Sachin=GOD Posted November 18, 2011 Posted November 18, 2011 Mumbai, Nov 14: Popular Television channel, Times Now has been slapped with a fine of Rs 100 crore in a defamation case. The hearing of the case at the Bombay High Court was not stayed by the Supreme Court forcing the channel to pay the huge amount. The channel had to face the music when it showed the wrong picture of Justice P B Sawant, a Supreme Court judge in a story on a provident fund scam for close to 15 seconds by mistake. Several judges were involved in the case. In spite of running an apology scroll for 5 days, Justice Sawant took the matter to court and sent Times Now a legal notice. In early Oct, the Pune District Court announced Times Now guilty and ordered it to pay Rs 100 crore. The channel appealed against the vedict at the Bombay High Court where it was asked to deposit Rs 20 crore and furnish a bank guarantee for the balance amount. The Broadcast Editors' Association (BEA) had earlier expressed concern over the court order and said that it would explore legal options since the incident had implications among all TV journalists. BEA is the apex body of editors of national and regional TV news channels of India. Link :WTF: 100 cr fine for an inadvertent error for which the channel has repeatedly apologized.
DomainK Posted November 18, 2011 Posted November 18, 2011 Good. The news channels need to learn to be responsible. I hope the SC supports the fine.
Mariyam Posted November 18, 2011 Posted November 18, 2011 Due the hullabaloo over the amount, a few finer points are being missed out from the discussion, which I think are the crux 1) Has anyone ever gotten a case resolved so fast? From the trial court in Pune, to the order by the Bombay HC asserting that Times Now pay up Rs 20 crores up front to the SC declining to interfere. All in a matter of a few weeks. 2) Has any other litigant won any award which was anywhere even close to this. Even 1% or 10%of this award? What kind of impression does the judiciary wish to promote here? That its a master of taking care of its own and couldn't be bothered when more bigger crimes have been committed? Even in the context of the media, Barkha Dutt and Vir Sanghvi's little 'conversation' with Neera Radia was more damning than this mistake ( which was due to someone not doing his/her homework properly). How much of a fine was levied there? :hmmm: Justice Katju said that the punishment is disproportionate. I agree with him on that. Its excessively harsh. I dislike Arnab Goswami and his smug holier than thou attitude from the bottom of my heart. But still, this punishment is just too harsh.
Sachin=GOD Posted November 18, 2011 Author Posted November 18, 2011 Good. The news channels need to learn to be responsible. I hope the SC supports the fine. yeah the news channels need to be responsible but 100 cr is way too much for such a mistake. This is the highest fine ever imposed on a news channel for this kind of a mistake. Such errors occur regularly in newspapers when they print the names of the wrong people. Should they also be given such huge fines??
varun Posted November 18, 2011 Posted November 18, 2011 1) Has anyone ever gotten a case resolved so fast? From the trial court in Pune, to the order by the Bombay HC asserting that Times Now pay up Rs 20 crores up front to the SC declining to interfere. All in a matter of a few weeks. 2) Has any other litigant won any award which was anywhere even close to this. Even 1% or 10%of this award? What kind of impression does the judiciary wish to promote here? That its a master of taking care of its own and couldn't be bothered when more bigger crimes have been committed? Precisely. All this is because the complainant is a higher-up Judge. Sets a bad precedent IMO.
kabira Posted November 19, 2011 Posted November 19, 2011 All the Journalists and News channel should get together. I am sure everyone will get their share (%) for taking the decision so fast. It has never happened. Compare with this case http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?278770
DomainK Posted November 19, 2011 Posted November 19, 2011 The extent of the fine is no doubt high and will probably be cut down to something more realistic at an upper level. But right now I am enjoying the show. It's high time the news channels learned a few lessons. Now they will be more careful knowing that a mistake can cost seriously.
Mariyam Posted November 19, 2011 Posted November 19, 2011 The extent of the fine is no doubt high and will probably be cut down to something more realistic at an upper level. But right now I am enjoying the show. It's high time the news channels learned a few lessons. Now they will be more careful knowing that a mistake can cost seriously. Thats not the take out from this case. Only thing they will learn is that they can't mess with the judiciary. They will still return to their age old ways of shabby and factually incorrect reporting on all other matters. They've been given the stick here, because it was a Supreme Court Judge. No reason to think why defamation case against a cricketer, an actor or an industrialist would have the same outcome.
