter the way we blog or even perceive bloggers [hat tip: Rahul]. Given the recent NDTV v. Chetan Kunte issue, we find these developments disturbing not only from the perspective of freedom of speech but also in terms of implications for political discourse and reasoned debate.

We are seeking suggestions to address these concerns especially from a legal perspective. Moving beyond rants against the SC ruling, we would appreciate if you could offer any suggestions to tackle efforts at controlling our blogging rights. This ruling not only affects bloggers but all netizens who comment on forums and Facebook/Orkut communities. You are free to share your suggestions through your personal blogs; if you do please send us your links. Any suggestions from lawyer-bloggers would be greatly appreciated.

“Yeah and their old laws. Anyway, I don’t think there is any country where truth is not an absolute defense”

“There is”

Google and Wikipedia time. I lost the bet. The country is Philippines. In the Philippines, truth is only part of the defense – in addition to showing the statements were true, the defendant will have to prove that matter charged as libelious was made with good motives and justifiable ends.

In the true spirit of xkcd and inspired by the recent NDTV v. Chetan Kunte brouhaha, Veena spends time online digging up information on libel laws in different jurisdictions. The real trouble is when the defendant is in one country with his content hosted on servers in a second country and is being sued by the plaintiff in a third country. So which laws apply? Anyway, none of the plaintiffs even want the cases to go to court when simply the threat of a lawsuit can achieve desired results, right?

Vishal Dadlani (music director), had created an online petition against the insensitive reporting of the Mumbai terror attacks by many TV news channels. The petition was signed by thousands and was eventually submitted to the Bombay High Court on November 30, 2008.

Vijayendra informs us of an important update to the above-quoted petition. Mind you, we do not support any kind of curbs or regulations on media coverage especially by the government and simply expect the media to hold themselves to higher standards and not attempt to clamp down on bloggers expressing their opinion.

Let us assume for the sake of argument that what Kunte wrote was indeed libelous, and something that required strong action. If so, why is NDTV mum on it after all this while? The story has certainly spread in the Indian blogosphere like wildfire. NDTV and/or Barkha Dutt should have, by now come out with at least a statement on this whole issue to present their side of the story. If they are convinced they have done nothing wrong, why not come out and proclaim their innocence?

Gaurav wants to know why Barkha Dutt and NDTV are silent on this whole issue especially if they want to send a message that so-perceived libelous posts will be dealt harshly.

It’s also a sad day for the media fraternity because Kunte was being threatened of libel for making legitimate criticism about an issue of public concern. Freedom of speech is the foundation of a functioning democracy, and the law of libel shouldn’t be used to stifle expression of an opinion that could have taken the debate forward.

Binu Karunakaran at Counter Currents reminds Barkha of her Independence Day-eve column in Khaleej Times on resisting a code for conduct for the media and asking to be scrutinized just as she does to the rest. As Binu says, we just want Barkha now to walk the talk.

But the fact remains that the Navy Chief has uttered those damaging words, and despite NDTV’s letter asking “for an immediate retraction from the Navy” and “officially [complaining] that the comments amount to defamation,” no such retraction appears to have been made by the Navy (at least to my knowledge).

Abi takes a look at the real reason Chetan was sent the legal notice – the acussation on Wikipedia concerning Barkha Dutt’s Kargil coverage and finds that not everything is as NDTV wants us to believe. Check out this interesting comment by ‘Army Officer’ who asks interesting questions about the above mentioned accusation and Barkha’s defense.

The main criticism that I saw everywhere was that your coverage of the movements of the police, army, commandos and others was aiding the enemy. So I was happy to see this morning that you are finally taking on the enemy. An enemy, furthermore, that nobody had previously identified: one Mr Chyetanya Kunte, a blogger. He apparently made critical statements of NDTV, and, particularly, of you. The nerve.

Rahul Siddharthan writes a fan letter to Barkha Dutt.

Terrorist attacks in Mumbai. Media reports. Bloggers blog. Twitterers tweet. People don’t like media’s coverage. Bloggers opine and report on media’s role. Media sues blogger for libel and defamation. Blogger forced to withdraw ‘offensive’ post.

Regularly Updated Post. Scroll down for updates

Unfortunately for NDTV, other bloggers continue to blog. In strong protest of such intimidation.

What’s appalling is the very bodies who owe their survival to free speech, the very organizations that used free speech to report on the Mumbai attacks, and defended their content as necessary for information dissemination are now against a blogger’s right to free speech.

Shripriya finds this behavior by NDTV unacceptable and accuses them of “violating some journalistic ethic”.

“Mom, tell me, is all criticism libelous? When news channels criticize politicians, is that also libelous? What about news analysis, which is opinion mixed with fact – is that libelous too?”

