The Centre for Internet and Society
http://editors.cis-india.org
These are the search results for the query, showing results 1 to 15.
Digital Native
http://editors.cis-india.org/digital-natives/blog/indian-express-december-22-2013-nishant-shah-digital-native
<b>The end of the year is supposed to be a happy, feel-good space for families, friends, societies and communities to come together and count our blessings. It is the time to look at things that have gone by and look forward to what the New Year will bring.</b>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify;">The article was <a class="external-link" href="http://www.indianexpress.com/news/digital-native/1210347/0">originally published in the Indian Express</a> on December 22, 2013.</p>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify;">And yet, when I started writing this piece, my horizons seemed to be eclipsed by the amount of violence we have witnessed in the last year, and the inability of our governance systems to deal with them.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Around this time last year, the nation had woken up to the horrors a young woman suffered as a group of men raped her in a moving bus in Delhi. The inhumanity of the crime, her tragic death, and the fact that despite our collective anger and grief, the year has been dotted with violence of a gendered and sexual nature, should be enough to quell any celebrations. What happened to her and then to many other reported and invisible survivors of sexual violence in the country has seen a dramatic transformation of the digital public sphere.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Spurred by anger, frustration and the realisation that we are often the agents of change, people have taken to the streets and the information highway in unprecedented forms. Every reported incident of sexual violence — from the young intern who was molested by a former Supreme Court judge to the now infamous Tehelka case — sparked great ire on Twitter, Facebook, blogs and collaborative user-generated content sites. Hashtags have trended, videos have gone viral. Men and women have bonded together to speak against the increasingly unsafe spaces we seem to inhabit.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Responding to this public demonstration and outrage, we have seen some positive developments from the governments and judiciary systems which are morally, legally and constitutionally bound to look after us. And yet, we are quickly realising that much of this is not enough. While the law takes its course and tries to craft and enforce more efficient regulation to prevent and protect victims of such violent crimes, we have despaired at how it doesn't seem to change things materially.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">The digital spaces that we have used to fight, to protest and to call for action, are also where we have shared the frustration at how little material reality has changed. Hashtags on Twitter have gone through life cycles of anger, protest and despair, as the complex structures of archaic laws, slow judiciary processes, prejudiced judges, and a populist politics which is often superficial, take their toll on processes to establish justice, equality and freedom for our societies.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">As tweets and Facebook updates have now clearly told us, through testimonies and witness accounts, these questions cannot be understood in isolation. The social media has consistently reminded us that the December 16 gang rape was not just about one woman. It was about the misogynist societies that we are constructing and the fundamental flaws in systems which encourage the idea that men have ownership of the bodies and lives of women in our country. Across the year, through campaigns by online intervention groups like the Blank Noise Project or through note-card viral memes like "I need feminism" have emphasised the need to acknowledge these not as "women's problems" or "exceptional" problems. These are problems that need to be understood in the larger context of human rights, and our rights to life, dignity, equality and freedom enshrined in our Constitution.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">And yet, as another year comes to an end, the social media is ablaze at a decision that has marked one of the darkest days in recent judicial history. On December 11, the Supreme Court of India repealed the landmark historical judgement issued by the Delhi High Court that read down Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code that criminalises same-sex relationships. Finding this in defiance of our constitutional rights, the well-weighed judgment was celebrated across social media — nationally and globally — for its recognition that the problem of discrimination is never just about one demography or section of the society. As the LGBTQ communities stood in shock, there was something else that happened on social media.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">For once, the comments of disbelief, anger and surprise turned into a roar for correcting such a verdict. And it is not only the LGBTQ identified people and activists who are joining this clamour. Straight people, people with families, families with LGBTQ children, are all coming out and finding a common bond of solidarity that works around hashtags and viral sharing of messages. The world of social media has shown how we have learned, that we cannot leave the underprivileged to fight for themselves. Because, if we ignore the discrimination against them, we will have nobody to support us when we are being treated as sub-human and irrelevant in a country that has often done poetic interpretations of what constitutional rights mean.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">I started writing this piece with despair. But I slowly realise that maybe there is something to be thankful about this year. That even when our archaic systems of justice are catching up with the accelerated transformations in our lives, the social media does act as a public space where those bound together in their belief for equality and justice can act in solidarity. On Twitter, this fateful day, everybody was queer. And they did not have to identify themselves as men or women, straight, gay or lesbian. Despite our bodies, our differences, our status and practices, we can claim to fight for those whose voices, bodies, lives and loves are being negated in our country. And if you cannot take to the streets to make your support felt, remember that the digital public sphere is active and buzzing. Those in power have no choice but to take into account the collective voice on the internet, which demands and shall build open, fair and equal societies.</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/digital-natives/blog/indian-express-december-22-2013-nishant-shah-digital-native'>http://editors.cis-india.org/digital-natives/blog/indian-express-december-22-2013-nishant-shah-digital-native</a>
</p>
No publishernishantSocial mediaWeb PoliticsResearchers at WorkDigital Natives2015-04-17T10:40:02ZBlog EntryWomen Arrested in Mumbai for Complaining on Facebook
http://editors.cis-india.org/news/india-blogs-nytimes-nov-19-2012-neha-thirani-hari-kumar-women-arrested-in-mumbai-for-complaining-on-facebook
<b>For over 30 hours following the death of the Shiv Sena leader Bal Thackeray on Saturday, stores throughout Mumbai closed their shutters and taxis and autorickshaws stayed off the streets.</b>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify; ">This article by Neha Thirani and Hari Kumar was <a class="external-link" href="http://india.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/19/women-arrested-in-mumbai-for-complaining-on-facebook/">published in New York Times</a> on November 19, 2012. Pranesh Prakash is quoted.</p>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify; ">While analysts throughout Mumbai debated whether the citywide shutdown following the death of Mr. Thackeray was inspired by fear or respect, one 21-year-old woman and her friend were arrested for raising a similar question.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">On Sunday, the police in Palghar, in Thane district, on the outskirts of Mumbai, arrested Shaheen Dhadha after she posted a status update on Facebook that questioned the shutdown, also known as a bandh. A local daily, the Mumbai Mirror, <a href="http://www.mumbaimirror.com/article/2/2012111920121119043152921e12f57e1/In-Palghar-cops-book-21yearold-for-FB-post.html" target="_blank">reported</a> that Ms. Dhadha, 21, had written, "People like Thackeray are born and die daily and one should not observe a bandh for that." The police also arrested her friend who "liked" the post, whom NDTV <a href="http://www.ndtv.com/article/world/two-women-arrested-for-facebook-post-on-mumbai-shutdown-294239" target="_blank">identified </a>by her first name, Renu.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The women were arrested under Section 505 of the Indian Penal Code for “statements creating or promoting enmity, hatred or ill will between classes.” Srikant Pingle, station house in charge of the Palghar police, told India Ink that the local Shiv Sena chief, whom he identified as “Mr. Bhushan,” filed the complaint against Ms. Dhadha because her comment on Facebook hurt Shiv Sena’s sentiments. Mr. Pingle declined to comment further on the details of the arrests.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Sudhir Gupta, the defense counsel for the two women, told NDTV, “Their posts don’t incite violence. It can’t be said they have made any derogatory remarks. They don’t belong to any political ideology.”</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">In a phone conversation with India Ink, a police officer of the Palghar station, who identified himself only as Gavali, said that the arrest took place on Sunday night and that the pair had been taken to court on Monday.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The two women, who were sentenced to 14 days in jail by the court, received bail after a bond of 15,000 rupees ($270) was paid, <a href="http://www.ndtv.com/article/world/two-women-arrested-for-facebook-post-on-mumbai-shutdown-294239" target="_blank">reported NDTV</a>.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The Times of India <a href="http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/21-year-old-girl-arrested-for-Facebook-post-slamming-Bal-Thackeray/articleshow/17276979.cms" target="_blank">reported</a> that a mob of 2,000 Shiv Sena workers vandalized her uncle’s orthopedic clinic in Palghar. Repeated calls made to the Dhada orthopedic hospital in Thane went unanswered, while Harshal Pradhan, a Shiv Sena spokesman, said that he was unaware of the incident.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">A police officer at the Palghar Police Station, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said that no one has been arrested in the attack on the clinic.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Pranesh Prakash, program manager with the Center for Internet and Society, said the arrests of the two women were a violation of free speech and the misapplication of the law. “There were thousands of people on Facebook, Twitter and in person who were saying the exact same kinds of things that this girl is alleged to have said,” said Mr. Prakash. “And the fact that only she and one other person who liked that comment have been arrested shows a clear arbitrariness in the application of the law.”</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">In <a href="http://justicekatju.blogspot.in/2012/11/a-letter-to-maharashtra-cm.html?m=1" target="_blank">an open letter</a> addressed to the chief minister of Maharashtra, the former Supreme Court Judge Markandey Katju defended the two women, saying, “To my mind it is absurd to say that protesting against a bandh hurts religious sentiments.” He further said that the arrest appears to be a criminal act as it is a crime to wrongfully arrest or wrongfully confine someone who has committed no crime.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">On social networking sites, people came out in support of Ms. Dhadha and her friend. The Facebook group “<a href="http://www.facebook.com/pages/BAN-Shiv-Sena/296699900777?fref=ts" target="_blank">Ban Shiv Sena</a>” had about 36,400 "likes" as of Monday afternoon, while <a href="http://www.facebook.com/shivsena.official?fref=ts" target="_blank">the party’s official Facebook page</a> had just under 2,700. On Twitter, several commenters expressed solidarity with the two women, including <a href="https://twitter.com/milinddeora" target="_blank">Milind Deora</a>, the government minister of state, communications and information technology, who <a href="https://twitter.com/milinddeora/status/270431926022701057" target="_blank">said</a>, "To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize ~ Voltaire."</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">In Maharashtra, Shiv Sena has a history of banning books, movies and other popular culture that are critical of the political party. In 2010, Rohinton Mistry’s book, "Such a Long Journey," was <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/oct/19/mumbai-university-removes-mistry-book" target="_blank">withdrawn from the syllabus</a> of Mumbai University after Shiv Sena officials complained that the book insulted Bal Thackeray. Ironically, in <a href="http://www.ndtv.com/video/player/walk-the-talk/walk-the-talk-with-bal-thackeray-aired-on-january-28-2007/253252" target="_blank">a January 2007 interview</a> with Shekhar Gupta, the editor in chief of The Indian Express, Mr. Thackeray said that what differentiated him from the mafia is that journalists and others were free to disagree with him and criticize him.</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/news/india-blogs-nytimes-nov-19-2012-neha-thirani-hari-kumar-women-arrested-in-mumbai-for-complaining-on-facebook'>http://editors.cis-india.org/news/india-blogs-nytimes-nov-19-2012-neha-thirani-hari-kumar-women-arrested-in-mumbai-for-complaining-on-facebook</a>
