Media Nama: New Delhi: Friday, 21 November 2025.
The absence of an explicit exemption for journalists and the dilution of the Right to Information (RTI) Act under the Digital Personal Data Protection Rules, 2025 (DPDP Rules, 2025) has left critical questions unanswered, the Editors Guild of India (EGI) said in a recent statement about the rules.
The crux of EGI’s concerns
boils down to the fact that, as per the law, reporting on matters of public
interest may be in conflict with people’ rights to personal data protection.
Importantly, the Guild mentions that in July 2025, the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) conducted a meeting with media organisations where it emphasised that journalistic work will not fall under the purview of the DPDP Act.
“The Guild, along with other media organisations, had urged MeitY to issue a legally tenable clarification or amendment provision to explicitly safeguard journalistic activities,” it explains.
Furthermore, the EGI adds that the media industry had submitted a set of 35 questions and case-based scenarios to the MeitY. However, the Ministry has not provided an official response to these queries.
EGI’s continued pushback against the lack of journalistic exemptions:
This is not the first time that the EGI has highlighted these concerns; it has been emphasising them since the DPDP Bill was tabled in the Parliament in 2023. At the time, the guild had cited the Justice Srikrishna Committee report on the data protection law, which stated that if the law required journalists to adhere to the grounds of processing personal data, it would be extremely onerous for them to access information.
The report had also highlighted that if the law mandates consent for data processing, it would mean that journalists would not be able to publish accounts that are unfavourable to the data principal. In these circumstances, the lack of a clear exemption for journalistic activities would have a chilling effect on journalism in the country.
And in February 2024, the
EGI sent a representation to MeitY seeking a class exemption to data
fiduciaries engaged in data processing for journalistic activities under
Section 17(5) of the DPDPA for as long as such purposes subsist. To explain,
this section allows the government to exempt certain data fiduciaries from any
provision of the act for a specific period.
How does the data protection law impact the RTI Act?
With regard to the RTI Act, EGI had mentioned back in 2023 that Clause 44(3) of the DPDP Act, 2023, unreasonably widens the scope of exemptions allowed to Public Information Officers (PIOs) of government ministries and departments to reject RTI applications, as they can simply argue that certain information ‘relates to personal information’.
EGI argued that this widened scope of exemptions “shifts the balance in favour of non-disclosure of information, including information which is being sought by journalists in public interest, thereby reducing accountability”.
As MediaNama has previously reported, the DPDP Act also amends a provision of the RTI Act, which guaranteed individuals the same access to information as available to the Parliament and state legislatures. This reduces the amount of information available to the average person.
The DPDP rules do not alleviate these concerns:
“The notified rules do not alleviate these concerns [lack of journalistic exemptions and curtailed RTI Act]. Ambiguous consent obligations around consent risk exposing journalists and newsrooms to compliance burdens that may impede routine reportage,” EGI explains in its latest statement.
It has once again urged the Government to issue a ‘clear and categorical clarification’ exempting bona fide journalism from the consent and processing requirements under the Act. The guild argues that while data protection and privacy are vital, the government needs to balance them against people’s right to know and the freedom of speech and expression.
The absence of an explicit exemption for journalists and the dilution of the Right to Information (RTI) Act under the Digital Personal Data Protection Rules, 2025 (DPDP Rules, 2025) has left critical questions unanswered, the Editors Guild of India (EGI) said in a recent statement about the rules.
Importantly, the Guild mentions that in July 2025, the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) conducted a meeting with media organisations where it emphasised that journalistic work will not fall under the purview of the DPDP Act.
“The Guild, along with other media organisations, had urged MeitY to issue a legally tenable clarification or amendment provision to explicitly safeguard journalistic activities,” it explains.
Furthermore, the EGI adds that the media industry had submitted a set of 35 questions and case-based scenarios to the MeitY. However, the Ministry has not provided an official response to these queries.
EGI’s continued pushback against the lack of journalistic exemptions:
This is not the first time that the EGI has highlighted these concerns; it has been emphasising them since the DPDP Bill was tabled in the Parliament in 2023. At the time, the guild had cited the Justice Srikrishna Committee report on the data protection law, which stated that if the law required journalists to adhere to the grounds of processing personal data, it would be extremely onerous for them to access information.
The report had also highlighted that if the law mandates consent for data processing, it would mean that journalists would not be able to publish accounts that are unfavourable to the data principal. In these circumstances, the lack of a clear exemption for journalistic activities would have a chilling effect on journalism in the country.
How does the data protection law impact the RTI Act?
With regard to the RTI Act, EGI had mentioned back in 2023 that Clause 44(3) of the DPDP Act, 2023, unreasonably widens the scope of exemptions allowed to Public Information Officers (PIOs) of government ministries and departments to reject RTI applications, as they can simply argue that certain information ‘relates to personal information’.
EGI argued that this widened scope of exemptions “shifts the balance in favour of non-disclosure of information, including information which is being sought by journalists in public interest, thereby reducing accountability”.
As MediaNama has previously reported, the DPDP Act also amends a provision of the RTI Act, which guaranteed individuals the same access to information as available to the Parliament and state legislatures. This reduces the amount of information available to the average person.
The DPDP rules do not alleviate these concerns:
“The notified rules do not alleviate these concerns [lack of journalistic exemptions and curtailed RTI Act]. Ambiguous consent obligations around consent risk exposing journalists and newsrooms to compliance burdens that may impede routine reportage,” EGI explains in its latest statement.
It has once again urged the Government to issue a ‘clear and categorical clarification’ exempting bona fide journalism from the consent and processing requirements under the Act. The guild argues that while data protection and privacy are vital, the government needs to balance them against people’s right to know and the freedom of speech and expression.
.JPG)
.JPG)
