The Draft IT Rules explained

In today’s episode on 8th April 2026, we explain the new draft IT rules and what it means for the creator economy. Book a FREE call with Ditto https://ditto.sh/vx51ji

• 0:00Speaker 00

  Hello folks, you're tuned into Finshots Daily. In today's episode, we explain the new draft IT rules and what it means for the creator economy.

• 0:10Speaker 00

  Before we begin, here's a quick word from team Ditto. Life has a way of surprising us and not always in a good way. Sometimes it's a sudden illness or an unexpected hospital visit that can shake up everything. In India, families still pay about 39% of medical expenses directly from their own pockets and just one hospital's take can wipe out years of savings. The easiest way to protect yourself is by getting a good health insurance plan. It's way cheaper than footing one huge bill. And if you're unaware where to start, book a free call with Ditto. No spam, just honest, jargon-free guidance. Trusted by over 8 lakh people for their health and term insurance needs. The link is in the description. Now, back to the story.

• 0:52Speaker 00

  For a lot of Indians online, their first source of news about the latest policy or change isn't the TV or newspaper anymore. It's their favorite creator, be it on Instagram, Twitter, YouTube or any other social media platforms. Better yet, their explanation of the topic is short, crisp and sticks to the key points, just like this podcast that you're now listening to. Some of them have a reach that goes far beyond a typical newsroom, all with a smartphone and a platform. But that also raises another question. If creators are doing the job of newsrooms, should they be treated like one? Ever since the creator economy blew up in India, the creators themselves have operated in a grey zone. They weren't registered as publishers, so they didn't face the same rules as media companies, but their influence could match or surpass it. Now with the government's second amendment to the IT rules,

• 1:35Speaker 00

  that's intermediary guidelines and digital media fix code of 2026, that grey zone is closing fast. Released by the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology, the draft amendments are framed as clarifying and procedural in nature. But what they actually propose is a significant reordering of how India's internet is governed and who gets to govern it. That's because at its core, the draft rules are trying to answer a simple question. What happens when individuals start behaving like media institutions? The answer, at least from the government's side, seems to be straightforward. If you're reaching millions shaping opinions... And explaining public affairs, then the expectations start looking similar too. In other words, the label may still say creator, but the responsibility could begin to look a lot like that of a newsroom.

• 2:20Speaker 00

  On paper, that sounds reasonable. After all, misinformation spreads just as easily through a reel as it does through a primetime debate. And unlike traditional media houses, most creators are a one-man army. They don't have editors, fact-checkers, or legal teams reviewing their content before it goes live. Holding them to higher standards could, well, in theory at least, clean up a lot of noise online. Because while creators may look like newsroom on the surface, they don't function like them underneath. A newsroom is an institution, whereas a creator is often just a person or, at best, a small team, operating at the speed of the internet. Applying the same rules to both just doesn't increase accountability, it also increases the burden of compliance, and that burden doesn't scale evenly. There's also the problem of who exactly counts as a news creator.

• 3:06Speaker 00

  Is it someone breaking political stories or someone explaining them? Does a finance influencer decoding the budget fall into this category? What about a meme page that comments on current events or a viral thread that shapes public opinions for a day? The line between information, opinion, and entertainment online is already blurry. Trying to neatly regulate it risks either being too broad or too easy to bypass. And then comes the unintended consequence that doesn't show up in policy documents: the chilling effect. It's when people start self-censoring not because they are forced to, but because they are unsure of the consequences. And this is where the definition of publisher of news and current affairs content is left open to translation.

• 3:46Speaker 00

  Because if it's read broadly enough, it doesn't just apply to influencers, but anyone who consistently posts about public issues. While this framework already exists for digital news, it's worth understanding how it works. Under the current rules, publishers of news and current affairs content are expected to follow a structured system. This includes a code of ethics, a grievance redress mechanism where users can raise complaints, and a three-tier oversight system that can escalate issues beyond the publisher. Intermediaries, also known as platforms like social media companies, are required to do their due diligence, which includes acting On flight content within specific timelines. In simple terms, traditional digital news operates within a system where content can be questioned, reviewed, and if required, taken down.

• 4:30Speaker 00

  The draft amendments attempt to extend this to the broader internet. And that's where things start to expand beyond just newsrooms. One of the key additions in the draft rules is around synthetically generated or AI-based content. Platforms may be required to ensure that such content is identifiable through labels, disclosures, and other mechanisms. This is especially when it relates to information that could mislead users. At one level, this is a response to a very real problem. The reason this rule exists is because it's getting harder every day to tell the difference between real and AI-generated content. But when combined with a broader interpretation of who counts as a publisher, this creates an interesting overlap. Because now, the responsibility doesn't just sit with platforms or large publishers, it could extend to anyone creating and distributing content that falls within these categories,

• 5:14Speaker 00

  whether that's a full-time creator, a niche page, or even a highly active individual user. Which brings us to the bigger picture. On one hand, these rules are trying to solve real problems in the media today. The internet isn't just a place to interact anymore, it's the primary source of information for most of us. That includes regular users, creators, communities, and platforms. And when that information is wrong or misleading, the consequences can scale very quickly. Creating systems where accountability, especially in an age of AI-generated content, is not an unreasonable call. But at another level, the way these systems are defined begins to matter just as much as the intent behind them. Because the internet doesn't operate like traditional media. It's not made up of just clearly defined publishers and audiences anymore. And when rules designed for institutions start extending into this space,

• 5:58Speaker 00

  the boundaries of who they apply to can become less clear. Now that's the trade-off at the heart of this moment. More accountability could mean cleaner and more reliable information, but it can also mean higher barriers to entry, caution, and a change in how people express themselves online. More importantly, this isn't a closed-door decision. These are still draft rules and they're currently open for consultation until April fourteenth. Which means that everybody can read the draft and respond and share their opinions. The more people understand what's being proposed, the more informed the conversation becomes, whether that's through reading the document, discussing it, or some feedback, participation plays a role in shaping how these rules evolve. Because ultimately, the future of the internet isn't just written in policy documents. It's shaped by how many people are paying attention while those documents are still being returned.

• 6:41Speaker 00

  And if your first source of news is no longer a newsroom, but a creator on your feed, then the rules shaping that creator will, in many ways, shape how you understand the world itself. All right, folks, I will see you in the next one. Thank you for listening to today's episode. And if you want to share your feedback or suggestions, do drop us an email to [email protected]. Until next time.