CJI Flags ‘Communal Content’ in Media

In News

• Recently, the Chief Justice of India stated that certain sections of the media communalised everything and this would ultimately result in giving the country a bad name.

About

• The remark from the CJI came while hearing petitions highlighting how some media outlets aired communal content linking the spread of the coronavirus to a Tablighi Jamaat meet held at Nizamuddin in Delhi.
• The hearing witnessed Chief Justice upbraiding the lack of accountability on the part of social media platforms.
• The court asked the government whether there was any regulatory mechanism in place for the web.
  • Solicitor-General drew the court’s attention to the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, which provide a redressal mechanism and timely resolution of grievances of users of social media and over-the-top platforms. 
  • The Rules require these platforms to appoint a grievance redressal officer who is a resident of India.
  • In the case of complaints against broadcasters, the Cable Television Networks (Amendment) Rules of 2021, were referred. 

Associated Issues

• Misuse of Social Media:
  • Vast user base:
    • WhatsApp currently has a user base of 340 million in the country, accounting for the largest number of subscribers in the world. 
    • Facebook has 290 million, Twitter 17 million, YouTube 265 million and Instagram, 120 million user base.
    • With such a huge population dependent on social media platforms, the tech-giants cannot choose to ignore the new and emerging challenges like: 
      • persistent spread of fake news, 
      • rampant abuse of the platforms to share morphed images of women, 
      • deep fakes and other contents that threaten the dignity of women and 
      • pose a threat to security.
      • Instances of use of abusive language, defamatory contents and hate speech in these platforms have become very common. 
  • Supreme Court Intervention:
    • In view of such emerging challenges, the Supreme Court in 2018, in the Tehseen S. Poonawalla v/s Union of India case, directed the government to curb and stop dissemination of explosive messages and videos on various social media platforms which have a tendency to incite mob violence and lynching of any kind.
    • The Court in 2017 observed that the government may frame necessary guidelines to eliminate child pornography, rape and gang rape imageries, videos and sites in content hosting platforms and other applications.
  • Rules as per Court’s Directives:
    • The new rules are thus in accordance with the previous Supreme Court observations. 
    • As per the rules, intermediaries are mandated to remove or disable contents that are against the safety and dignity of individuals within 24 hours of receiving complaints. 
• Technological Hurdles with Respect to Traceability:
  • Breaking end to end encryption:
    • Social media companies like WhatsApp have expressed apprehensions about the provisions in the new rules which require them to identify traceability when required to do so by authorities. 
    • They contend that this could possibly lead to the breaking of end-to-end encryption, which in turn can compromise users’ privacy.
  • Government’s Stand:
    • The government, on the other hand, has stated that traceability would only be required in case of “very serious offences” that threaten the sovereignty and integrity of India. 
    • Further, it could also be implemented without breaking the end-to-end encryption. The onus, however, will lie on the companies to find a technological solution for the same.
• The Free Speech Debate
  • The social media giant, Twitter, has raised concerns regarding free speech over the new IT guidelines. It stated that it would strive to comply with the law but if guided by principles of transparency and freedom of expression under the rule of law. 
  • The government insists that the rules are neither arbitrary nor sudden, since the draft rules were put up for public comments and several individuals, industrial associations and organizations had responded. 
  • The comments were then analysed in detail and an inter-ministerial meeting was also held before finalising them.

Way Ahead

• Freedom of speech and expression is the basic tenet of any democracy. However, no freedom is absolute or completely unrestricted. 
• The imperative of striking the right balance between fundamental rights and ascertaining the reasonableness of a restriction has been a constant effort since the adoption of the Constitution. The debate has now reached the digital world. 
• The on-going tussle between private tech giants who own a substantial amount of Big Data, governments and users worried about issues relating to data privacy, is likely to get more complicated before optimum solutions can be arrived at. 
• The IT Rules 2021 seek to address concerns of the citizens without infringing on their privacy and personal liberties, while maintaining digital sovereignty at the same time.

Source: TH