Let industry regulate OTT content, not govt: Experts

As debates around the regulation of Over-The-Top (OTT) platforms continue to intensify, several experts are calling for a shift in approach—arguing that content oversight should come from within the industry, not the government.

They believe a self-regulatory framework led by an independent industry body would be more effective, flexible, and less prone to censorship, allowing creators to maintain artistic freedom while ensuring accountability. Experts warn that direct government intervention could stifle creative expression and lead to excessive policing of online content.

“Moral policing is unlikely to yield long-term results”, say industry leaders, who argue that sustainable content regulation must go beyond reactive bans and ideological judgments. Instead, they advocate for a structured framework that includes clear content guidelines, a credible and independent industry-led regulatory body, and robust investment in audience education.

“Rather than policing what people can watch, we should be empowering them to make informed choices,” said one senior executive from a leading streaming platform. This approach, they believe, balances creative freedom with social responsibility and builds a healthier digital ecosystem.

The Regulatory Imperative

This moment presents a pivotal question for the OTT industry: where should the line be drawn between adult content and obscenity, and who decides what is right or wrong for viewers? While some fear overregulation may stifle innovation, others argue that clearer content labelling, age-gating, and moderation standards could offer a more sustainable middle ground.

Once content regulation becomes subjective and politicized, it can suppress artistic expression under the guise of morality or nationalism, say industry experts.

“What’s considered obscene can vary across cultures and time, so giving any government unchecked power to decide this opens the door to censorship beyond adult content, affecting films, satire, social commentary, and even historical representations,” says Pep Figueiredo, COO - PTPL India and former SonyLIV executive.

I truly believe these narratives need to be balanced keeping the need of the hour in mind and that this is the right moment to define a balanced and transparent content regulation framework, he noted.

“In my opinion, the law shouldn't be involved in modern content policing unless the material is grievously offensive or has sparked serious public objections. Most of these platforms operate behind a paywall, giving viewers a choice. As for creative freedom, I don’t have much to add—frankly, many of these shows lack real creativity to begin with,” said an executive.

“First Define What Is Obscene”

Without clear standards defining what qualifies as 'obscene', government actions often appear arbitrary, says Abhishek Anthwal, Advocate, High Court of Uttarakhand. “Given the easy accessibility of explicit content on mainstream social media platforms like Twitter and Facebook, banning select apps does little to achieve the government's stated goals.”

“Moreover, India's governance system is frequently hampered by inaction, delays, and bureaucratic red tape—diagnosing problems and implementing solutions takes far too long. The banning of apps also creates a chilling effect that stifles creative freedom. To avoid such outcomes, it’s crucial to establish transparent content guidelines and empower strong, independent watchdog bodies—similar to what TV industry has, Anthwal noted.

“Creative freedom must coexist with societal responsibility—and brand strategy. As the streaming space matures, platforms will need to make deliberate choices about the kind of content they champion and the long-term audiences they want to serve,” Pep Figueiredo, COO - PTPL India and former SonyLIV executive says.

India needs a credible, independent body, not just government-controlled but like the ONE ALLIANCE like Sony, Star and Viacom had at a point of time to regulate OTT content, ensuring safety for minors while protecting freedom of expression. Education, not moral panic, is the key to navigating the digital age responsibly. Freedom of expression has been mistaken for lazy sensationalism in some parts of the OTT realm for far too long, Figueiredo noted.

Way Forward: From Moral Panic to Media Literacy

Experts agree that banning content is not a viable long-term solution. It often pushes demand underground, encouraging illegal downloads, VPN use, and untraceable access—further removing viewers from regulatory reach.

“The conversation shouldn’t begin and end with bans,” says a former platform executive. “It should begin with media literacy. Are we educating parents, youth, and content creators about what’s harmful, and why? Or are we just reacting to headlines?,” said a producer.

A comprehensive solution, many argue, lies in a three-pronged approach: clear content guidelines, an empowered industry body, and investment in audience education.

“Freedom of expression has, at times, been mistaken for lazy sensationalism,” Figueiredo acknowledges. “But the solution isn't censorship—it's accountability, nuance, and better storytelling.”

Content Regulation A Complex Matter

The Government of India had earlier proposed the Broadcasting Services (Regulation) Bill, 2024, which aimed to regulate content across both traditional broadcast media and OTT platforms. The draft bill, first circulated for consultation in November 2023, sought to create a comprehensive framework for overseeing online content, including provisions that would extend regulatory oversight to a wide range of digital content creators—ranging from independent journalists on YouTube and Instagram to influencers and newsletter writers.

A particularly contentious clause classified many online influencers as broadcasters, subjecting them to strict content regulation, including the mandatory establishment of Content Evaluation Committees (CEC) for pre-certifying content, if they crossed government-set thresholds.

However, the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting officially withdrew the draft of the bill in August 2024, signalling a pause or rethink in the legislative process. The decision to withdraw came amid significant pushback and concerns from industry players about certain provisions and the consultation process itself.

At present, it remains unclear whether the government intends to redraft the bill entirely or revise only specific sections, as no public announcement regarding a new version has been made so far.

“The withdrawal underscores the complexity and sensitivity surrounding content regulation in India’s rapidly evolving digital media landscape. Stakeholders argue that a heavy-handed or overly broad regulatory approach risks stifling creative freedom and inadvertently casting a wide net over diverse digital voices,” said a Union government official.

As the government evaluates next steps, industry leaders continue to call for a balanced framework that protects viewers—especially minors—while respecting artistic expression and the unique dynamics of online content creation.