New Delhi: Media watchdogs DIGIPUB News India Foundation and the Editors Guild of India have issued strong warnings against the Digital Personal Data Protection Rules, 2025, saying the provisions pose a serious threat to press freedom and democratic accountability.
The rules, notified on November 15, follow the Digital Personal Data Protection Act (DPDPA), 2023, and mark India’s first comprehensive privacy law. On paper, the Act requires platforms to secure informed consent from users, preserve or delete personal data on request, and places liability on companies to protect citizen information. The government has said implementation will be staggered over 18 months, beginning with the establishment of a data protection board and its enforcement powers.
However, DIGIPUB argues that the new framework undermines the Right to Information Act and creates avenues for state overreach. “By excluding journalists from any statutory exemption and granting the State broad access and enforcement powers, they open the door to indirect censorship, a chilling effect on free expression, and disproportionate surveillance of legitimate newsgathering activities,” the organisation said. It warned that source confidentiality, anti-corruption disclosures and public-interest investigations could all be compromised.
DIGIPUB had earlier submitted objections to the removal of the journalistic carve-out from the DPDPA, 2023, and flagged that Section 44(3) substitutes Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, abolishing the public-interest override. Representatives also met the MeitY secretary during consultations but said their concerns were ignored. “This reflects a serious departure from the democratic consultative process expected in delegated legislation and demonstrates disregard for press freedom and the constitutional right to information,” DIGIPUB noted.
The Editors Guild echoed these concerns, stressing that ambiguous obligations around consent could expose journalists and newsrooms to heavy compliance burdens. “Without explicit exemptions or clarifying guidance, the possibility remains that journalistic activities could be interpreted as “processing” requiring consent, thereby chilling newsgathering and hindering accountability journalism,” the Guild stated.
The Guild, along with other media organisations, had earlier submitted 35 detailed questions to MeitY, urging a legally tenable clarification or amendment to safeguard journalistic activity. They said no official response has been received. “In the absence of such clarity, confusion and over-compliance will weaken press freedom and obstruct the media’s essential role in a democratic society,” the Guild warned.
Both DIGIPUB and the Editors Guild emphasised that while data protection and privacy are vital objectives, they must be balanced against the constitutional guarantee of free speech and the public’s right to know.