Date: 11/04/2023

Relevance: GS-2: Government Policies and Interventions for Development in various sectors and Issues arising out of their Design and Implementation

Key Phrases: The IT (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Amendment Rules, 2023, Fact-Check Unit, Press Freedom, natural justice, Judicial Oversight, Free Speech and Expression, Section 69A of the IT Act, 2000, Shreya Singhal vs Union of India.

Why in News?

• The advent of social media has brought about a new problem of misinformation, which requires express measures to curb it.
• The IT (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Amendment Rules, 2023, have added a provision for a fact-checking unit to identify fake, false, or misleading online content related to the government.
• However, the new provisions have raised concerns about the Union government's involvement in regulating the content online.

What is the amendment in question?

• The 2023 amendment confers power on MeitY to notify a fact check unit of the Central Government that will identify fake or false or misleading online content with respect to any business of the Central Government.
• Social media intermediaries (such as Facebook, and Twitter) and telecom service providers shall inform the user not to host, display, upload, modify, publish, transmit, store, update, or share any information in respect of any business of the Central Government, that is identified as fake or false or misleading by such fact check unit.
• Violation of this rule can lead to the social media intermediaries losing their 'safe harbour' immunity.

Problematic Nature of Fact-Check Unit

• Government's Role as Regulating Entity:
  • The fact-checking unit's inclusion in the IT Amendment Rules raises concerns about the government's role as a regulating entity.
  • The government's power to determine whether any information is “fake” or “false” could be misused to prevent questioning or scrutiny by media organizations.
• Misuse of Power:
  • The power vested in the fact-checking unit could be misused to prevent free speech and expression.
  • The government's takedown notices issued for critical opinion or commentary on social media platforms can be seen as a way to suppress dissenting voices.
• Judicial Oversight:
  • The government cannot sit on judgment without a right to appeal or judicial oversight.
  • There is a need for a fair and impartial mechanism to ensure that the fact-checking unit's powers are not misused.
• Threat to Free Speech and Expression:
  • By threatening to remove a platform’s immunity for content that is flagged by a government unit, the Union government intends to create a “chilling effect” on the right to speech and expression on online platforms.
  • This can have a significant impact on citizens' right to access information and express their opinions freely.

The Impact on Press Freedom:

• A Constitutional Guarantee:
  • Freedom of the press is enshrined in Article 19 of the Indian Constitution, which also guarantees the public's right to free speech.
  • This right has been the cornerstone of a democratic society that values transparency and accountability.
• The Need for Arm's Length Relationship:
  • The relationship between the government and the media should be kept at arm's length to ensure the media has sufficient freedom.
  • The media plays an essential role in providing information to the public, and its freedom to report without fear of censorship or intimidation is crucial.
• The Dangers of Draconian Censorship:
  • The government's power to determine what constitutes "false" or "fake" news and to act upon platforms for publishing these can amount to draconian censorship.
  • In effect, the government has given itself absolute power to determine what is fake or not in respect of its own work and order takedown.
  • All of this goes against the principles of natural justice and is akin to censorship.

Contradiction with Existing Guidelines:

• Section 69A of the IT Act, 2000 elucidates the procedure to issue takedown orders, which these notified amendments could bypass.
• They also run afoul of Shreya Singhal vs Union of India (2015), a verdict with clear guidelines for blocking content.
• Any bypassing of existing guidelines could lead to censorship and restrictions on the freedom of speech and expression.

The Need for Consultations:

• The IT Amendment Rules, 2023 were notified by MeitY without any meaningful consultation that it had promised after it withdrew the earlier draft amendments it had put out in January 2023.
• The Press Information Bureau was given sweeping powers in the earlier draft amendments, which were criticized by media organizations across the country.
• The lack of consultation is concerning, and the government should conduct consultations with media organizations and press bodies before making any significant changes.

Conclusion:

• The IT Amendment Rules, 2023 have raised concerns about the Union government's involvement in regulating online content.
• The fact-check unit's sweeping powers to determine what is fake or false with respect to the business of the central government and to order takedown has been deemed unacceptable and problematic.
• The lack of consultation with media organizations and press bodies is also concerning. The government should reconsider the provisions in the IT Amendment Rules, 2023, and conduct meaningful consultations with all stakeholders to ensure that free speech and press freedom are not compromised.

Source: The Hindu

Mains Question:

Q. Critically analyse the impact of the IT (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Amendment Rules, 2023 on free speech, press freedom, and the relationship between the government and the media.