Bank English – Test 6

Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below it. Some words have been given in bold so that you can locate them easily while answering some questions. Given the rapid proliferation of TV channels, the Supreme Court suggested on 12 January 2017 that the Union government set up a <strong>statutory</strong> mechanism to decide people's <strong>grievances</strong> against programmes broadcast on the visual medium. A bench of Chief Justice J S Khehar and Justice D Y Chandrachud said, "We are of the view that the <strong>competent</strong> authority, having framed the rules under the Cable TV Network (Regulation) Act, will be well advised to frame similar rules so as to formalise the complaint redressal mechanism providing for limitation for filing complaint before an authority, which shall adjudicate, the appellate authority and the final determination on the complaint. This order was passed on a petition filed by NGO `Common Cause', which through advocates Kamini Jaiswal and Prashant Bhushan complained that though there were more than 800 TV channels and 250 radio stations in the country , the government had not put in place an independent regulatory body to monitor programme content. Jaiswal and Bhushan stressed that the government should not be given control of the regulatory mechanism as the ruling <strong>dispensation</strong> would use it to throttle those critical of it, in gross violation of freedom of speech and expression guaranteed under Article 19 (1) (a) of the Constitution." The bench clarified that when it suggested a regulatory mechanism, it meant a complaint redressal system to address grievances of citizens relating to social issues like gender justice etc. We will not go to the extent you think it politically. We have nothing to do with politics or otherwise. If anyone has a grievance against news or a programme, let them have the option of a statutory committee to approach with their complaint. Appearing for the Centre, senior advocate Yashank P Adhyaru said the government had put a complaint redressal mechanism in place. The bench asked, "Who knows about it?" It told the government to give wide publicity to this mechanism even as it considers setting up a statutory mechanism. Adhyaru said that The government wants to promote self-regulation, otherwise it will open a Pandora's box. People will object to everything on the basis of culture, religion and taste. The court told the Centre that the present regime was all right, but it needed crystallisation. Appearing for News Broadcasters Association and Indian Broadcasters Federation, senior advocates Anoop Bhambani and K V Vishwanath said world over, TV channels were governed by self-regulating regime. In India, these two associations have handled complaints satisfactorily and giving the regulatory mechanism to the government could violate the right to freedom of speech and expression that guarantees independence of media. The bench asked, "Can anyone challenge the decision rendered on a complaint by the body under the self-regulatory mechanism?" Vishwanath said, what is vulgarity for one is lyrics to another. The world is diverse in its taste and values. How does one crystallise the content code? The bench decided to leave it to the Centre to set up a complaint redressal mechanism and disposed of the petition.

Which of the following is TRUE according to the passage?

Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below it. Some words have been given in bold so that you can locate them easily while answering some questions. Given the rapid proliferation of TV channels, the Supreme Court suggested on 12 January 2017 that the Union government set up a <strong>statutory</strong> mechanism to decide people's <strong>grievances</strong> against programmes broadcast on the visual medium. A bench of Chief Justice J S Khehar and Justice D Y Chandrachud said, "We are of the view that the <strong>competent</strong> authority, having framed the rules under the Cable TV Network (Regulation) Act, will be well advised to frame similar rules so as to formalise the complaint redressal mechanism providing for limitation for filing complaint before an authority, which shall adjudicate, the appellate authority and the final determination on the complaint. This order was passed on a petition filed by NGO `Common Cause', which through advocates Kamini Jaiswal and Prashant Bhushan complained that though there were more than 800 TV channels and 250 radio stations in the country , the government had not put in place an independent regulatory body to monitor programme content. Jaiswal and Bhushan stressed that the government should not be given control of the regulatory mechanism as the ruling <strong>dispensation</strong> would use it to throttle those critical of it, in gross violation of freedom of speech and expression guaranteed under Article 19 (1) (a) of the Constitution." The bench clarified that when it suggested a regulatory mechanism, it meant a complaint redressal system to address grievances of citizens relating to social issues like gender justice etc. We will not go to the extent you think it politically. We have nothing to do with politics or otherwise. If anyone has a grievance against news or a programme, let them have the option of a statutory committee to approach with their complaint. Appearing for the Centre, senior advocate Yashank P Adhyaru said the government had put a complaint redressal mechanism in place. The bench asked, "Who knows about it?" It told the government to give wide publicity to this mechanism even as it considers setting up a statutory mechanism. Adhyaru said that The government wants to promote self-regulation, otherwise it will open a Pandora's box. People will object to everything on the basis of culture, religion and taste. The court told the Centre that the present regime was all right, but it needed crystallisation. Appearing for News Broadcasters Association and Indian Broadcasters Federation, senior advocates Anoop Bhambani and K V Vishwanath said world over, TV channels were governed by self-regulating regime. In India, these two associations have handled complaints satisfactorily and giving the regulatory mechanism to the government could violate the right to freedom of speech and expression that guarantees independence of media. The bench asked, "Can anyone challenge the decision rendered on a complaint by the body under the self-regulatory mechanism?" Vishwanath said, what is vulgarity for one is lyrics to another. The world is diverse in its taste and values. How does one crystallise the content code? The bench decided to leave it to the Centre to set up a complaint redressal mechanism and disposed of the petition.

