Relevance: GS-2: Important aspects of governance (e-governance, accountability), IT Rules 2021, Government policies and interventions for development in various sectors, and issues arising out of their design and implementation.
Key Phrases: Information Technology Rules 2021 (IT Rules), Social Media Platforms, Grievance redressal, Appellate Panels, Freedom of Speech, Self-Regulatory Appellate Body, Over The Top Platforms, Chief Compliance Officer, Content Moderation
Why in News?
- The government has recently released a set of draft amendments to the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021.
Key Highlights:
- The digital intermediaries will now have to ensure that the community standards to which they hold their users answerable comply with Indian law and India’s constitutional principles.
- This move became necessary because a number of intermediaries have acted in violation of the rights of Indian citizens.
- The new amendments also propose the constitution of a Grievance Appellate Committee that will be tasked with dealing with “problematic content” in an expeditious manner.
- Users not satisfied with the complaint handling by an intermediary will be able to make an appeal of the decision and would be able to get it resolved within 30 days.
Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021
- It mandates a grievance redressal system for over-the-top (OTT) and digital portals in the country. This is necessary for the users of social media to raise their grievances against the misuse of social media.
- Significant social media firms have to appoint a chief compliance officer and have a nodal contact person who can be in touch with law enforcement agencies.
- Social media platforms will also have to name a grievance officer who shall register the grievance within 24 hours and dispose of it in 15 days.
- If there are complaints against the dignity of users, particularly women – about exposed private parts of individuals or nudity or sexual act or impersonation, etc – social media platforms will be required to remove that within 24 hours after a complaint is made.
- Publication of a monthly report about the number of complaints received and the status of redressal.
- There will be three levels of regulation for news publishers — self-regulation, a self-regulatory body, headed by a retired judge or an eminent person, and oversight from the Information and Broadcasting Ministry, including codes of practices and a grievance committee.
Issues with the Amendments:
- Curtailment of Free Speech:
- The proposal is being looked as another attempt by the government to either curtail or interfere with free speech.
- Tool of Government Censorship:
- There were instances when intermediaries refused to take down content that did not violate their community guidelines, despite pressure from the Centre to do so.
- These were referred to by the government as a violation of citizens' rights.
- Hence, what the government sees as an escalation mechanism to provide redress to users against unfair decisions of the social media platforms they subscribe to, many members of civil society view it as just another tool of government censorship.
- Curbing Dissent:
- The government will exercise this power to quell dissent if the proposed Grievance Appellate Committee allows the government to have the last word on the raised questions.
- Violation of Copyrights:
- An artist’s original composition can be marked for taking down because of some imagined infringement in a decision.
- If they are forced, without recourse, to take their content down, that could be the end of their careers.
- Issue of Neutrality:
- A government-appointed appellate committee raises the concern of its ruling in favour of the government in case a government agency makes an appeal whose take-down notice has been rejected.
- Then, it becomes challenging to mitigate the likelihood of such an eventuality and still preserve the right to appeal.
Way Forward:
- The industry needs to establish a self-regulatory appellate body to which appeals from all content moderation decisions can be referred.
- It could be staffed with a cross-section of experts from industry and the domain of law so that its decisions will be sufficiently robust and informed both by industry context and applicable laws while judicial precedents are taken into account.
- The appellate body should operate as an appellate forum for all content moderation decisions, regardless of the platform from which the appeal originates.
- Since the government will not operate it, it will, hopefully, have the neutrality required to remain impartial while deciding on take-down notices issued by the government.
Conclusion:
- The government has already indicated that it is open to considering self-regulatory alternatives. Now it is for the industry to establish self-regulatory bodies.
- Social media platforms are designed to enable free speech, so they must eliminate, or at least mitigate the harms that could arise from uncontrolled speech.
- They need to arrive at a balance between the rights of persons who post and those they offend.
- This will keep it beyond the power hierarchy of the platforms themselves, offering the process a measure of independence that is absent in internal grievance redressal systems.
Source: Live-Mint
Mains Question:
Q. The government has recently released a set of draft amendments to the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021. Critically Examine. (250 words).