</p>
No publisherpraskrishnaSocial mediaFreedom of Speech and ExpressionPublic AccountabilityInternet GovernanceCensorship2012-11-21T11:32:04ZNews ItemOn social media, Modi goes soft
http://editors.cis-india.org/news/hindustan-times-specials-coverage-gujarat-assembly-elections-2012-zia-haq-oct-26-2012-on-social-media-modi-goes-soft
<b>“Truth stands on its own; it doesn’t need a prop.” Is this Mahatma Gandhi? No, it’s Gujarat chief minister Narendra Modi on Twitter. Gujarat’s elections are near, but in the arena of social media, Modi has already won. From over a million subscribers on Twitter to a Facebook page flooded with “likes”, Modi’s net is cast wide. </b>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Zia Haq's article was <a class="external-link" href="http://www.hindustantimes.com/Specials/Coverage/Gujarat-Assembly-Elections-2012/Chunk-HT-UI-GujaratAssemblyElections2012-DontMiss/On-social-media-Modi-goes-soft/SP-Article10-950251.aspx">published in the Hindustan Times</a> on October 26, 2012. Sunil Abraham is quoted.</p>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify; ">In political rallies, Modi roars with demagogic speeches. On Twitter, he displays a softer, brooding side: “Powers of the mind are like rays of light.” Only occasionally is a political challenge thrown in: “Delhi Sultanate treats Gujarat like enemy nation but Gujarat will never bow.”</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">A polarising figure still, Modi is often accused of avoiding action to stop a carnage that killed nearly 2,000 people in 2002, mostly Muslims. Yet, he has pulled off a stunning PR strategy on social media to showcase Gujarat as India’s Guandong, a Chinese province with top GDP rankings. Gujarat has posted robust growth rates, although its human-development indicators remain skewed.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Modi became the third politician globally, after Obama and the Australian PM, to host a political conference on Google+ hangout, a video chat platform. In the past quarter, he added nearly 24,000 Twitter subscribers every 12 days, according to twittercounter.com.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Modi has leveraged social media in a way the Congress hasn’t been able to. Unlike him, none among the Congress’s leadership, including Rahul Gandhi, has a personal Twitter account. “Our leaders believe more in transparent dialogues with the public, rather than spreading Internet canards,” said Congress spokesperson Manish Tewari.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Shashi Tharoor, a Congress MP with the highest Twitter subscriber base among Indian politicians, attracts mostly the elite, not the masses.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">He jibes at his own government with irreverent tweets often making his party frown.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Yet, research shows that social media is more persuasive than television ads. Nearly 100 million Indians, more than Germany’s population, use the Internet.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Of this, the 40 million who have broadband are the ones active on the social media. “Unlike Obama, who used it directly for votes, Indian politicians tend to use social media more to mould public discourse,” says Sunil Abraham, the CEO of The Centre for Internet and Society.</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/news/hindustan-times-specials-coverage-gujarat-assembly-elections-2012-zia-haq-oct-26-2012-on-social-media-modi-goes-soft'>http://editors.cis-india.org/news/hindustan-times-specials-coverage-gujarat-assembly-elections-2012-zia-haq-oct-26-2012-on-social-media-modi-goes-soft</a>
</p>
No publisherpraskrishnaFreedom of Speech and ExpressionSocial mediaInternet Governance2012-11-02T06:20:13ZNews ItemCensorship makes India fall two places on global internet freedom chart
http://editors.cis-india.org/news/dna-india-sep-27-2012-dilnaz-boga-censorship-makes-india-fall-two-places-on-global-internet-freedom-chart
<b>A recently released global report on the internet freedom rated India 39th in 2012, a slip from two places last year.</b>
<hr />
<p>The article by Dilnaz Boga was <a class="external-link" href="http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_censorship-makes-india-fall-two-places-on-global-internet-freedom-chart_1745778">published</a> in DNA on September 27, 2012.</p>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The report titled, Freedom on the net 2012 (FOTN): A global assessment of internet and digital media by Freedom House, a Washington-based monitoring group conducted a comprehensive study of internet freedom in 47 countries.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Quoting Bangalore-based Centre for Internet and Society, the report said 309 specific items (URLs, Twitter accounts, img tags, blog posts, blogs, and a handful of websites) have been blocked by the government. But officially, the government has admitted to blocking 245 web pages for inflammatory content hosting of provocative content.<br /><br />Ketan Tanna, India analyst for Freedom House told DNA, “A reflection of the downward spiral in the freedom on the net that Indians enjoy is evident in the upward revision of scores for India in the FOTN 2012 report. India was one of the only 4 of the 20 countries that “recently experienced declines” and are democracies. The other three are Mexico, Turkey and South Korea.”<br /><br />Internet usage in India continues to increase, with tens of millions of new users getting online each year. According to the International Telecommunications Union, internet penetration was 10% — or about 120 million people at the end of 2011. Among internet users, 90 million were ‘active,’ accessing it at least once a month (70 million urban and 20 million rural).<br /><br />The report has mentioned that in India, “amid several court cases regarding intermediaries’ responsibility for hosting illegal content, much evidence has surfaced that intermediaries are taking down content without fully evaluating or challenging the legality of the request”.<br /><br />Citing an example, Tanna said in December 2011, the website Cartoons against Corruption was suspended by its hosting company after a complaint filed with the Mumbai police alleged that the site’s cartoons ridiculed parliament and national emblems. “As a result of such dynamics, large swaths of online content are disappearing, and the losses are far more difficult to reverse than the mere blocking of a website,” he added.<br /><br />More common than website blocking is the removal of content based on judicial orders, government directives, and citizen complaints. This phenomenon that has increased in recent years and in some cases, targeted content on political, social, and religious topics, the report said.<br /><br />The Indian authorities had submitted 68 removal requests covering 358 items between January and June 2011. According to Google, 255 items related to what it categorised as “government criticism,” while 39 involved defamation and 8 pertained to hate speech.<br /><br />In January, responding to a freedom of information request, the home ministry reported that the government orders 7,500 to 9,000 phone interceptions per month, the report disclosed. Criticising this practice and the government’s disregard for the Constitution, the data revealed, “Established guidelines regulate the ability of state officials to intercept communications, but India lacks an appropriate legal framework and procedures to ensure proper oversight of Intelligence agencies’ growing surveillance and interception capabilities, opening the possibility of misuse and unconstitutional invasion of citizens’ privacy.”<br /><br />As another method of controlling speech and activism online, governments have imposed temporary shutdowns of the internet or mobile phone networks during protests or other sensitive times. Localised internet shutdowns and mobile phone shutdowns occurred in India due to security concerns, the report said.</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/news/dna-india-sep-27-2012-dilnaz-boga-censorship-makes-india-fall-two-places-on-global-internet-freedom-chart'>http://editors.cis-india.org/news/dna-india-sep-27-2012-dilnaz-boga-censorship-makes-india-fall-two-places-on-global-internet-freedom-chart</a>
</p>
No publisherpraskrishnaSocial mediaFreedom of Speech and ExpressionPublic AccountabilityInternet GovernanceCensorship2012-09-27T10:37:47ZNews ItemPitroda seeks to put govt information in public domain
http://editors.cis-india.org/news/www-livemint-september-25-2012-surabhi-agarwal-pitroda-seeks-to-put-govt-information-in-public-domain
<b>In the first-ever Indian government press conference on Twitter, Sam Pitroda, adviser to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on public information infrastructure and innovations, championed the cause of putting government information in the public domain to usher in openness and empowerment. </b>
<hr />
<p>Surabhi Agarwal's article was <a class="external-link" href="http://origin-www.livemint.com/Politics/5xXKN9JH15noiYuQtVQtrL/Governments-first-ever-conference-on-Twitter-to-begin-short.html">published in LiveMint</a> on September 25, 2012. Sunil Abraham is quoted.</p>
<hr />
<p> </p>
<p><img alt=" " src="http://origin-www.livemint.com/rw/LiveMint/Period1/2012/09/26/Photos/sam%20pitroda1--621x414.jpg" title=" " /></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">“In India, we have the Right to Information (Act) but the information is locked up in files,” he said in a video that was uploaded on YouTube before the conference started. Pitroda said the government has various plans to build robust information infrastructure on a scale that has never been done before.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">“I firmly believe that information is the fourth pillar of democracy along with (the) legislature, executive and judiciary,” he tweeted as opening remarks during the press conference titled “Democratization of information”.</p>
<table class="invisible">
<tbody>
<tr>
<th><img alt="photo" height="220" src="http://origin-www.livemint.com/rf/Image-330x220/LiveMint/Period1/2012/09/26/Photos/web_socialmedia.jpg" width="330" /></th>
<td style="text-align: justify; ">
<p>Even though Pitroda largely reiterated the government’s already announced plans in the space of digitization, the move to hold a press conference over Twitter has been largely construed as as a sign that the administration, criticised for attempting to rein in social media, is trying to come to terms with it.</p>
