Digital Personal Data Protection Act does not infringe on press freedom: Ashwini Vaishnaw
NEW DELHI Information Technology Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw on Wednesday (October 28, 2026) said the Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act did not infringe on press freedom, asserting that the Constitution guaranteed journalistic independence. Editorial | Too little, much later: on the Digital Personal Data Protection Rules, 2025 Speaking to the media, Mr. Vaishnaw said: “The journalistic freedom is guaranteed by the Constitution.
That freedom is absolutely available. There is not even an intention to affect the journalistic freedom.” He invited editors and media professionals to engage in an open dialogue with the government to discuss concerns surrounding the law. The remarks came amid concerns from news publishers that the law could make investigative reporting more difficult. They have argued that the absence of a specific exemption for journalism could affect reporting on matters of public interest, especially investigations involving personal information collected without consent.
They have also raised concerns about retaining information required as part of investigative reporting, and protecting confidential sources. Media association challenges privacy law in Supreme Court storyline 1 New privacy law will shut down newsrooms, change the concept of news: Digital News Publishers Association New privacy law will shut down newsrooms, change the concept of news: Digital News Publishers Association The Supreme Court issued notice to the Centre and listed the case for detailed hearing on November 17 New privacy law will shut down newsrooms, change the concept of news: Digital News Publishers Association storyline 1 The Minister said the privacy law “absolutely maintains, fully maintains the journalistic freedom, the Constitution guarantees”, adding that it was aimed at protecting personal data without undermining media freedom.
Open to amendment It is learnt that the government is also open to amending the law to explicitly safeguard journalistic activities, if necessary. “If hardcoding is required, we can hardcode it; it only requires an amendment... There is no problem in that because our intent is clear,” a top source said. The source added that the government was willing to discuss the concerns and that any confusion could be addressed through an amendment in Parliament.
Mr. Vaishnaw said the DPDP Act was introduced following a Supreme Court judgment recognising the right to privacy as a fundamental right. The law was drafted after more than a year of consultations with stakeholders, including newspapers, television channels, media representatives and the information technology industry. “It was clearly explained that provisions of the DPDP Act nowhere infringe upon freedom of the press, journalism and freedom of media,” he said.
(With agency inputs)