“No, it is just freedom of speech. ”

Lekhni shares a bedtime story that would perhaps help NDTV sleep better at night if they listen carefully for the moral of the story.

However it pisses me off totally when they indulge in sensational journalism that potentially puts people’s life in peril and then arm twist their way out when a concerned blogger mentions it in his blog.

V.P.Jaiganesh is maha-pissed at NDTV for such strong arm tactics against bloggers who merely are expressing their opinion; just like any other aam aadmi.

The Comic Project channels Ice T in defense of Chetan’s right to express himself.

And here is the clincher: In his rant against the media, Admiral Sureesh Mehta directly alleged that Barkhta Dutt was responsible for death of three Indian soldiers in Kargil operations. Has Admiral Mehta been sued for what Barkha Dutt criticizes as ”defamatory” remarks? No! In fact, all that remark has elicited from NDTV and Barkha Dutt is an advice to read V.P Malik’s book on Kargil war and an ”official complaint.”

Rohit is not surprised by NDTV’s conduct and wonders why other media outlets that have criticized Barkha Dutt and NDTV’s coverage have not been targeted.

How does a Barkha Dutt reconcile her stated respect for criticism with the suggestion that those who don’t like what you do and the way you do it can say it with the remote? What the latter statement reveals is the hypocrisy inherent in the former—no more, no less.

Prem Panicker provides clarifications and highlights the primary issue here concerning Barkha Dutt and NDTV – “lack of grace, this intolerance for criticism, this tendency to the notion that you are immune to the searching examination you subject others to”. Trying to silence bloggers with an opinion with heavy-handed legal stunts doesn’t bode well for their brand.

Which takes us back to the same question: why do they hate us so much? From India Today to TOI to Outlook and now NDTV, the media has on numerous occasions ranted against bloggers with undisguised contempt, which stems from their appalling ignorance of what blogging is all about.

Sandeep asks if the media’s simmering anger against the blogger is somehow responsible for this mess. He has created a Facebook group to express his solidarity with Chetan.

You won’t achieve anything by getting one blogger to withdraw what he typed in the heat of anger. Just like the government of India wouldn’t have achieved anything by blocking one TV news channel. The ‘have lawyers will sue’ attitude won’t help. It will make things worse. For you, me, and everyone else. ‘We the people‘ are pissed. Do you care?

Vijayendra Mohanty reminds NDTV and Barkha Dutt where and why they are wrong in this drama.

Can you imagine if what would have happened if any of the politicians had dared to sue NDTV for libel. Not only NDTV but everyone in English media would be crying fascism like it was Third Reich. This despite the fact that not only a politician has as much right to redressal as NDTV but also he probably has a stronger case for libel against Barkha Dutt (and English media) than Barkha Dutt has against Chyetanya.

Gaurav wonders if Barkha Dutt knows that she too can easily be at the other end of the barrel.

Barkha has earlier covered topics like “regulating blogs” but I sincerely hope that she would also consider making this latest issue a topic of discussion during her next “We The People” debate on NDTV.

Amit Agarwal at Digital Inspiration has a great suggestion – why not debate this issue on Barkha Dutt’s program – We the People – if she thinks it is such a serious issue. I’m sure that’s all what we want – a lively and constructive debate.

This isn’t the first instance of bloggers getting into legal trouble with media companies over their content: as far back as 2005, Mediaah!, a media blog by Pradyuman Maheshwari who recently joined the Exchange4Media Group as the Editor in Chief for Exchange4Media and Impact was forced to shut down after being served a legal notice by the Times of India group. Someone then launched Mediaha, with some of the deleted content.

MediaNama remembers the previous case when a blog was forced down by a media organization. Dragging bloggers into court or threatening to only makes matters worse when things can in fact be amicably settled.

NDTV probably sent the legal notice. Kunte, probably satisfied that the post had done its job by raising awareness, must have agreed to take the post down. But NDTV lawyers, or maybe even Barkha Dutt herself (I don’t know for sure) might have insisted that unless he issues a sniffling apology, they will take him to court and demand crores and crores. And who knows, since they seem to have been following the IIPM playbook so closely, maybe they even tried to contact his employers to pressure him (again, I don’t know if this is true…. just speculating).

Gaurav Sabnis who knows a thing or two about being stifled by large organizations thinks that NDTV and Barkha Dutt made a huge tactical error by making Chetan grovel for forgiveness regardless of what he wrote was right or wrong. As he points out, things are not beyond reproach even now. The fact that a news organization gets so hot and bothered about opinions they don’t like is especially galling.

This post has simply been set up to convey your thoughts to Burkha Dutt and NDTV in a peaceful and respectful manner. The email is not meant to offend Ms. Barkha Dutt but to simply express your displeasure hence the body of the email is non-editable.