<p>Sunil Abraham, executive director of Bangalore-based research organization Centre for Internet and Society, said too much shouldn’t be read into Pitroda holding a press conference on Twitter. One government bureaucrat available on Twitter for a fixed period doesn’t make up for the non-existence of the government on social media, he said. “They (government) should be available all the time.”</p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The department of electronics and information technology recently issued guidelines for government agencies on improved engagement with citizens through social media. Tuesday’s press conference may spark a trend of more such engagements on social media platforms by government agencies.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Pitroda said that the public information infrastructure (PII) will include a national knowledge network that will connect 1,500 nodes for universities, colleges, research labs and libraries along with connecting 250,000 panchayats in the country through fibre optics. The information network will be operational in the next two year, Pitroda said in the YouTube video.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The government’s open data platform (<i>http://www.data.gov.in</i>), the beta site for which was launched some time ago, will provide access to government data and documents, he said.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Even though the government’s battles with the Internet continue over issues of regulation, which have often been construed as censorship, an increasing number of political leaders and agencies have been using the route to get their message across.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Gujarat chief minister <a href="http://origin-www.livemint.com/Search/Link/Keyword/Narendra%20Modi">Narendra Modi</a> has sought to engage with people through video chat on <a href="http://origin-www.livemint.com/Search/Link/Keyword/Google+">Google+</a> Hangout. West Bengal chief minister and Trinamool Congress (TMC) chief <a href="http://origin-www.livemint.com/Search/Link/Keyword/Mamata%20Banerjee">Mamata Banerjee</a> has been using <a href="http://origin-www.livemint.com/Search/Link/Keyword/Facebook">Facebook</a> to make public her views on recent economic and political developments.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) has also been communicating over Twitter in the recent past. The authorities have sought to block accounts that style themselves as belonging to the Prime Minister. Account holders have said that some of these are satirical in nature.</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/news/www-livemint-september-25-2012-surabhi-agarwal-pitroda-seeks-to-put-govt-information-in-public-domain'>http://editors.cis-india.org/news/www-livemint-september-25-2012-surabhi-agarwal-pitroda-seeks-to-put-govt-information-in-public-domain</a>
</p>
No publisherpraskrishnaFreedom of Speech and ExpressionPublic AccountabilityInternet GovernanceSocial media2012-09-27T05:13:05ZNews ItemAnalyzing the Latest List of Blocked Sites (Communalism and Rioting Edition) Part II
http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/analyzing-the-latest-list-of-blocked-sites-communalism-and-rioting-edition-part-ii
<b>Snehashish Ghosh does a further analysis of the leaked list of the websites blocked by the Indian Government from August 18, 2012 till August 21, 2012 (“leaked list”). </b>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><b>Unnecessary Blocks and Mistakes:</b></p>
<ol>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">http://hinduexistance.files.wordpress.com/..., which appears on the leaked list, does not exist because the URL is incorrect. However, the correct URL does contain an image which, in my opinion, can be considered to be capable of inciting violence. It has not been blocked due to a spelling error in the order. Instead of blocking hinduexist<b><i>e</i></b>nce.wordpress.com/... the DoT has ordered the blocking of hinduexist<b><i>a</i></b>nce.wordpress.com/..., which does not exist.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">Two URLs in the block order are from the website of the High Council for Human Rights, Judiciary of the Islamic Republic of Iran. The reason for blocking these two links from this particular website is unclear.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">The website of the Union of NGOs of the Islamic World was blocked. Again, the reason for blocking this website remains unclear.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">URLs such as, http://farazahmed.com/..., mumblingminion.blogspot.com, were blocked. The content on these URLs was in fact debunking the fake photographs.</li>
<li style="text-align: justify; ">Certain blocked Facebook pages did not have any bearing on the North East exodus which was the main reason behind the blocks. For example, Facebook link leading to United States Institute for Peace page was blocked.</li>
</ol>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><b> </b></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><b>Duration of the Block</b></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The Department of Telecommunications (DoT) did not specify the period for which the block has been implemented in its orders. As a result of which certain URLs still remain blocked while a majority of the links in the leaked list can be accessed. Lack of clear directions from the DoT has resulted in haphazard blocking and certain internet service providers (ISPs) have lifted the block on certain links whereas some other ISPs have continued with a complete block.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><b> </b></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><b>How have the intermediaries reacted to the block orders?</b></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Going by the leaked list of websites blocked by DoT, it issued the block orders to ‘all internet service licensees’. Intermediaries that do not fall in the category of 'internet service licensees’ were also sent a separate set of requests for taking down third party content. However, it is unclear under which provision of the law such request was made by the Government.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><b>Internet Service Licensees</b></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><b><img src="http://editors.cis-india.org/home-images/chart_1.png" alt="Implementation of the order at the ISP level" class="image-inline" title="Implementation of the order at the ISP level" /><br /></b></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The internet service licensee or the ISPs have not followed any uniform system to notify that a particular URL or website in the leaked list is blocked according to DoT’s orders. The lack of transparency in the implementation of the block orders, have a chilling effect on free speech.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">For instance, BSNL returns the following messages:</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">"This website/URL has been blocked until further notice either pursuant to Court orders or on the Directions issued by the Department of Telecommunications" or “This site has been blocked as per instructions from Department of Telecom (DOT).”</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">However, these messages are not uniform across all the URLs/websites in the leaked list. BSNL does not generate any response for the majority of the URLs in the leaked list. This results in ‘invisible censorship’ as the person who is trying to access the blocked URL does not have any means to know whether a particular URL is unavailable or certain sites are blocked by government orders.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Lack of notification does not only infringes upon the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression but also violates the fundamental right to a constitutional remedy guaranteed under Article 32 of our Constitution. The person aggrieved by such block orders cannot approach the Court for a remedy because there is no means to figure out:</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">(a) Description of the content blocked?</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">(b) Who has issued the block order/request?</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">(c) Under which provision of the law such block order/request has been issued?</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">(d) Who has implemented the block order/request? and</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">(e) What was the reason for the block?</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The intermediaries should provide with the above notification details while implementing a block order issued by the Government. </p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><b>Intermediaries hosting third party content: </b></p>
<p align="right" style="text-align: justify; ">More than 100 out of the 309 blocks are Facebook (http and https) URLs. Facebook has not informed its users about the reasons behind unavailability of certain pages or content. This is another instance of invisible censorship. However, YouTube, a Google service, has maintained certain level of transparency, and informs the user that the content has been blocked as per ‘government removal request’. It is interesting to note that certain YouTube user accounts were terminated as well. It is unclear whether this was as a result of the block order. Furthermore, links associated with blogger.com, which is another service provided by Google, have been removed.</p>
<hr />
<p align="right" style="text-align: justify; ">This was <a class="external-link" href="http://www.medianama.com/2012/09/223-analyzing-the-latest-list-of-blocked-sites-communalism-rioting-edition-part-ii/">re-posted</a> by Medianama on September 26, 2012.</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/analyzing-the-latest-list-of-blocked-sites-communalism-and-rioting-edition-part-ii'>http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/analyzing-the-latest-list-of-blocked-sites-communalism-and-rioting-edition-part-ii</a>
</p>
No publishersnehashishIT ActSocial mediaFreedom of Speech and ExpressionPublic AccountabilityInternet GovernanceIntermediary LiabilitySocial Networking2012-09-27T10:42:30ZBlog EntryNeed a standard strategy to deal with Web issues: Chandrasekhar
http://editors.cis-india.org/news/www-livemint-com-surabhi-agarwal-sep-4-2012-need-a-strategy-to-deal-with-web-issues
<b>The government has been facing allegations of Internet censorship for over a year now.</b>
<hr />
<p>This article by Surabhi Agarwal was <a class="external-link" href="http://www.livemint.com/2012/09/04231942/Need-a-standard-strategy-to-de.html">published</a> in LiveMint on September 4, 2012. Pranesh Prakash's analysis is quoted.</p>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The government said it needed to improve the way in which it dealt with issues such as Internet hate messages besides blog posts and SMSes that seek to create panic so that it’s not accused of trying to gag free speech.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">"We all have agreed that we need some combination of self-regulation and government interventions. But we need to do it in a proper way,” said department of telecom secretary R. Chandrasekhar, while addressing a Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (Ficci) conference on the issue of “legitimate restrictions on freedom of online speech".</p>
<table class="invisible">
<tbody>
<tr>
<th><img align="left" alt="Photo: HT" height="200" src="http://www.livemint.com/images/0D9BBF0A-7642-4213-B7BC-312D0C0138A6ArtVPF.gif" title="Photo: HT" width="300" /></th>
<td style="text-align: justify; ">
<p>The Union government has been facing allegations of censorship after it sought to contain messages that led to communal violence and a panicexodus by people from the north-eastern states in some cities.</p>
