Overview
- The government notified the Digital Personal Data Protection Rules on November 15, outlining consent managers, retention norms, children’s data processing, duties for significant data fiduciaries, and state carve-outs.
- The Press Club of India says vague clauses in the DPDP Act could be weaponised against journalists and create burdensome, uncertain compliance for newsrooms.
- In June, the PCI and 22 press bodies sent a joint memorandum to MeitY; after a July 28 meeting, they submitted 35 case-based FAQs on August 22 seeking clarity on sections 2, 5, 6, 7, 10, 17, 28, 33, 36, and 37.
- Press groups argue Section 44 of the DPDP Act weakens RTI Act Section 8(1)(j), reducing access to public records vital for public-interest reporting.
- The PCI accuses the executive of obfuscation, says it is not seeking repeal of the law, and calls for binding assurances and explicit journalistic exemptions, with the Editors Guild echoing the demand and noting no formal clarification.