Big Tech vs State

There is a growing push and pull between Big Tech and the state over the governance of global public platforms. A few days ago, social media platform, Twitter, moved the Karnataka High Court over the government’s orders to block certain tweets and handles under Section 69 of the Information Technology Act 2000. Twitter’s move came after the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) had asked it to comply with its orders or risk losing the safe harbour protection afforded to such platforms. This clash between big tech and the state is, however, not unique to India. Across the world, governments are grappling with this issue, struggling to arrive at a new equilibrium. Regulation of social media platforms — public forums but owned by corporations — is a contentious issue.

Twitter has alleged that the blocking orders are “procedurally and substantially non-compliant with Section 69A, are manifestly arbitrary, fail to provide the originators prior notice and are disproportionate in several cases”. In its petition, the social media giant has also argued that some of the URLs contain “political and journalistic content”, blocking which would be a violation of the right to free speech. However, Twitter’s past actions — the manner, for instance, in which it “suddenly cut the mic” of Donald Trump — lend credence to the charge that it is unaccountable. Its content moderation decisions can be accused of being shrouded in opacity, and/or taken by executives in Silicon Valley whose incentives are not aligned with what may be deemed as public interest. Considering the power of such platforms in shaping public opinion, these are matters of concern. Elon Musk’s takeover attempt — he has now pulled out of buying Twitter — would have compounded the problem. A privately owned company is under lesser public scrutiny as compared to a publicly listed one.