A Pandora's box is an idiom, what does it mean?

Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below it. Some words have been given in bold so that you can locate them easily while answering some questions. Given the rapid proliferation of TV channels, the Supreme Court suggested on 12 January 2017 that the Union government set up a <strong>statutory</strong> mechanism to decide people's <strong>grievances</strong> against programmes broadcast on the visual medium. A bench of Chief Justice J S Khehar and Justice D Y Chandrachud said, "We are of the view that the <strong>competent</strong> authority, having framed the rules under the Cable TV Network (Regulation) Act, will be well advised to frame similar rules so as to formalise the complaint redressal mechanism providing for limitation for filing complaint before an authority, which shall adjudicate, the appellate authority and the final determination on the complaint. This order was passed on a petition filed by NGO `Common Cause', which through advocates Kamini Jaiswal and Prashant Bhushan complained that though there were more than 800 TV channels and 250 radio stations in the country , the government had not put in place an independent regulatory body to monitor programme content. Jaiswal and Bhushan stressed that the government should not be given control of the regulatory mechanism as the ruling <strong>dispensation</strong> would use it to throttle those critical of it, in gross violation of freedom of speech and expression guaranteed under Article 19 (1) (a) of the Constitution." The bench clarified that when it suggested a regulatory mechanism, it meant a complaint redressal system to address grievances of citizens relating to social issues like gender justice etc. We will not go to the extent you think it politically. We have nothing to do with politics or otherwise. If anyone has a grievance against news or a programme, let them have the option of a statutory committee to approach with their complaint. Appearing for the Centre, senior advocate Yashank P Adhyaru said the government had put a complaint redressal mechanism in place. The bench asked, "Who knows about it?" It told the government to give wide publicity to this mechanism even as it considers setting up a statutory mechanism. Adhyaru said that The government wants to promote self-regulation, otherwise it will open a Pandora's box. People will object to everything on the basis of culture, religion and taste. The court told the Centre that the present regime was all right, but it needed crystallisation. Appearing for News Broadcasters Association and Indian Broadcasters Federation, senior advocates Anoop Bhambani and K V Vishwanath said world over, TV channels were governed by self-regulating regime. In India, these two associations have handled complaints satisfactorily and giving the regulatory mechanism to the government could violate the right to freedom of speech and expression that guarantees independence of media. The bench asked, "Can anyone challenge the decision rendered on a complaint by the body under the self-regulatory mechanism?" Vishwanath said, what is vulgarity for one is lyrics to another. The world is diverse in its taste and values. How does one crystallise the content code? The bench decided to leave it to the Centre to set up a complaint redressal mechanism and disposed of the petition.

What could be the suitable title for the above passage?