Aditya has set up a simple un-editable message that can be emailed to Barkha Dutt. If you agree with the content, fill in your details and hit send.

Media organizations need to accept that bloggers will watch them and criticize them, whenever they make a mistake. Many journalists, some of whom are bloggers themselves, welcome this reality and even see the blogosphere as a realization of Habermas‘ public sphere. Some journalist disagree. Shobhan Saxena at TOI has called blogs “rubbish” and Barkha Dutt herself has previously wondered if blogs should be regulated. The point is that, irrespective of which end of the spectrum they are on, journalists and media organizations will need to accept that blog surveillance is here to stay.

Gaurav Mishra once again underlines the core issue here and also warns bloggers to be aware of libel laws that they may be subject to.

No one creates heroes better and faster than old media. Sometimes, they do it inadvertently. Like in the case of blogger Chetan Kunte (Chyetanya Kunte), who ‘dared’ to question the work of a mainstream media journalist Barkha Dutt of NDTV news channel.

Pramit Singh highlights the irony in this drama that ended up making Chetan Kunte an hero in spite of his inactions against NDTV.

Barkha Dutt and NDTV simply failed to learn from the groundswell of opinion against their coverage and instead chose to intimidate a lone blogger using legal tactics. That is the core issue here. How does this affect their brand and bottomline? Check out Placid Freedom’s post on his disillusionment with NDTV after this incident.

Tell me again, if taking action against Chetan for his so-called libelous statements has now enhanced Barkha Dutt’s reputation. In fact, the opposite may be true now. Especially so as Amrutha says, when NDTV themselves have been guilty of transgressions that they accuse Chetan of and yet no apology has been forthcoming as yet.

you may want to know that the author of this email- a certain Mr. Kunte who lives in Holland.. has been sent a legal notice by NDTV for the rubbish and lies peddled in this email.

From the horse’s mouth. Rohit discovers on a Facebook group that Barkha Dutt admits that NDTV has in fact sent a legal notice to Chetan Kunte. Feel free to join in the discussion with Barkha.

Bloggers value their opinions, but do not always feel obliged to back up those opinions with the necessary rigour to support and substantiate them. It is time that this obligation was picked up and applied to blogposts in the same way as columns and news reports do.

Sumant wants bloggers to be more careful about what they write. But if NDTV really wanted Chetan to be a better blogger, they would have asked him to remove the offending statements [quoted from Wikipedia] and let him retain the rest of the post that expressed his opinion. It is not just the ends but also the means that indicate the intent of their actions.

One day, when Her Shrillness was out playing in the garden, she spotted a globber lurking in the shrubbery. Quick as a newsflash, she had the globber captured by her guards, and brought him before the High Council. When the High Council told her that no, she couldn’t have his head cut off (only her cousin, the Red Queen, could use that head line), she proceeded to whine and pout until the poor globber agreed to issue a public apology for the things he’d said about her

Falstaff weaves a ‘fictional’ tale about the oh-so-almighty Hark! DaButt and her quest for conquering the truth. He even has a voluntary notice to prevent Hark! DaButt from suing him.

Feel free to send us your posts if you choose to write on this issue.

Recently Terri’s Mom wrote a post Potable Poison describing the sadness of seeing men drink themselves to death in India and the suffering of their wives, who are at the receiving end of a lot of abuse. The Mad Momma…

Continue reading this post

I am interested in hybrid religious practices, because of a variety of factors, my family background, my own faith, that is rooted in Hinduism but borrows from other religious ideas, India, it’s history…
A few months ago when the debates on…

Continue reading this post

What can be a “credible” evidence? The answer is simple. Nothing can be a “credible” evidence. Because the word “credible” involves mutual trust. Since all possible evidences can be forged, so “credibility” of each evidence can always be questioned. The other factor is equally important – the desire to investigate. Everyone knows that Pakistan is lacking in this front – so we can’t expect anything else.

Diganta at The New Horizon dismisses Pakistan’s claim of forged evidence by digging up legal precedents especially with GPS and phone intercepts (some even in Pakistan) used in prosecuting the accused [via]. My question is why does India have to bend over backward displaying any evidence we have?

2. Anonymous name : Being anonymous or not revealing your true identity does not guarantee anonymity. It just takes a couple of hours to track anyone down on the internet. Sad but true. (Unless you are a hacker. Not someone who just took a course in ethical hacking with Ankit Fadia. An experienced one. Even then I am not too sure.)
3. More keywords : Use keywords like ‘allegedly’ and ‘citation needed’ in case it is something you overheard, like rumours.

In a recent incident a blogger landed in trouble for writing about the Kurla Best Bus Encounter. Deepak Iyer writes about the points to note while writing such posts.