BY PRASHANT THIKKAVARAPU| IN CENSORSHIP |13/01/2018
The Supreme Court’s promiscuous use of contempt laws towards criticism has led to the volcanic eruption of a press conference.
BY PRASHANT THIKKAVARAPU| IN CENSORSHIP |26/11/2017
Since the proceedings involve the CM and serious criminal allegations against him, public interest surely outweighs concerns about inaccurate reporting?
BY PRASHANT THIKKAVARAPU| IN JUDGEMENTS |06/06/2017
A High Court judge says an apology for defamation is often better than damages. The argument is intriguing, but flawed.
The distinction between self-imposed ethics and legal remedies is being blurred by an activist judiciary which has begun to issue writs to private organizations.
The Indian Express’ tendency to rely on anonymous sources has surfaced again, this time in a ‘nudge, nudge, wink wink’ piece on Justice Chelameshwar
But even after codification the legislature can legally codify its privileges in a manner which clearly violates fundamental rights.
Sloppiness by journalists and misuse of contempt powers by judges results in poor reporting.
The truly astonishing aspect of this episode is the fact that the Central Government achieved its goal without having a single one of its ministers or bureaucrats speak on the record.
BY PRASHANT THIKKAVARAPU| IN DEFAMATION |21/04/2014
Once the SC has created a right of privacy over all events not in the public record, it opens the door to censorship of any reporting on such events.
Subscribe To The Newsletter

The National Herald has announced  that Neelabh Mishra, Editor-in-Chief of National Herald and Navjeevan, died on February 24 after a long illness, in Chennai. He was formerly editor of the Hindi Outlook until 2015, and became editor of NH in 2016. He began his career from the Navbharat Times in Patna, and launched Eenadu TV in Rajasthan in 1998. Tributes to him on Twitter describe him as  deeply committed to egalitarian and secular values.                                             

The Hindu, The Times of India and  Hindustan Times reported the most controversial parts of the Army chief's Feb 21 speech on immigration in the North East and the growth of the AIUDF as a party. It was only Indian Express that reported a longer excerpt, in which he spoke of amalgamation rather than identification as a solution in Assam, and pointed out that Muslims had come to Assam with the Ahoms in the 1200s and had equal rights over the land. "Both these people have claim to the state of Assam and therefore to the North East region," the army chief said.  Why didn't the others report this crucial admission, which is rarely heard? Because it would have gone against the sensational headlines all the papers gave to their report of the speech? The headlines either highlighted Rawat's comparison between the growth of Badruddin Ajmal's  AIUDF's and the BJP, or his accusation that Pakistan and China were driving the illegal immigration into the North East.                     

            

View More