India’s approach must be nuanced

An anti-fake news law, if it comes about, should not stifle freedom of expression

In what is being criticised as a controversial law, Singapore’s Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation (Pofma) Law, criminalising fake news and allowing the authorities to remove objectionable online content, was passed recently. It went so far as to allow policing of private conversations to ensure that misinformation is not transmitted. Despite a backlash from opposition parties, rights groups and tech companies, the law, or rather the intent of a law, has merit.

India’s battle against fake news has got fiercer with time, with the government pressuring tech companies for more content regulation, and tech companies attempting to clean up one mess after another. But to place the onus on for-profit companies (here, intermediaries largely guarded by law) to regulate content is irresponsible. So, if India were to move in the same direction as Singapore and enact a law, it should do so with caution to ensure that the intent of the law isn’t to stifle freedom of speech but to safeguard citizens from the dangers of fake news and false information. Fake news is an online epidemic, and the way forward is three-pronged: one, rethinking the intermediary liability rules to ensure a greater degree of social responsibility and transparency from tech companies; two, passing a law that strictly defines fake news; and three, ensuring tech literacy through awareness drives, to inculcate the habit of verifying all content received.