The Opaque Exclusion of Selected Digital Press during the NLA Session

The Nagaland Legislative Assembly (NLA) is meant to be the people’s house. It is the forum where elected representatives debate issues of public importance, where the Chief Minister and his cabinet are held to account, and where the policies that shape our future are scrutinised. By its very nature, its proceedings must be transparent and accessible to the public it serves. However, a deeply concerning decision to bar few established YouTube news channels from covering the ongoing session on September 2 and 4, 2025 strikes at the very heart of this democratic principle.

This is not a matter of simple logistics. For years, credible journalists representing digital news platforms underwent proper verification by the Department of Information and Public Relations (DIPR) and were granted access. They performed their duty—to inform the Nagas about the workings of their government—effectively and responsibly. This year, that door has been slammed shut under the vague and unsubstantiated guise of “security" and other reasons, such as accessibility only for working and accredited journalists and with access restricted solely to reporters from satellite TV channels and so on.

The immediate question that arises is: Why? What changed between sessions? The government’s reasoning is as flimsy as it is alarming. If security is a genuine concern, the established verification process that worked in prior years remains a viable solution. To use it as a blanket excuse to exclude specific media houses reeks of selectivity and censorship.

This move is particularly appalling given the media consumption landscape of Nagaland. A vast majority of Nagas now consume news through YouTube platforms, not traditional television. Some legitimate news channels are not mere rogue bloggers or vloggers; they are professional working news offices with credible journalists, content writers, videographers and video editors who have built a reputation for truthful reporting and delivering on the state’s affairs just as other credible reporters and channels in the State. By excluding them, the government is not just barring a few individuals from a hall; it is effectively blocking the primary conduit through which the Naga public receives information about its own assembly and elected members as well.

This leads to the most troubling aspect: the complete lack of transparent, official regulation or rulebook governing this exclusion. When a government acts arbitrarily, without a published framework of rules, it operates not under the authority of law but under the shadow of whim. This can be termed as the antithesis of good governance. The right to access information, especially from legislative proceedings, is a fundamental component of a functioning democracy, implicitly enshrined in the spirit of the Constitution under Article 19(1)(a), which guarantees freedom of speech and expression. This includes the right to receive information, as affirmed by Supreme Court judgments.

The Nagaland Assembly is discussing matters meant for the People of Nagaland. The public deserves to know, unfiltered and in full, what their elected members are saying on their behalf. And that will happen by amplifying the session along with the selected news outlets. This decision to sideline a significant section of the press is a disservice to democracy. It undermines the role of the fourth estate, fosters distrust among the citizenry, and sets a dangerous precedent for information control, which we are witnessing to be happening too often lately. If the Government's stand is clear, what were the specific criteria approved? This cherry-picking must stop.

The government must immediately review this arbitrary decision and hopefully reinstate the access of all duly verified journalists in future, regardless of their platform. Proper verification and credibility of work should be one of the criteria. A recce of sorts is required before such decisions are taken. If new regulations are needed, they must be drafted transparently, in consultation with press bodies and other senior reporters at the least and made public. Until then, this act of exclusion stands as a blatant attempt to manage the narrative and perhaps silence critical voices along with many others.

Esther

Chief Operating Officer

Nagaland News Network