Delhi police cannot dictate how journalists cover protest | LME 169 | Pooja Prasanna

Since the Delhi police is now in the business of giving professional advice to journalists, I want to share a few suggestions with them

Rule number one: When you are dealing with protesters, try not to hit them.

Rule number two: When a woman reporter identifies herself as a journalist, don’t grab her.

Rule number three: Don’t tell journalists how far away they should stand.

And rule number four: When women journalists report that your officers assaulted or sexually harassed them, investigate those complaints before posting Instagram graphics lecturing the media on ethics.

Because that is precisely what the Delhi Police just did.

They put out a little guide on how to report. 

See this? It is really an extraordinary document.

The police are not neutral bystanders at a protest. They are armed, powerful actors in the frame. They arrest people. They fire tear gas. They deploy water cannons. They set up barricades, control access, and enforce state power.

So when the police start dictating where journalists can stand, how close we can get, and what counts as a valid badge, this isn't about professional etiquette.

It is about deciding who gets to watch the state when it uses force.

And the subtext that many missed in these guidelines?

The attempt of the state this time is to clamp down on digital media, YouTubers and influencers.

Let me explain.

As I was scrolling X, I saw this tweet.

"The story matters, so does how you get it! Guidelines for journalists."

This was complete with hashtags like #EthicsofJournalism.

Charming. The Delhi Police, an armed state authority that reports directly to the Union Home Ministry, had suddenly decided to moonlight as an editorial board.

So, what exactly are these brilliant new rules they’re demanding?

First, carry and visibly display a valid identity card issued by your organisation or a valid PIB accreditation card at all times.

Second, do not obstruct police operations.

Third, during tense situations, maintain a “reasonable and safe distance” while recording.

And fourth, position yourselves so that you clearly distinguish yourselves from the protesters.

Have any of the IPS officers who drafted this graphic ever actually covered a lathi charge at Jantar Mantar in Delhi, Marina Beach in Chennai or Town Hall in Bengaluru?

What on earth is a “safe distance” when the police themselves are firing tear gas shells, charging with lathis and or using water cannons?

If a reporter is standing 50 metres behind a police barricade at a “safe distance”, they aren't reporting. They are just police plants, taking press releases.

Ground reporting means being there. Where the detentions happen. Where the force is used. Where a citizen is screaming.

You cannot report on police accountability from a vantage point chosen by the police.

And how exactly is a reporter supposed to “clearly distinguish” themselves in the middle of a chaotic, fast-moving crackdown?

This is how independent journalist Deeksha Sinha was dragged by the police.

She previously worked with The Quint. 

So, let’s be clear. The guidelines aren't really about keeping reporters safe. It is about keeping the protesters' voices from reaching people through journalists.

And they create something much more useful for the police: an excuse to blame the journalist the next time an officer hits one. 

Before I go further, here’s a reminder that we have been on the ground covering protests in Delhi, Mumbai and Bengaluru. But our work on the Election Commission has gone beyond that.

For more than three years, we have investigated discrepancies and illegalities in Karnataka, Uttar Pradesh, Delhi and more states. We have questioned the SIR process. 

We have been following the paperwork, the process and the people who stand to lose their vote.

Someone has to keep tabs and keep asking the tough questions that pliant journalists won't ask. Help us do that work. Subscribe to TNM or support LME directly.  

Like Pooja's LME? Support the show: https://rzp.io/rzp/support-lme

Like our journalism? Become a subscriber: https://www.thenewsminute.com/subscription

Okay, let's ask a fundamental question: Who gave the Delhi Police the authority to issue ethics guidelines for journalists in the first place?

Under the Indian Constitution, press freedom stems from Article 19(1)(a), the right to freedom of speech and expression. There is no provision in the law that gives an executive enforcement agency the power to dictate how journalists cover public events. Or decide who qualifies as a legitimate reporter. Or tell them where they can point their cameras.

And look at the biggest hypocrisy, the timing of this PR exercise.

During recent protests at Jantar Mantar and near Parliament, women journalists, reporters standing on public roads with mics and press badges, have alleged that they were subjected to outright physical violence by Delhi Police personnel.

Multiple women journalists came forward with accounts of male officers grabbing them, dragging them by their clothes, shoving them, and one journalist said she was sexually harassed by an officer.