Holysmoke Posted November 19, 2011 Posted November 19, 2011 Thats not the take out from this case. Only thing they will learn is that they can't mess with the judiciary. They will still return to their age old ways of shabby and factually incorrect reporting on all other matters. They've been given the stick here, because it was a Supreme Court Judge. No reason to think why defamation case against a cricketer, an actor or an industrialist would have the same outcome. Doesnt it set a precedent? Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk
Mariyam Posted November 19, 2011 Posted November 19, 2011 Doesnt it set a precedent? Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk Unfortunately, it does, in terms of the result and its relative magnitude. But the courts are going to show no such urgency in reaching a settlement/decision for cases involving others. Like they always have. :P
DomainK Posted November 19, 2011 Posted November 19, 2011 Unfortunately, it does, in terms of the result and its relative magnitude. But the courts are going to show no such urgency in reaching a settlement/decision for cases involving others. Like they always have. :P Something is better than nothing. Even if it's the judiciary, it's good that some action has been taken against this brand of journalism. Look how the whole broadcasters association and the rest of the news media are standing up in arms against the decision. They have the ability to influence the sentiments of the masses and they have been abusing that power. For me, the bigger element here is the fact that a news channel has been made accountable for it's blunder than the fact that the fine amount was unusually high.
Mariyam Posted November 19, 2011 Posted November 19, 2011 ^^ Fair enough DK. The way I look at it, is that as a country we can do pretty ok with a shoddy and fraudulent media. But we'll be doomed if those at the top echelons of the judicial structure engage in petty games. What happened here isn't justice, its vendetta. After all, the only reason they 'resolved' this so fast was that the judge held a chair in the SC. If posting that pic and being a sensationalizing and entertainment centric news channel was a mistake, punishing Times Now in record time and over zealously is a mistake x 10000. Maybe I've added an extra zero. Was never good with numbers.
ganeshran Posted November 19, 2011 Posted November 19, 2011 Too harsh. Times Now is unadulterated crap, but you canrt slap disproportionately heavy fines just because a judge is involved. If the same strict defamation laws are followed for everyone, it would be ok I guess.
nikred Posted November 19, 2011 Posted November 19, 2011 ^^ Fair enough DK. The way I look at it, is that as a country we can do pretty ok with a shoddy and fraudulent media. But we'll be doomed if those at the top echelons of the judicial structure engage in petty games. What happened here isn't justice, its vendetta. Exactly. This is in no way a rationale decision.
Sachin=GOD Posted November 19, 2011 Author Posted November 19, 2011 Some people here are confusing irresponsible media (as is the case with Indian media generally) with inadvertent mistake (as is the case here). Sure, the media needs to be put into place for the kind of reporting we see generally but in this case it was just a mistake so there was absolutely no need for such a harsh penalty.
punjabi_khota Posted November 19, 2011 Posted November 19, 2011 these *********s deserve even more fines
ravishingravi Posted November 19, 2011 Posted November 19, 2011 Interesting discussion on the issue http://ibnlive.in.com/shows/The-Last-Word.html
Sachin=GOD Posted November 19, 2011 Author Posted November 19, 2011 ^^ Fair enough DK. The way I look at it, is that as a country we can do pretty ok with a shoddy and fraudulent media. But we'll be doomed if those at the top echelons of the judicial structure engage in petty games. What happened here isn't justice, its vendetta. After all, the only reason they 'resolved' this so fast was that the judge held a chair in the SC. If posting that pic and being a sensationalizing and entertainment centric news channel was a mistake, punishing Times Now in record time and over zealously is a mistake x 10000. Maybe I've added an extra zero. Was never good with numbers. the case was filed in Nov 2008 and fine has been given last month so how is it fast :hmmmm2:
ViruRulez Posted November 20, 2011 Posted November 20, 2011 these *********s deserve even more fines +++ Don't care about the reason but these ***ing news channels have all become Peepli Live and need to be fined a lot more. They are SELLING news. They create controversy just for the sake of TRPs. They are now competing with entertainment channels for TRP. FFS at least in an entertainment channels people know that they should not take it seriously but when news channels become crap and only interested in commercial profitability like it is happening in India then there is a real case of wrong information for the masses.
Recommended Posts