<p>Last month, the government ordered the blocking of almost 310 web pages for content deemed to be attacking particular communities. According to a post by Pranesh Prakash of the Centre for Internet and Society, 33% of them were on Facebook, 28% on Google Inc.’s YouTube and around 10% on Twitter.</p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Defending the government move, Gulshan Rai, chief of the Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT-in), said it was the first time that the emergency provision of the Information Technology Act 2008 had been exercised. Even though the list was not drawn up by his agency, due scrutiny was carried out before issuing orders to block the sites.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">This came after allegations that government may have also blocked bona fide posts as it sought to block content related to the North-East.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Twitter accounts of some journalists and other individuals associated with and sympathetic to right-wing causes were blocked, according to a list published earlier by The Economic Times.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">"This is certainly not the last time we are seeing such a situation, so meaningful ways to respond to such complex situations will have to be devised," said Chandrasekhar.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">He added that there was also a need to collaborate better with all stakeholders to devise not just defensive strategies during a crisis but also ways to contain its impact using the social media.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Ankhi Das, head of public policy at Facebook India, said that during the London riots of 2011, the UK government enlisted the support of social networking sites to dispel rumours.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">"Social media can also be allies of the government at times like this," she said.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Raman Jit Singh Cheema, a senior policy analyst at Google India, cited a similar example of authorities in Japan using such methods to send out correct information following the tsunami that hit the country in 2011.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">"We need to collaborate on a continuing basis, so that when you are faced with such a crisis, you are able to deal with it," said Chandrasekhar.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The government has been facing allegations of Internet censorship for over a year after minister for communication and information technology Kapil Sibal raised the issue of regulating social networking sites. They had allegedly not complied with the government’s demand that offensive content be removed.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Chandrasekhar said that processes should be clearer, more transparent and well-defined.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">"These need to be brought out in the form of some kind of a standard operating procedure, so that they (stakeholders) are expected to know how to conduct themselves and how they can expect the government to deal if a contingency arises," he said.</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/news/www-livemint-com-surabhi-agarwal-sep-4-2012-need-a-strategy-to-deal-with-web-issues'>http://editors.cis-india.org/news/www-livemint-com-surabhi-agarwal-sep-4-2012-need-a-strategy-to-deal-with-web-issues</a>
</p>
No publisherpraskrishnaSocial mediaFreedom of Speech and ExpressionPublic AccountabilityInternet GovernanceCensorship2012-09-05T08:37:09ZNews ItemPolitical war on the web
http://editors.cis-india.org/news/www-tehelka-com-kunal-majumder-tehelka-magazine-vol-9-issue-36-sep-8-2012-political-war-on-the-web
<b>Twitter is not only the ‘people’s voice’. It is also a forum for orchestrated propaganda.Kunal Majumder tracks the BJP-Congress online duel.</b>
<hr />
<p>Kunal Majumder's article was <a class="external-link" href="http://www.tehelka.com/story_main53.asp?filename=Ne080912Political.asp">published</a> in Tehelka Magazine, Vol 9, Issue 36, Dated 08 Sept 2012. Pranesh Prakash is quoted.</p>
<hr />
<table class="invisible">
<tbody>
<tr>
<th><img align="middle" src="http://www.tehelka.com/channels/News/2012/September/08/images/digvijay.jpg" /></th><th><img align="middle" src="http://www.tehelka.com/channels/News/2012/September/08/images/sushma.jpg" /></th>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>New battlelines Digvijaya Singh (left) and Sushma Swaraj are active tweeples<br />Photos: Shailendra Pandey</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">ON 27 August, as the Congress and the BJP battled it out in Parliament and later through news conferences, the story on Twitter was a bit different. Congress supporters, who had been at the receiving end of the ‘Coalgate’ issue so far, finally started hitting back. Adopting a strategy they had so far been accusing right-wingers of, they launched into an all-out attack on anyone who supported the BJP. Every tweet was hashtagged with #RIPBJP. At the end of the day, #RIPBJP was trending, making it the most successful Congress campaign against the BJP — a first on Twitter.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">“The social media battle against the BJP has just begun,” says a Congress supporter associated with the new project. “In the days to come, you will see our volunteers in a more combative mode.” However, he says it will not “replicate the negative campaign of the right-wing”.<br /><br />The Congress’ social media strategy is spearheaded by its tech-savvy General Secretary Digvijaya Singh. On Twitter for nearly nine months, Singh has been readying to take on the BJP on its own turf and influence the ‘voice of people’. Though serious doubt remains about how much of this voice is real and how much is a result of political propaganda.<br /><br />The push for the Congress to take the battle online comes from the recent ‘banning’ of Twitter handles of BJP sympathiser and senior journalist Kanchan Gupta. While the government insists that the handles were blocked due to security issues, Gupta claimed political martyrdom and launched a tirade against the Congress for imposing a second Emergency. Hashtags like #Emergency2012 and #GOIBlocks started trending, with BJP supporters turning their display pictures to black. "The fact remains none of the blockings were politically motivated,” says Pranesh Prakash, programme manager with Centre for Internet and Society. Prakash instead points to the UPA’s earlier request to IT companies like Google and Facebook to pull down certain pages, which displayed morphed photos and cartoons of Congress “functionaries” as clear example of politically motivated intervention.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Though no explanation was forthcoming from the government as to why specific handles were blocked temporarily through ISPs (Twitter has still not blocked them), the PMO issued a statement saying it has requested Twitter to take “appropriate action against six persons impersonating the PMO”. Certain handles like @PM0India (with a ‘zero’) were often accused of impersonating the actual @PMOIndia. But that’s another story.</p>
<table class="invisible">
<tbody>
<tr>
<th>
<hr />
#Emergency2012 and #GOIBlocks started trending, <br />with various BJP supporters turning their display pictures to black
<hr />
</th>
<td style="text-align: justify; ">The day Gupta’s handle was ‘blocked’, former bureaucrat B Raman wrote a blog that gave an interesting insight into why the government might have targeted Gupta. Raman describes a meeting that took place in Ahmedabad in 2008 — just before the 2009 General Elections — attended by senior BJP leaders and sympathisers, including Gupta. Raman says the general feeling among BJP participants was that mainstream media was not giving enough opportunities to the BJP and other right-wing activists to air their views. Therefore, “it was suggested by some participants that the BJP could get over this handicap by making good use of the online media”. Raman goes on to point that supporters of Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi and other right-wingers have since then used online media superbly with help of IT-savvy Hindutva supporters.</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">What Raman wrote in his blog is confirmed by the BJP’s IT Cell Convener, Arvind Gupta. The BJP was not only the first political party in India to have a website in 1999, its social media network has been way ahead of any other political group in the country. From posting updates to engaging users, it has a well-oiled social media machinery in place. Arvind calls this the “listen, engage and inform” model. This includes Internet TV, YouTube and messenger chats. In fact, the next big thing on the party’s social media agenda is the interaction with Narendra Modi on Google+ Hangout.</p>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify; "><b>Poli-Tweeting</b></p>
<table class="invisible">
<tbody>
<tr>
<th><img align="middle" src="http://www.tehelka.com/channels/News/2012/September/08/images/twi1.jpg" /></th>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><img align="middle" src="http://www.tehelka.com/channels/News/2012/September/08/images/sushma2.jpg" /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><b>Poli-Faking</b></p>
<table class="invisible">
<tbody>
<tr>
<th><img align="middle" src="http://www.tehelka.com/channels/News/2012/September/08/images/tweet1.jpg" /></th>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><img align="middle" src="http://www.tehelka.com/channels/News/2012/September/08/images/advani.jpg" /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><img align="middle" src="http://www.tehelka.com/channels/News/2012/September/08/images/neta.jpg" /></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><img align="middle" src="http://www.tehelka.com/channels/News/2012/September/08/images/bjp.jpg" /></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">BUT IT is not political agenda that has left Digvijaya Singh singed. Speaking to TEHELKA, Singh points to abusive — and at times, factually incorrect — tweets posted by right-wing supporters. In many cases, the mere mention of anything against Modi or Baba Ramdev would have scores of right-wing supporters bombarding Twitter timelines with counter-criticism, and often, abuses. “Anything that incites hate is a problem,” he says.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Though what can be called ‘hate’ is a very subjective matter, Arvind Gupta feels social media reflects the mood of the young population. “People call themselves Internet Hindus. We, as a party, have nothing to do with this. People are so passionate about Modi that they take up his case (against anyone who posts anti-Modi tweets),” says Gupta. He also points towards a similar trend when it comes to people tweeting against Team Anna.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Many right-wing Twitter users are accused of posting sponsored tweets against specific people who they believe are anti-BJP. This accusation has not been proven so far, though many users claim to have tracked interaction between rightwing Twitter users on coordinated attacks on users with liberal or pro-Congress ideologies. “There is a belief — and let me tell you that it is wrong — that we hire people,” says Gupta. So can the high number of right-wing users be put down to an ideological stance alone? Gupta says it’s got to do with understanding politics better. “Our volunteers are generally more educated and understand the the Congress’ wrong policies. That category also forms a major part of the ecosystem in this new media,” he says.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Within minutes of talking to this correspondent, Gupta posts a new hashtag on Twitter — #MotaMaal — taking a cue from Sushma Swaraj’s accusation of corruption against the Congress in the coal scam. The next day, Twitter became all about #MotaMaal versus #RIPBJP. Handles like @BJP0fficials and @PMAdvani have been created to counter the right wing. Clearly, Congress supporters are hitting back even at the risk of adding to the cacophony of an already-chaotic medium.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><i>Kunal Majumder is a Principal Correspondent with Tehelka</i>.</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/news/www-tehelka-com-kunal-majumder-tehelka-magazine-vol-9-issue-36-sep-8-2012-political-war-on-the-web'>http://editors.cis-india.org/news/www-tehelka-com-kunal-majumder-tehelka-magazine-vol-9-issue-36-sep-8-2012-political-war-on-the-web</a>
</p>
No publisherpraskrishnaSocial mediaFreedom of Speech and ExpressionPublic AccountabilityInternet GovernanceCensorship2012-09-05T05:27:24ZNews ItemIs the govt caught in the 'censorship' web?
