EXCLUSIVE: India’s biggest news publishers including Ambani's Network18, Adani's NDTV, Indian Express, Times Internet & others mount the most high-profile challenge yet to Modi’s privacy law, warning it would “render investigative journalism a benign and neutered recorder of events.” DNPA (@publishers_news) has taken the law to the Supreme Court. They argue it would trample investigative work and let New Delhi identify journalists’ sources. The provisions “constitute pre-censorship which is anathema to any democracy worth its name,” the group’s 698-page filing says. The key concerns: 🔹 Consent: requiring a journalist to notify the subject of an investigation and seek consent “would allow that subject to destroy evidence, intimidate witnesses” 🔹 Erasure: people can withdraw consent and demand their data be erased, which the group says could force publishers to unpublish or heavily redact news reports 🔹 Sources: a “nakedly unguided” power to demand information that “can extend to privileged communications in possession of a reporter or the informant” In a letter to the government, the group said India “has chosen to grant broad exemptions to the state, while failing to extend any corresponding protection to the press.” reuters.com/business/media-t…

Response to Claims by Chief Electoral Officer, Uttar Pradesh. In several posts on X, the Chief Electoral Officer (CEO) of UP has made some claims after the publication of our four reports on the failures of the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) in the state. On the first two stories: 1. The Mysterious 16.18 Lakh Voters Added to Uttar Pradesh’s Roll reporters-collective.in/trc/… 2. UP CEO Confirms: 16.18 Lakh Applications for Addition Accepted Before Draft Roll. Falsely Claims Details Were Hidden on ECI’s Instructions reporters-collective.in/trc/… We stand by the assertions and facts in these two stories in their entirety. In response to our first story, the UP CEO had confirmed that the details of 16.18 lakh applications for addition were not made public following the instructions of the ECI and the extant laws. We then brought out these internal instructions of the ECI to prove that the ECI had in fact asked the CEOs of all states undergoing the SIR to put in public the details of all applications received for addition of voters. The ECI had not instructed the CEOs to accept such forms before the listed due date, nor to keep their details out of the public domain. As evidence, we also made the relevant part of the ECI’s internal instructions public. On the following two stories 1. In UP SIR, ECI Software Auto-generated 85,854 Forms to Delete Voters Without a Reason reporters-collective.in/trc/… 2. UP CEO Admits ECI Auto-generated 85,000+ Voter Deletion Forms Without a Reason, Confirms Mass Deletion Attempts Against Muslims reporters-collective.in/trc/… The UP CEO claimed that officers were not forced to sign blank Form 7s, stating that “no digital signature was required to work in ECINET”. TRC’s response: Working on ECINET requires an officer's personal login. Electoral registration officers (EROs) we interviewed confirmed that every Form 7 filed through that login automatically bears their signature and authorisation on record. The UP CEO also claimed that all the auto-generated forms did not contain any reason for deletion of the voters. None contained alphabets such as, “A, N, H or E” or ‘absent/shifted”, as the reason. TRC’s response: He is right. We stand corrected. None of the forms provided a reason for deletion. The total number of forms that were auto-generated and auto-signed without giving voters a written reason for deletion is 87,127, not 85,854. We have revised this number of auto-generated deletion forms in UP upwards, from 85,854 to 87,127, in the headline and the body of the report. The copy has been corrected for the two wrong claims in the original story: that 62 forms contained alphabets such as, “A, N, H or E” as the reason for deletion, and that 1,211 forms provided ‘absent/shifted” as the reason. We continue to stand by our assertion that all these forms were auto-generated and auto-signed in violation of the regulations governing the updation of voter rolls. Editors The Reporters Collective 6.15 pm, October 20

Any anomaly or complaint brought out regarding conduct of SIR in UP by anyone is welcome. As far as the issue of submission of multiple forms-7 by an individual elector is concerned, there is no limit prescribed either in the RPA Act or in the RER rules. 1/5

Hello Mr. Navdeep Rinwa @ceoup, You now Tweeted, You'll take action against people for wrong Declaration in Form-7 with punishment with Imprisonment up to one year or fine or both. Hello @ceoup, There is a long list of bulk objectors, Incan share the full list. Babu Ram alone filed 250 Form 7 objections in March (95% against Muslim voters). What action have you taken on these people filing mass deletion requests? @ECISVEEP @SpokespersonECI @yadavakhilesh @RahulGandhi

Still calling the report misleading and called it so in our rebuttal also. The rebuttal is available on our X handle. Some of the figures arrived at in the report are not correct. eg one figure is off by 24%. The deadly mix of preconceived notions, biased approach, faulty assumptions and botched homework always leads to erroneous conclusion. The SIR -2026 conducted in UP is an exercise that we are proud of. It was conducted in a fair and transparent way.