Social media rules can be a doubleedged sword

The guidelines, which the government intends to set, must be unambiguous

Last week the Press Trust of India reported that the government was finalising a social media policy to stop its misuse. Representatives from various security agencies discussed the way ahead. This move comes at a time when there are reports of social media platforms being used by terrorists for anti-India activities. There has also been a spat in the number of arrests for ‘offensive’ social media posts. At the moment there is only a list of ‘do’s and don’ts’ which the government intends to convert into guidelines — and this is a delicate area.

There is a need to contain the abuse of social media for terrorrelated activities, but, the test is to make sure that such measures do not create an authoritarian State. The fact is that it is hard to censure social media in a healthy way. One of the problems of setting guidelines is that if they are not clearly defined it could result in abuse — it could be misused to settle personal scores. The more vague the guidelines the more susceptible to abuse they will be. The recent cases of people being arrested for celebrating Pakistan’s victory over India at the Champions Trophy finals is an example of this grey area. Guidelines in themselves are not bad, the problem is when these are used to police users. In such a scenario, guidelines would lead to abuse. This further gets complicated because India holds on to old censorship practices, like the sedition law, or indistinct provisions where a person can be arrested for ‘offending the sensibilities of a community’ or ‘inciting violence and disturbing communal harmony’.

Government intervention in monitoring social media can have both negative and positive outcomes. It can play a positive role to dispel false rumours and fake news. It would be negative if the guidelines set out to override existing freedoms. The government’s intention to check the misuse of social media platforms is right, but it would do more harm than good if the guidelines are vague and open to misinterpretation.