The Delhi High Court on Thursday took strong exception to the language used by Newslaundry journalist Manisha Pande in a video concerning the TV Today Network, the owner of Aaj Tak and India Today news channels.

A Division Bench of Justices C Hari Shankar and Om Prakash Shukla said that Pande’s use of the word “shit” in relation to a video about Good News Today, a channel run by TV Today, was “gross” and disparaging.  

The Court warned that it may make observations and pass an order which will damage Pande’s career. 

“Are you continuing with anchor? She should be thrown out. She has no business being a reporter. She doesn’t know the basics. She doesn’t know the fundamentals of decency in reporting. We will make this statement in open court. We will comment on her personally. We won’t mind impleading her as a party. There has to be a limit to everything… We may pass an order which will place her entire career in disarray,” the Court remarked. 

Senior Advocate Rajshekhar Rao appeared for Newslaundry. He said that while he did not agree with some of the statements used in the videos, TV Today’s disparagement, defamation and copyright suit against the online news platform is not about the use of language but the manner in which it calls out the fourth estate.

“I take their clip and comment on it. Yes, I should have used better language. But somebody wants to shut me down,” Rao stated. 

The Court made the remarks while hearing appeals filed by the two news organisations against an order of the single-judge in a case filed by TV Today alleging copyright infringement, defamation and disparagement by Newslaundry.

In October 2021, TV Today filed the suit alleging that Newslaundry published videos and articles that tarnished its reputation and made “false, malicious and derogatory” statements about its channels, anchors and management.

However, Newslaundry argued its material was criticism and satire protected as free speech. 

In an order passed on July 29, 2022, the High Court denied interim relief to TV Today.

Both Newslaundry and TV Today filed appeals against the order. While TV Today challenged the denial of interim relief, Newslaundry argued that the court's finding that a prima facie case was made out may harm them.

Today, advocate Hrishikesh Baruah appeared for TV Today and referred to the videos published by Newslaundry.

He said that the comments made by Pande and Newslaundry's Abhinandan Sekhri about TV Today and its journalists were disparaging and that they had used the videos for a substantial amount of time, which goes beyond fair use and amounts to copyright infringement.

While the Court took exception to the use of the word shit by Pande, it said that TV Today cannot term every video that it dislikes as disparaging.

The Court said that Newslaundry's use of phrases like "method anchoring", "thoda drama thoda gimmick (little drama, little gimmick)", "soap opera" or "killing sports journalism Aaj Tak style" in relation to India Today or Aaj Tak amounts to criticism, not disparagement.

"Every word that they say is ot disparaging. This is commenting on what youa are showing. This is criticism. How is this disparaging? She is saying that you are doing it for cheap thrills, that’s not disparaging... Even if he says your programme is absolute nonsense, that’s not disparaging, that’s a comment," the Court remarked.

Advocate Bani Dikshit also appeared for Newslaundry and stated that they have claimed that Aaj Tak or India Today videos are theirs.

She said that Newslaundry's comments like "nanga nach (nude dance)" have to be seen in the context of that it was made.

In the end, Senior Advocate Rao stated that Newslaundry was founded on the principle that the media has stood in the defence of the country in the most trying of times, but somewhere a shift has taken place.

"We [media] are conscience keepers of democracy," he added.

The Bench said that it does not want to express its views on what the media is doing today.

"We don’t want to express our views about what the media is doing. We are restricting ourselves," Justice Hari Shankar said.

The Bench then reserved its verdict in the appeals.