http://editors.cis-india.org/news/www-ndtv-com-we-the-people-aug-26-2012-is-the-govt-caught-in-the-censorship-web
<b>NDTV aired a one-hour debate on censorship in "We the People" episode hosted by Barkha Dutt on August 26, 2012. Pranesh Prakash participated in the discussions as a speaker.</b>
<p>Pranesh Prakash responded to Barkha Dutt's question on what does a government do in a time of social unrest:</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">"I think in a time of social unrest there is leeway provided in laws for the government to take action. The law existing and the law allowing for it is a very different matter from the government actually making use of it. There are as shown in the United Kingdom, much better ways of combating situations of riots. As we have seen in India for instance, there are people who provoke riots from podiums yet don't get arrested and as we have seen in the UK, there are people who take part in riots and have been punished a great deal."</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><b>Video</b></p>
<p><iframe frameborder="0" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/-0f0_yG2gVE" width="320"></iframe></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">See the <a class="external-link" href="http://www.ndtv.com/video/player/we-the-people/is-the-govt-caught-in-the-censorship-web/244248">full debate</a> on NDTV</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/news/www-ndtv-com-we-the-people-aug-26-2012-is-the-govt-caught-in-the-censorship-web'>http://editors.cis-india.org/news/www-ndtv-com-we-the-people-aug-26-2012-is-the-govt-caught-in-the-censorship-web</a>
</p>
No publisherpraskrishnaSocial mediaFreedom of Speech and ExpressionPublic AccountabilityInternet GovernanceVideoCensorship2012-09-04T06:54:25ZNews ItemGovernment to hold talks with stakeholders on Internet censorship
http://editors.cis-india.org/news/www-the-hindu-com-shalini-singh-sep-4-2012-govt-to-hold-talks-with-stakeholders-on-internet-censorship
<b>In an unprecedented move, the government, through the Department of Telecommunications and the Department of Electronics and Information Technology, has agreed to initiate dialogue on Internet censorship with mega Internet companies, social media giants such as Google and Facebook, members of civil society, technical community, media, ISPs and legal experts.</b>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify; ">This article by Shalini Singh was <a class="external-link" href="http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article3856121.ece">published</a> in the Hindu on September 4, 2012. Pranesh Prakash's analysis is quoted.</p>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The triggers for the discussion, which will be held on Wednesday, are the riots in Assam, Mumbai and Uttar Pradesh, as well as the mass exodus of north-east Indians from Bangalore, which resulted in bringing the government, civil society organisations and the media to a flashpoint.<br /><br />Two of India’s seniormost officers in the area of Internet censorship, DoT Secretary R. Chandrashekhar and Director General, CERT-IN, Gulshan Rai will engage with a range of stakeholders in a two-hour meeting titled ‘Legitimate Restrictions on Freedom of Online Speech: The need for balance – from Deadlock to Dialogue.’<br /><br />Other panellists include representatives from Google and Facebook; Pranesh Prakash from the Centre for Internet and Society (a civil society group); Prabir Purkayasta, Delhi Science Forum (technical community); Paranjoy Guha Thakurta, president, Foundation for Media Professionals; Rajesh Chharia, president, Internet Service Providers Association of India; and Apar Gupta, an advocate dealing with cyber issues.<br /><br />One analysis by the CIS has shown that 309 specific items, including URLs, Twitter accounts, IMG tags, blog posts and blogs were blocked. Complaints arose when blocking a page resulted in the blocking of an entire website — which has scores or hundreds of web pages. The government maintained that this was necessary as there was a sense of crisis. Home Minister Sushil Kumar Shinde insisted that the government was “taking strict action only against those accounts or people which are causing damage or spreading rumours.” However, the collateral damage of the move was the Twitter accounts of several people, including journalists like Kanchan Gupta, being blocked.<br /><br />“Mass censorship is like killing a fly with a sledgehammer. Rather than blocking the sites, the government should have used the same media, Facebook, Twitter and Google to counter terrorism and hate speech. I am glad that they are now open to dialogue,” says Mr. Thakurta.<br /><br />“It is an extremely productive move as it will generate awareness among content providers, government and users. In the absence of any dialogue, everyone was just sticking to their own positions without listening to the other stakeholders’ point of view,” says Mr. Chharia.<br /><br />The meeting is to bring several stakeholders in dialogue on a single platform.<br /><br />Nearly 50 other experts from industry, mobile service providers, Internet companies, intermediaries, academia and some international organisations as well as multilaterals are expected to join the conference, which will be held at 2.30 p.m. on September 4 at FICCI.<br /><br />While this is seen as a brave attempt by some, there are an equal number of sceptics who believe that the discussion may not yield the desired result given the national security objectives governing law enforcement agencies on the one hand and the desire of users, media and civil society to preserve free speech on the other. Clearly, ISPs, Internet companies and social media are in a tough spot since they face legal obligations on legitimate orders for blocking on one hand while needing to protect their user privacy and rights to unhindered access to information.<br /><br />If successful, it is possible that this dialogue will ensure that legitimate restrictions do not slide into illegitimate censorship.</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/news/www-the-hindu-com-shalini-singh-sep-4-2012-govt-to-hold-talks-with-stakeholders-on-internet-censorship'>http://editors.cis-india.org/news/www-the-hindu-com-shalini-singh-sep-4-2012-govt-to-hold-talks-with-stakeholders-on-internet-censorship</a>
</p>
No publisherpraskrishnaIT ActSocial mediaFreedom of Speech and ExpressionPublic AccountabilityInternet GovernanceCensorship2012-09-04T03:39:32ZNews ItemThe state. And the rage of the cyber demon
http://editors.cis-india.org/news/www-tehelka-com-vol-9-issue-36-sep-8-2012-shougat-dasgupta-the-state-and-the-rage-of-the-cyber-demon
<b>The Internet might be a Pandora’s box. But should the government be wasting time regulating the cacophony?</b>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Shougat Dasgupta's article was <a class="external-link" href="http://www.tehelka.com/story_main53.asp?filename=Op080912State.asp">published</a> in Tehelka, Vol 9, Issue 36, Dated September 8, 2012. Pranesh Prakash is quoted.</p>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify; ">SOME YEARS ago a cartoon was doing the rounds that caught in a few sharp strokes the selfimportance and self-righteousness of the Internet warrior. A man sits hunched at his computer, the keyboard lit with his fervour. Not looking away from the screen, he has a terse, impatient exchange with his partner off-panel: ‘Are you coming to bed?’ ‘I can’t. This is important.’ ‘What?’ ‘Someone is wrong on the Internet.’ It is the anonymous exchange that gives cyber debates their peculiar animus; that anonymity coupled with the low stakes, as is famously said of academic politics, is what makes the sniping so bitter and vicious. The complaints about social media like Twitter or the comment sections on blogs have mostly centred on the incivility of the discourse, on ‘trolls’ too eager to throw rotting vegetables at journalists, politicians, celebrities unused to such irreverence. But action taken by the government in the last fortnight to block content from over 300 websites and a dozen Twitter accounts imputes a far more vitiating effect on society than the mere puncturing of already overinflated egos.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Kapil Sibal, Minister for Communications & Information Technology, has said in interviews that the government’s intent was to “protect the victims” from these “mischievous acts happening through these sites and blogs”. There is, by now, little doubt that the threats and fake pictures of slain Muslims spread through mobile phones and social media, “disseminating misinformation” in the minister’s phrase, helped exacerbate tensions and fears. There is equally little doubt that what action the government took was both late and clumsy: blocking blogs that debunked the rumours and morphed images that the government held responsible for causing panic; blocking web pages of international news organisations such as The Telegraph and Al-Jazeera; blocking Twitter accounts of journalists, the government’s political opponents, accounts parodying the prime minister, even people who tweeted mostly about information technology and cricket. Like a giant in clown shoes chasing a sprite, the government has looked lumbering and foolish, led a merry dance by light-footed ‘netizens’, while the rest of us pointed and laughed.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Can the government’s actions be at all justified? Appearing on NDTV’s ‘We the People’, R Chandrashekhar, Secretary, Department of Information Technology, argued that “once a law enforcement agency has made an assessment you act first and then make corrections as you go along”. In essence, extraordinary times call for extraordinary measures, which along with concern for ‘national security’ is trotted out by every democratic government accused of ignoring civil liberties. Congress spokesperson Manish Tewari, on the same programme, claimed that the “mandate of section 69a of the Information Technology Act and the rules with regard to safeguards and blocking is fairly clear and rule 9 allows the government, if it thinks that there’s an expedient situation in order to protect the sovereignty of the State or public order, to go ahead with this blocking on an interim basis”.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">We will discuss the section being referred to and the 2011 guidelines for intermediaries later but for now let’s accept the government’s argument that it acted in the face of a clear and present danger, to borrow from Oliver Wendell Holmes, the famous 19th-century US Supreme Court Justice. Kharan Thapar, citing another of Holmes’s shopworn phrases, wrote that “[ j]ust as it’s not acceptable to shout fire in a crowded cinema hall for the fun of it, it cannot be permitted to deliberately frighten helpless innocent people who, for whatever reason, believe you and panic”. Thapar is making the point that free speech is not without its responsibilities. He does so, however, using a long discredited cliché and compounds this error with condescension, refusing to grant people (“helpless”, “innocent”, like babies) their full agency. Besides, the government only acted from 18 August to limit text messaging, already months after initial images of supposed Burmese atrocities against Muslims had been widely circulated to stir anger. It also chose to block webpages and Twitter handles, some for spurious, even mystifying reasons. The result has been embarrassment. Acting arbitrarily in the name of communal harmony to prevent damage after terrible damage has already been done, does little to convince the people you are supposedly protecting that you have the situation in hand.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The government has left itself open to being serially lectured about free speech by the US government, by journalists (particularly Kanchan Gupta, whose apparently blocked Twitter account has made him a patron saint of free speech), by hysterical twitterers (ok, ‘tweeple’) drawing an entirely ridiculous parallel to the Emergency, and most egregiously by Narendra Modi. Presumably, Modi, by blackening his display picture was not commenting on the black irony of a man who bans books mourning constraints on freedom of speech. Pranesh Prakash of the Bengaluru-based Centre for Internet and Society (CIS), a trenchant critic of the government’s recent blocks (social media not coal) and the “horrendously drafted” legislation that permits the leeway for such indiscriminate action, says that “people [were] losing a sense of reality”.</p>
