Supreme Court seeks measures against all vulgarity youtuber online Samay Raina and Ranveer Allahabad

 Supreme Court seeks measures against all vulgarity youtuber online Samay Raina and Ranveer Allahabad

YOU READ THIS BOOK 

But one thing is being seen that by working on issues in India, they are catching hold of us small comedians and making it look like they have hit a big target. According to me, if you know my view point, then so many big things have happened in India but no decision has been taken on them yet and decisions are taken first on these useless things. This is not governance but is being seen as a fraud. According to me, if seen, you should be taken first.

According to me, whatever it is, it is all useless. People are running their households on YouTube, which the public is watching. Everything keeps changing on YouTube according to the friends they present. People like that thing. That is why they are watching that thing and whatever thing is there, according to me it is like this. If you do not know, then it would not have got views. If there were not so many subscribers, then you would have caught everyone.

Why in the News?

Recently, the Supreme Court of India asked Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Central Government, to suggest regulatory measures to control the use of filthy language and vulgarity in online programmes.

What did the Supreme Court ask the Solicitor General to suggest regarding online programmes?

The Supreme Court asked Solicitor General Tushar Mehta to propose "regulatory measures" to control the use of "filthy language" and "vulgarity" in online programmes.

The regulatory framework should ensure that programmes adhere to the "known moral standards" of Indian society while maintaining freedom of speech and expression.

These measures are intended to function as reasonable restrictions on free speech, focusing on decency and morality without imposing outright censorship. The court also sought input from stakeholders to facilitate a healthy debate on the issue.

Why did the court emphasize the need for regulatory measures on humour and vulgarity?

To Maintain Public Decency and Morality: The court stressed the need to uphold societal moral standards and prevent the spread of indecent content under the guise of humour. Example: The Supreme Court remarked that humour should be family-friendly and using filthy language is not a demonstration of talent.

To Prevent Misuse of Free Speech: While protecting freedom of expression, the court emphasized reasonable restrictions to curb vulgarity and perversity in public content. Example: The court modified restrictions on YouTuber Ranveer Allahbadia, allowing him to broadcast but warned him to adhere to decency norms.

To Protect Vulnerable Audiences: The court highlighted the need to shield minors and impressionable viewers from offensive and inappropriate humour. Example: The Solicitor General noted that the content of "India Got Latent" was unsuitable for public viewing due to its perverse nature.

To Strike a Balance Between Creativity and Responsibility: The court underlined the fine line between creative humour and offensive language, ensuring content creators remain responsible. Example: Justice Surya Kant noted that talented comedians in India use ordinary words to produce humour without crossing moral limits.

To Ensure Accountability of Online Platforms: The court called for regulatory oversight to ensure online platforms are held accountable for the content they broadcast. Example: The Bench urged the Solicitor General to suggest mechanisms to regulate vulgar content while respecting freedom of speech.

 

What impact does vulgar humour have on society?

Erosion of Social and Moral Values: Frequent exposure to vulgar humour desensitizes people to offensive language and inappropriate behavior, weakening social norms. Example: Shows that rely on sexual innuendos or crude jokes may normalize disrespectful behavior towards women and marginalized groups.

Negative Influence on Youth: Young audiences imitate vulgar humour, leading to disrespect, bullying, and a casual attitude toward serious issues. Example: Viral videos promoting explicit jokes can shape adolescent speech patterns, fostering insensitivity in social interactions.

Public Backlash and Social Division: Vulgar humour offends religious, cultural, or social groups, causing outrage and polarization in society. Example: Comedians making derogatory remarks about religious practices have faced protests, legal action, and censorship demands.

Undermining Respect for Institutions: Crude jokes about public figures or institutions diminish trust and disrespect toward authorities and legal systems. Example: Vulgar portrayals of political leaders can foster cynicism and weaken public faith in governance.

Legal and Regulatory Consequences: Vulgar content violates decency laws and leads to legal penalties or censorship under frameworks ensuring public morality. Example: YouTuber Ranveer Allahbadia faced legal scrutiny and temporary broadcast bans due to vulgar content on his show.

Way forward:

Establish a Clear Regulatory Framework: Develop a transparent and balanced regulatory mechanism that sets clear guidelines for online content, ensuring decency and morality while protecting freedom of speech. Example: The government can establish a self-regulatory body for digital content, similar to the Broadcasting Content Complaints Council (BCCC) for television.

Promote Responsible Content Creation: Encourage content creators to adopt ethical standards and self-regulation through awareness campaigns and guidelines that differentiate between humour and vulgarity. Example: Platforms like YouTube and OTT services can implement content advisories and age-appropriate ratings to safeguard vulnerable audiences.

Mains PYQ:

Q How have digital initiatives in India contributed to the functioning of the education system in the country? Elaborate your answer (UPSC IAS/2020)