‘Will make things harder’: Creators on new news content rules

The Centre’s decision to widen the regulatory net around news content on social media platforms is drawing mixed reactions from the creator economy, with industry stakeholders flagging both operational challenges and broader concerns around speech and compliance. The move, announced through changes to the IT Rules, signals a shift in how user-led news dissemination will be treated going forward.

The development also comes at a time when creators such as Dhruv Rathee and Mohak Mangal have been at the centre of debates around the use of news clips, copyright boundaries and editorial interpretation. Industry insiders say the expanded oversight could further tighten scrutiny in such cases, particularly for those operating in the explainer and current affairs segment.

At the core of the amendment is the rewrite of the proviso to Rule 8(1), which extends the Code of Ethics for digital media to cover not just publishers but also individual users who share news and current affairs content. In addition, the Inter-Departmental Committee under Rule 14 will now have the mandate to examine such content. This effectively brings creators, commentators and even casual users within the ambit of formal oversight, marking a departure from the earlier framework that largely focused on registered entities.

Raj Mishra, CEO of Chtrbox, said, “The IT Ministry's move to bring individual creators and news commentators within the ambit of the Inter-Departmental Committee is a significant shift, one that reflects how deeply embedded social media has become in the news consumption habits of everyday Indians. For the creator economy, this introduces a new layer of responsibility that goes beyond entertainment content, with implications for how influencers approach news commentary, opinion pieces, and even reposts. From a brand safety standpoint, this could prompt advertisers to be more deliberate about the kind of creators they associate with. At Chtrbox, we see this as an evolving landscape where clarity of definitions will determine whether this regulation fosters a more trustworthy information ecosystem or inadvertently constrains the diversity of voices that make digital media so compelling.”

Gautam Madhavan, founder of Xley.ai and founder and CEO of Mad Influence, said, “Manual checks are going to be impossible to ensure transparency and credibility. We plan to automate content checking and monitoring through Artificial Intelligence using Xley Ai. It is going to be mandatory eventually.”

Arsh Goyal, tech influencer and educator, said, “This raises concerns around freedom of speech, as it limits our ability to share opinions on news or any piece of work. I don’t think such a move will be welcomed by the creator community, whether it’s those covering current affairs or those in the infotainment space. If these regulations come into effect, it will make things significantly more challenging. Having to get content reviewed before posting would add an extra layer of burden for creators like me.”

Legal experts tracking the policy shift suggest that the intent may be to create parity between traditional publishers and digital-first creators who command significant influence. However, they add that the lack of granular clarity on enforcement could lead to interpretational challenges. According to them, the balance between accountability and overregulation will be critical, especially in ensuring that compliance requirements do not disproportionately impact independent creators or discourage legitimate commentary.

According to Rishabh Gandhi, Founder, Rishabh Gandhi and Advocates, "That means creators who step into the news space must stop thinking like casual uploaders and start behaving like disciplined publishers. Fact-check before posting. Keep your source trail. Separate reporting from opinion. Avoid dramatic captions that go beyond the material. Build a correction and takedown protocol before trouble starts, not after. Recent disputes involving creators such as Mohak Mangal and Dhruv Rathee already show that online commentary can invite legal scrutiny from several directions. This proposed move would only raise the stakes further. In this climate, disclaimers are thin protection. Process is the real shield."

Isha Jaiswal, Finfluencer, said, "While this can reduce misinformation and improve responsibility, it also creates uncertainty for creators - especially those who don’t see themselves as ‘media’. The key issue is clarity. Without clear boundaries, there’s a risk of over-regulation and hesitation in content creation. Going forward, we creators will need to be more careful, verify information, and accept greater accountability."

CA Sakchi Jain, who is also a finfluencers with over million of followers on Instagram said, "I have no issues with accountability. Anyone putting out content on public platforms should stand behind what they say. That part I agree with completely."

She also pointed out the ambiguity of rule. "There is a real difference between a registered news organisation with editors and legal teams and an individual creator who picks up a news clip and offers their perspective. Putting both under the same framework without clearly defining what that means in practice is where this gets concerning. The intent behind this move matters enormously. If it is about creating accountability, I am on board. If it ends up becoming a tool that discourages creators from discussing public interest topics including government policies, financial regulations, and economic decisions that directly affect ordinary people, then we will have lost something important. A lot of my content involves exactly these things. If creators start hesitating before explaining a new regulation or sharing their view on a policy because they are unsure what crosses a line, it does not reduce misinformation. It just reduces information."

Creators want from this is clarity. "What triggers a review. What the consequences look like. Whether the process is proportionate for an individual versus a publisher. Because right now it reads more like uncertainty than regulation. And the people who go quiet first are usually not the ones spreading misinformation," she said.