When these women went to the Parliament Street police station to lodge formal complaints and demand FIRs against the guilty personnel, how did the department respond? 

They delayed, stonewalled, and buried the complaints under the convenient cover of an "internal inquiry"

And then, while actively protecting officers accused of sexual harassment and assault, the Delhi Police had the gall to post social media graphics lecturing the press on "professionalism."

And now to how this note is a calculated attempt to choke independent digital media, and specifically, the swelling army of YouTubers, podcasters, livestreamers, and independent creators on the ground.

Look at the wording in the Delhi Police advisory again.

They clearly state that reporters must carry identity cards issued by "recognised organisations" or valid PIB or DIP accreditation cards.

Read between those lines. Who actually has a PIB pass in India today?

That covers a small fraction of India’s journalistic ecosystem.

PIB accreditation is hardly a democratic gateway to the profession.

It is an elite, heavily bureaucratic, government-controlled system. Freelancers, small independent newsrooms and digital-first startups are routinely left out.

And who is most likely to have an “organisation ID”?

The traditional corporate media houses, with their multi-floor offices in Film City and Noida, where primetime anchors often do little more than echo official press releases.

But who is actually reporting from the streets of Delhi when protests break out?

Who was on the ground during the anti-CAA demonstrations, the year-long Farmers’ Protest, the wrestlers’ agitation at Jantar Mantar, or the recent students protests?

They were small media houses like us or independent creators.

It was YouTubers carrying smartphones and lapel mics.

It was mobile journalists without corporate backing, without official press cards, and without PIB passes. They went live directly to millions of viewers, showing unfiltered footage of what was actually happening on the ground, before the official spin could even be written.

And that is precisely why the state is terrified of them.

Independent creators don't need government advertising revenue to survive.

They don't have corporate owners who can be intimidated by tax notices or enforcement agencies.

Their authority comes entirely from their audience and their raw, unvarnished coverage.

By demanding "valid organisation IDs and accreditation" at protest sites, the Delhi Police is creating a legal pretext to clear the streets of independent eyes.

The next time a YouTuber or an independent creator pulls out a phone at Jantar Mantar to document police action, the police won't even have to justify stopping them.

They will simply say: "Where is your PIB card? Where is your organisation ID? You aren't a real journalist under our guidelines. Move back, or we will detain you."

This playbook isn't new.

Connect this police advisory to the broader, systematic legislative assault on digital media over the last few years.

First came the IT Rules of 2021.

Under the guise of regulating "misinformation", the government handed itself unprecedented oversight over digital news publishers and OTT platforms.

Then the government tried to institute a state-run "Fact-Check Unit"; it took the high courts to step in and pause the overreach.

Then came the Broadcast Services (Regulation) Bill drafts.

What was the central objective of those draft laws?

To extend heavy-handed broadcast regulation to independent online creators, YouTubers and socio-political commentators.

The proposed rules would have required individual creators with large followings to register with the government, set up internal “Content Evaluation Committees” and comply with rigid content codes. Failure to do so could mean hefty fines and takedown orders.

This draft was taken back after heavy opposition. 

The bill will come back in some form, but meanwhile, police advisories can be issued much faster.

This is a three-step squeeze:

First, you control traditional broadcast media through corporate pressure and government advertising leverage.

Second, you pass digital regulations to try and control online platforms  

Third, You deploy the police to declare that street reporting without a government-recognised badge is unacceptable.

Now I must admit that, especially after the CJP protests in July, a large number of people who are not journalists have taken to social media.

And their reach is massive.

With no editorial restraints, some of them have even taken to provoking the police and trying to trigger a response that can be captured on camera.

This virality can bring them fame and money.

But using that as an excuse to go after journalists, creators and influencers is a different matter.

And if that’s the case, why did the police not have an issue with mainstream media that has institutionalised similar tactics for TRP.

I can tell you that in many newsrooms, reporters are sent out with a clear brief to provoke not just security personnel, but ministers, politicians, actors, protesters and even victims of crimes.

The police of any state did not issue any ‘guidelines’ then.

So think about this, why now? 

Like Pooja's LME? Support the show: https://rzp.io/rzp/support-lme

Like our journalism? Become a subscriber: https://www.thenewsminute.com/subscription

Produced by Megha Mukundan, script by Pooja Prasanna, edit by Nikhil Sekhar ET, camera by Akshay Lal