Stressing that the information and broadcasting ministry has not done "anything substantial" and "failed to discharge its responsibility" in curbing the issue of “paid news”, a parliamentary panel has suggested setting up either a new statutory regulator or revamping the existing Press Council of India (PCI) by giving it more teeth.

Paid news means printing or telecasting advertisements in the guise of news reports/stories. While paid news has been an issue that has left the credibility of many media houses at an all-time low — the Karnataka state election commission, for instance detected 42 cases of “paid news” during the assembly poll, which took place on May 5 — a statutory body to regulate the media is no less dangerous, say many in the media. It could be, for instance, a government move to partially control the media from being too critical of the government, or the ruling dispensation, especially handy in the current times when the media is going all guns blazing at corruption cases and in the run-up to 2014 general elections.

But another contention is that the media — both print and electronic — is in dire need for a regulatory body with power to penalise media organisations found passing off advertisements (whether political or corporate) in the garb of journalism, and that PCI is certainly not that organisation.

So is the idea to form a statutory, or constitutional body, to curb paid news a good idea? Or is it another plan to curb media freedom?