<table class="invisible">
<tbody>
<tr>
<th><img align="middle" height="268" src="http://www.tehelka.com/channels/Op-ed/2012/September/08/images/Illustration.jpg" width="185" /></th>
<td style="text-align: justify; ">He points to the criticism of the government’s blocking of parodies of the prime minister’s Twitter account. “An underreported part of this whole controversy,” he says,“is Twitter’s own terms of service and one parody account in particular violates those terms.” He confesses to “having to look quite closely” to tell the PMO account from PMO, which substitutes a zero for the letter ‘o’. Also, according to sources, a letter sent last year by the government to the likes of Google and Facebook asking them to screen for offensive content specifically excepted parody and satire. If accurate, this underscores that the Prime Minister’s Office did not have a problem with parody but a genuine, if peculiar, fear of misinformation stemming from the six accounts it asked Twitter to remove.</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">NONE OF this is to say that the government, in its haste, acted with reason. Certainly, it has since last year been working assiduously to exert at least some control over online content. The rules from April last year updating sections of the Information Technology Act, 2000, requires “due diligence” from companies like Twitter, or Facebook, to not “host, display, upload, modify, publish, transmit, update or share any information that… is grossly harmful, harassing, blasphemous, defamatory, obscene, pornographic, paedophilic, libellous, invasive of another’s privacy, hateful, or racially, ethnically objectionable, disparaging, relating or encouraging money laundering or gambling, or otherwise unlawful in any manner whatever…” Disparaging? Encouraging gambling? Well, gambling, at least in casinos, is lawful in Goa and Sikkim. No wonder Kapil Sibal felt he was on firm legal ground when he complained in December about “derogatory pictures” of Sonia Gandhi and Manmohan Singh that the government had culled from Facebook accounts.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Prakash, of the CIS, describes the Information Technology Act, particularly sections 69a and 66 as “having issues and being badly worded”. The powers it gives the government are too intrusive and that the prison sentences for offenders “are greater than those for death by negligence”. What he finds most troubling is how little transparency exists around issues of censorship; how, for instance, there is no easily accessible central list of banned books. “How,” he asks, “are people even supposed to know if their website or Twitter account is blocked if the government won’t issue proper notices and lists?” Our democratically elected government appears fond of the aristocratic maxim to never contradict, never explain, never apologise, as if hauteur and bluster are adequate substitutes for communication and we are subjects rather than citizens.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Seen in isolation, the blocking of websites and rationing of text messages is just a comical bungle by an unwieldy, Luddite administration. In the context of the last 12 months though, the government’s recent actions are a logical extension of its drive to bring the Internet to heel. The unregulated nature of the Internet is a particular bugbear of this government. It had already made a proposal to the United Nations in October last year, at the 66th session of the General Assembly, for the institution of a Committee for Internet- Related Policies. This 50-nation body would be tasked not to control the Internet, “or allow Governments to have the last word in regulating the Internet, but to make sure that the Internet is governed not unilaterally, but in an open, democratic, inclusive and participatory manner, with the participation of all stakeholders”. For all the incompetence the government has displayed, both most recently and in previous attempts to censor Internet content, it asks an important question about the future of Internet regulation, about the need for multilateral debate and international consensus.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">TEHELKA, as cyber chatter about the blocked sites grew increasingly frenzied, asked its online readers to define the forum provided by social media. Most agreed that Twitter, for instance, was a public space, a place to give vent to private thoughts publicly with, if wanted or needed, the comfort of anonymity. The metaphor used is often that of a public square or town hall. I’ve always thought of Twitter as a carnival — a space, as defined by the Russian literary theorist Mikhail Bakhtin, where the existing social order is overturned, where social pieties are profaned. Twitter, like carnival, appeared to me an exhilarating space. This is utterly naïve. The fact is that Twitter is not a public space, it is privately owned and its investors are in the business of revenue generation and profit. This means Twitter’s terms of service are subject to change, as is its cooperation with governments over the private information it controls and owns.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Rahul Bose, the actor, told me in a conversation about social media that he thinks individual freedom is increasingly an “illusion”, that the very idea has become “laughable”. We live our lives, particularly our online lives, under the unblinking gaze of government: “You don’t need a close circuit camera at Flora Fountain to know you’re being watched, that every piece of information is on a file somewhere.” (This is probably not quite true of our dozy government.) It is indisputable that private entities such as Facebook and Twitter hold enormous amounts of information about individuals. In that light, surely, the Indian government is correct about the need for multilateral oversight of a system currently beholden in significant ways to the United States. ICANN, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, for instance, still makes only a token gesture at global participation and any question of greater United Nations involvement is generally met with US suspicion.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Arguably, the Indian government doesn’t go far enough in its call for greater inclusivity in the governance of the Internet. The academic Jeremy Malcolm, an influential figure in discussions about Internet governance, has written that the World Summit on the Information Society has “established at the level of principle that governance of the Internet should be a transparent, democratic and multilateral process, with the participation of governments, private sector, civil society and international organisations, in their respective roles”. More immediate, perhaps, is the question of how a democratic country, committed to free speech, should regard social media.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">This is not a discussion confined to India. During the August 2012 London riots, David Cameron threatened to ban people suspected of planning criminal activity from using Facebook, Twitter, and Blackberry Messenger. In words similar to those used by Sibal, Cameron spoke about reminding these companies of their responsibilities. In an interview with TEHELKA, Congress General Secretary Digvijaya Singh held close to the party line, insisting that “anything that incites violence is problematic, as is anything that is factually incorrect, and must be removed”. He envisages a future where online exchanges are governed by the same rules as public life, governed by similar cultural codes and basic civility. This is, it has to be said, an optimistic view of public life.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">There are, as discussed earlier, as many different ways to see online exchanges as there are Internet users. The Internet’s shapelessness, its Moby Dick-like vast blankness, makes it impossible to apply the same standards to conversation on Twitter or Facebook, even if it is in print and in public, as you might apply to a magazine article. Pranesh Prakash points out that “while some people may see Twitter as akin to friends talking in the pub, others use the service as a bulletin board”. When I propose to Prakash the idea of an ombudsman to monitor online dialogue in the same way an independent press commission might monitor newspaper reports, he makes a cogent rebuttal: “There is no ombudsman for regular speech, or to outline what you can or cannot say from a podium. Besides, there are laws that deal with defamation, slander and unless there is a requirement for an extra-legal authority I cannot see the need for an ombudsman.”</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Much of the debate over the last couple of weeks has devolved, as so much debate in all our media, mainstream or online, does, into grandstanding — in this instance about ‘freedom of speech’ versus the national security imperative. This is to miss the woods for the trees. For all its heavy-handedness, the Indian government is correct to be concerned about oversight of the Internet and correct that not enough stakeholders are currently involved in its governance. Cant about freedom of speech cannot change the fact that the government is also correct that in a precariously held together democracy comprising various, widely different cultures and religions, certain standards of respectful speech are necessary. Of course, we can and should argue those standards and there needs to be a national conversation about the strictures of Internet legislation in India. Still, let us not pretend that the mob mentality of political discourse on the Internet is not a cause for worry and is not, as are all mobs, subject to manipulation.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><i>With inputs from Ajachi Chakrabarti</i>. <br />Shougat Dasgupta is an Assistant Editor with Tehelka.</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/news/www-tehelka-com-vol-9-issue-36-sep-8-2012-shougat-dasgupta-the-state-and-the-rage-of-the-cyber-demon'>http://editors.cis-india.org/news/www-tehelka-com-vol-9-issue-36-sep-8-2012-shougat-dasgupta-the-state-and-the-rage-of-the-cyber-demon</a>
</p>
No publisherpraskrishnaFreedom of Speech and ExpressionSocial mediaInternet GovernanceCensorship2012-09-03T11:03:53ZNews ItemFacebook's Delicate Dance With Delhi On Censorship
http://editors.cis-india.org/news/www-forbes-com-mark-bergen-aug-29-2012-facebooks-delicate-dance-with-delhi-on-censorship
<b>At the end of last week, a hashtag briskly rose across India: #Emergency2012. It was a reference to the 21-month stint, beginning in the summer of 1975, when then PM Indira Gandhi determined democracy an inconvenience.</b>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Contributed by Mark Bergen, the post was <a class="external-link" href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/markbergen/2012/08/29/facebooks-delicate-dance-with-delhi-on-censorship/">published</a> in Forbes on August 29, 2012. Sunil Abraham is quoted.</p>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify; ">This time around, the government launched a jumbled attempt, following ethnic violence in the northeast, to stem rumors behind a panicked exodus. They blocked over 300 sites and axed at least 16 Twitter accounts, including those of <a href="http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2012-08-23/news/33342537_1_twitter-accounts-twitter-users-block-six-fake-accounts" target="_blank">political opponents and journalists</a>. Many of us found our cell phone texts suddenly, with no announcement, cut off after five missives.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">It was hardly the Emergency of 1975. The government’s actions were far less draconian than three decades ago. But, back then, there were no foreign internet companies to complicate matters—and, it seems, absolve the government.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">In response to the recent charges, <a href="http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-08-24/internet/33365421_1_twitter-accounts-objectionable-content-twitter-users" target="_blank">Delhi claimed</a> that there was “no censorship at all.” As the communications minister, Kapil Sibal, put it, “Facebook and Google are cooperating with us.”</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Under the circumstances, shutting down the incendiary hate speech online was warranted, explained Sunil Abraham, the director of the Centre for Internet and Society (CIS) in Bangalore. The process was just incredibly inept. “There were so many things they did wrong,” he told me when I asked about the government’s response. And the reaction can be tacked onto <a href="http://india.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/12/05/india-asks-google-facebook-others-to-screen-user-content/" target="_blank">a very recent history</a> of Delhi issuing sweeping, usually empty, threats of censoring U.S. internet companies.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">“Perhaps the Indian government has wasted, frittered a way goodwill,” Abraham continued. “It has cried ‘wolf’ so many times that this time the internet intermediaries are not taking them as seriously as they should.”</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">His group <a href="http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/analysing-blocked-sites-riots-communalism" target="_blank">analyzed the sites</a> shut down last week, pointing out the “numerous mistakes and inconsistencies that make blocking pointless and ineffectual.” It’s clear that the censorship was also opportunistic—used to stamp out political parody Twitter accounts—and counterproductive. Among the sites blocked was a Pakistani blog debunking the rumors behind the whole exodus episode.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Abraham criticized the government for coming to the intermediaries with broad demands first, rather than directly to Twitter, Facebook and Google. That approach, coupled with earlier censorship demands, may strain the trust between the ruling coalition and the web giants.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Still, Facebook has every reason to keep Delhi happy. This year, the number of users in India <a href="http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-08-05/social-media/29854245_1_advertisers-and-developers-social-networking-number-of-internet-users" target="_blank">hit 32 million</a>—a 85 percent jump from the last. The total is expected to nearly double next year, leap-frogging Indonesia for the title of second largest market. An overwhelming chunk of that growth will come from mobile users. As this solid report from <a href="http://forbesindia.com/article/special/facebooktoo-much-hype-too-little-substance/33106/1#ixzz24kFQXSMH" target="_blank"><i>Forbes India</i></a> shows, the company is still struggling here, as it is in the U.S., to turn those new users into ad revenue:</p>
<p class="callout" style="text-align: justify; ">Indian businesses spent Rs 2,850 crore on digital advertising as of March 2012, a number that’s expected to grow to Rs 4,391 crore next year, according to a report by the Internet Mobile Association of India/Indian Market Research Bureau (IAMAI/IMRB).<br /><br />…But Facebook has not been able to capture much of this share. Mahesh Murthy reckons that businesses spent about Rs 150 crore on Facebook marketing, but only a third went to Facebook’s own kitties in the form of ad revenues. The rest went to social media marketing firms which handle Facebook accounts.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">That’s not to say that the company will discontinue its aggressive efforts. It likely will not be deterred by policies that attack free speech—Zuckerberg’s empire has long been accused of <a href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/markbergen/2012/08/29/facebooks-delicate-dance-with-delhi-on-censorship/techcrunch.com/2007/11/22/is-facebook-really-censoring-search-when-it-suits-them/" target="_blank">complacency with censorship</a>. It’s India’s<a href="http://www.indianexpress.com/news/facebook-google-face-heat-on-india-tax/958603/" target="_blank">infamously unpredictable tax policies</a> toward foreign entities that would conceivably slow the company’s expansion.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">There’s little reason to suspect, then, that Facebook, Google and the western web behemoths will not continue to cooperate with Delhi moving forward. And much of that cooperation should come not as blatant censorship but covert surveillance. According to the <a href="http://www.google.com/transparencyreport/map/" target="_blank">Google Transparency Report</a>, India has made over 2,000 data requests and 100 removal requests, third only to the States and Brazil. As the mobile revolution soars, that number will surely rise.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">On Monday evening, Christopher Soghoian, a D.C.-based privacy analyst, spoke at the CIS before a crowd of young Indian law students and activists. Despite the shoddy security default of internet firms, he said, they can impose limits on government surveillance. “When these companies receive requests from where they don’t have an office,” he claimed, “they refuse.” Two years ago, Facebook India opened its first office in Hyderabad.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Soghoian advised his audience to push for privacy and transparency standards in India. He shared the story of the long-fought <a href="http://mashable.com/2011/01/27/facebook-https/" target="_blank">battle for encryption protection</a> with Facebook in the U.S. Yet, he admitted that security provisions can falter when a government is bent on policing the internet—and a company is bent on cooperation. “If you can force companies to hand over the keys,” he said, “then encryption is useless.”</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/news/www-forbes-com-mark-bergen-aug-29-2012-facebooks-delicate-dance-with-delhi-on-censorship'>http://editors.cis-india.org/news/www-forbes-com-mark-bergen-aug-29-2012-facebooks-delicate-dance-with-delhi-on-censorship</a>
</p>
No publisherpraskrishnaSocial mediaFreedom of Speech and ExpressionPublic AccountabilityInternet GovernanceCensorship2012-09-03T04:39:45ZNews ItemIndia Blocks Facebook, Twitter, Mass Texts in Response to Unrest
http://editors.cis-india.org/news/www-pbs-org-aug-28-2012-simon-roughneen-india-blocks-facebook-twitter-mass-texts-in-response-to-unrest
<b>The Indian government has gone on the offensive against Internet giants such as Facebook, Google and Twitter, demanding hundreds of pages be removed or blocked after political unrest erupted in various parts of the country.</b>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify; ">This post by Simon Roughneen was <a class="external-link" href="http://www.pbs.org/mediashift/2012/08/india-blocks-facebook-twitter-mass-texts-in-response-to-unrest241.html">posted</a> in Media Shift on August 28, 2012. Nishant Shah is quoted.</p>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify; ">On August 15, India's independence day, Indian <a href="http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2012-08-16/news/33232891_1_northeast-strict-action-rumours">northeasterners began fleeing</a> Bangalore, the country's southern IT hub and 5th largest city, after text messages said to threaten Assamese people and other northeasterners were sent around.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Authorities restricted text messages so they could be sent to only five recipients to stop bulk sending, which was followed by a government backlash against social media and news sites; more than 300 pages have been blocked in recent days.</p>
<h2 style="text-align: justify; ">Exodus</h2>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The scene during the exodus was reminiscent of an old newsreel from World War II Europe, or, more aptly, from the separation of India and Pakistan in the late 1940s when around 25 million people took flight amid chaos and bloodshed as the contours of the new states were drawn up after British withdrawal.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">On the platform at a Bangalore train station were hundreds of people from Assam state and other areas of India's northeast, a remote part of the country almost 2,000 miles away. The region is mostly surrounded by Bangladesh, Bhutan, China and Burma and is linked to the rest of India only by a narrow strip of land nicknamed the chicken-neck.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">In July, <a href="http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Assam-remains-tense-2-more-bodies-found/articleshow/15790126.cms">fighting in the northeast's Assam state</a> between local ethnic groups and Muslims -- which some Indians say are illegal immigrants from Bangladesh -- killed 80 people and forced 400,000 more from their homes, most of them Muslims. On August 11, <a href="http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/c7ab28d4-e454-11e1-affe-00144feab49a.html">a march in Mumbai</a> , India's financial capital, ended up in a riot, with two killed and dozens injured, when Muslims there protested attacks on Muslims in the northeast and on Muslim Rohingya in Burma.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The SMS scare in Bangalore came next, but who sent what and why has never been clearly established, though three men were <a href="http://www.indianexpress.com/news/man-held-in-bangalore-sent-messages-to-20-000-probe/991361/">subsequently arrested</a> in Bangalore on suspicion of mass-forwarding threatening text messages.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Nonetheless, the scare, real or hyped, was enough to prompt panic among the 300,000 or so northeasterners who study and work in Bangalore. Interviewees at the city's rail station, waiting for a train to Guwahati in Assam state, a two-and-a-half-day journey, <a href="http://www.simonroughneen.com/asia/south-asia/india-south-asia/thousands-of-indian-northeasterners-flee-bangalore-after-text-message-scare-christian-science-monitor/#more-6511">said they hadn't received or even seen any messages</a>, but the rumor mill went into overdrive and their parents in the northeast urged them to come home, temporarily at least.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">A lack of confidence in police, perceived racism against northeasterners -- some of whom appear east or southeast Asian and are sometimes called "chinki" by other Indians -- as well as political discord ahead of elections next year <a href="http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?282077">all contributed</a> to the exodus.</p>
<h2>Government Reacts</h2>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The Indian government urged the northeasterners to stay put, as the exodus spread to Pune, Chennai and other large cities in the south and west where northeasterners work. Text messages were limited to five recipients to stop bulk messages spreading fear, a bar later raised to 20 recipients. India has around 750 million cell phone subscribers, the world's second biggest market after China, and the government's nationwide restriction seemed an over-reaction given that the exodus was confined to a few cities.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">In a country of 1.2 billion people -- the world's fourth biggest economy measured in purchasing power parity terms -- the government is worried about a recent economic slowdown. Growth is at its lowest since 2003, and foreign investors are complaining out loud about <a href="http://www.simonroughneen.com/business-economics/hows-business-in-india-watch-bangalore-christian-science-monitor/#more-6519">hazy rules and red tape</a>. India feels it needs to nip any political unrest in the bud with foreign investment dropping by 78 percent year-on-year, according to June figures.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Apparently with public order in mind, the Indian government began blocking websites and pages said to contain inflammatory content, even as the exodus slowed.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Nishant Shah of the Bangalore-based <a href="http://editors.cis-india.org/">Centre for Internet and Society</a> said that the government is trying to figure out how best to react to the transition from an era when news and information was carried via broadcast and print.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">"In the older forms of governance, which were imagined through a broadcast model, the government was at the center of the information wheel, managing and mediating what information reached different parts of the country. In the [peer-to-peer] world, where the government no longer has that control, it is now trying different ways by which it can reinforce its authority and centrality to the information ecosystem. Which means that there is going to be a series of failures and models that don't work," Shah told PBS MediaShift in an email.</p>
<h2 style="text-align: justify; ">Overdoing It?</h2>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">However, for a country that has long styled itself as the world's biggest democracy, and is home to some of the world's biggest selling English language newspapers, the last few days have seen the government take a forceful line against Internet giants such as Google and Facebook that some feel threatens freedom of speech.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The text messages were said to be from some of India's 170 million or so Muslim population, the world's third largest after Indonesia and Pakistan -- and the Indian government at first sought to blame Pakistan for fomenting the exodus by whipping up anger among India's Muslims.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Following the text restrictions, Indian authorities blocked what they describe as "incendiary" and "hate-mongering" content on websites in Pakistan and Bangladesh that they say spurred the northeast fighting -- including images of the 2010 Tibet earthquake passed off as images of Burmese Buddhists after attacking Burmese Muslims -- and asked Google and Facebook to remove the content.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">However, news reports on the exodus, as well as other coverage of Muslim-Buddhist clashes in Burma, were blocked. Among those affected were Doha-based news agency Al-Jazeera and the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC). And stories on sectarian fighting in Arakan in western Burma -- where Buddhist Arakanese have clashed with Muslim Rohingya, with the flare-up catching the attention of Islamist groups elsewhere, including India -- were blocked in India.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">ABC <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/abc-hit-as-india-blocks-media/story-e6frg6so-1226457697028">said on Friday</a> content that "in relation to the particular blocked ABC, we are surprised by the action and we stand by the reporting."</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">An April 2011 law says that the government must give 48 hours before blocking pages, as well as an explanation for the block in each individual case, though this can be sidestepped in an emergency. "Every company, whether it's an entertainment company, or a construction company, or a social media company, has to operate within the laws of the given country," said Sachin Pilot, minister of state in the Ministry of Communications, speaking about the recent restrictions.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">There's more to the back-story than just the 2011 IT law, however. Prior to the recent exodus from Bangalore and the government reaction, Google and Facebook were facing charges for allegedly hosting offensive material.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">A Google spokesman, speaking by telephone from Singapore about the Indian government's recent blocks, said that the company abides by the law of the land, in India and elsewhere. "We also comply with valid legal requests from authorities wherever possible, consistent with our longstanding policy," he said.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">All told, 80 million to 100 million Indians are online, and India has the world's third biggest number of <a href="http://www.socialbakers.com/facebook-statistics/">Facebook users</a>, at 53 million. But, that just makes up just 4.5 percent of the country's population.</p>
<table class="invisible">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="text-align: justify; "><img alt="@PM0India.png" src="http://www.pbs.org/mediashift/assets_c/2012/08/@PM0India-thumb-300x393-5300.png" /><br />Some commentators see the government as oversensitive. For example, using the pushback to put a block on an account parodying the country's prime minister.</td>
<td>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Twitter has 16 million accounts in the country. By Friday, a stand-off between New Delhi and Twitter saw around 20 Twitter handles blocked by Indian ISPs, on the orders of the government, with threats that the government could block Twitter completely.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The hashtag <a href="https://twitter.com/#%21/search/%20%23GOIblocks">#GOIblocks</a> gets about 10-12 tweets per minute -- going by a quick scroll-through -- from users protesting the government's measures. However, caught up in the dragnet so far are accounts with little apparently to do with the Bangalore exodus. The Indian opposition said the blacklist is partisan, while other commentators see the government as oversensitive, using the pushback to put a block on an account (<a href="https://twitter.com/@PM0India">@PM0India</a>) parodying the country's prime minister, for example.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Adding to the irony, though it is not clear whether this was by accident or design -- the Twitter account of <a href="http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/tech/social-media/Twitter-apologizes-restores-ministers-account/articleshow/15643487.cms">Milind Deora</a>, the country's minister of state for communications and IT, and a vocal proponent of the recent blocks, was taken down by Twitter for 12 hours before being restored -- along with an apology by Twitter on Saturday.</p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><i>This story has been altered to correct the date of India's independence day</i>.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; "><i><a href="http://www.simonroughneen.com/">Simon Roughneen</a></i><i> </i><i>is an Irish journalist usually based in southeast Asia. He writes for the</i><i> </i><i>The Irrawaddy,</i><i> </i><i>Christian Science Monitor</i><i> </i><i>and others. He is on twitter @simonroughneen and you can</i><i> </i><i><a href="https://plus.google.com/106019217146969702755/about">Circle him on Google+</a>.</i></p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/news/www-pbs-org-aug-28-2012-simon-roughneen-india-blocks-facebook-twitter-mass-texts-in-response-to-unrest'>http://editors.cis-india.org/news/www-pbs-org-aug-28-2012-simon-roughneen-india-blocks-facebook-twitter-mass-texts-in-response-to-unrest</a>
</p>
No publisherpraskrishnaSocial mediaFreedom of Speech and ExpressionPublic AccountabilityInternet GovernanceCensorship2012-09-03T02:46:42ZNews ItemTata Photon unblocks Wordpress.com
http://editors.cis-india.org/news/tech-2-in-com-aug-30-2012-tata-photon-unblocks-wordpress
<b>As of yesterday, the Tata Photon service of the Internet service provider (ISP) Tata Teleservices seems to have lifted the block it had put on the Wordpress.com domain for over a week.</b>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The post was <a class="external-link" href="http://tech2.in.com/news/services/tata-photon-unblocks-wordpresscom/403112">published</a> in tech2 on August 30, 2012. Pranesh Prakash is quoted in it.</p>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Tech2 had reported on Saturday that the free platform of <b><a href="http://tech2.in.com/news/services/some-isps-block-wordpress-domain-across-india/392092" target="_blank" title="Some ISPs block Wordpress domain across India">Wordpress was put under a blanket ban across India by the ISP</a></b> following government orders to block around 309 URLs carrying disruptive or inflammatory content. Directives issued by the Department of Telecommunications (DoT) to ISPs between August 18 and 21 state that only the URLs mentioned be blocked, not entire domains. Users could neither view Wordpress blogs nor edit or post new content on them, the first instance of which was noticed by us on August 20.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Our repeated efforts to contact Tata Teleservices' officials drew a blank. Numerous users who contacted customer service did not receive any replies or resolution. Through the course of the blockade, the ISP did not even display any message to Wordpress visitors that the domain was blocked, nor did it notify the owners of Wordpress blogs about it. Puzzled users tried resetting their Internet connections, clearing DNS caches, and calling the customer service helpline only to realise that they were experiencing an ISP-level block.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The reactions of Wordpress users ranged from annoyance to distress. Human rights activist and lawyer Kamayani Bali Mahabal commented on Tech2, <i>"Yes, my wordpress blog is blocked and I have 4 blogs...have also written to TATA. I can access through [an] anonymous browser but I cannot log in, edit and do admin functions, I can do about 50 percent work on my blog. Dashboard not accessible[,] barely manage to post, will be suing TATA soon"</i>. In a <b><a href="http://kractivist.wordpress.com/2012/08/29/tatadocomo-censorship-on-wordpress-step-by-step-guide-foe/" target="_blank" title="TATADOCOMO #censorship on wordpress- step by step guide #FOE">blog post</a></b>, she has described her experience of the block.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Blogger Shantanu Adhicary who goes by the <i>nom de blog</i> Tantanoo says, <i>"My blogs are self-hosted [on Wordpress] so I was not affected. But it was annoying that I was unable to access, read or comment on other Wordpress blogs, especially in the absence of any message whatsoever that this site has been blocked".</i></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The move by Tata Teleservices is being seen as ham handed; around 25 million Wordpress blogs were made inaccessible to deal with a few rotten eggs. Blogger and social media consultant Prateek Shah opines, <i>"Blanket bans on domains because content on some of their pages is objectionable are akin to jailing a certain section of society just because some people from the community broke the law. Wordpress plays an extremely important role on the Internet and if such a site were to go down even for a few hours, it would mean mayhem for bloggers as well as readers who count on the platform to get the latest updates and information. ISPs need to mature and grow up to the fact that one can't put millions of people in jeopardy when apparently trying to protect the interests of some".</i></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">In June, the Madras High Court had granted relief to netizens in India by urging that there be no more John Doe orders. <i>“The order of interim injunction dated 25/04/2012 is hereby clarified that the interim injunction is granted only in respect of a particular URL where the infringing movie is kept and not in respect of the entire website. Further, the applicant is directed to inform about the particulars of URL where the interim movie is kept within 48 hours.”<i> </i></i></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Pranesh Prakash, Policy Director at Centre for Internet and Society (CIS), agrees the move was wrong but shares insights about the position of the ISPs. He says, <i>"It was obviously wrong. It contravenes the government's orders to not block the base URL but individual pages. Action should be taken against them for causing inconvenience to users. This is not the first time an ISP has gone overboard in implementing censorship, be it copyright issues, piracy or inflammatory content. In 2006, the government had </i><b><i><a href="http://pib.nic.in/newsite/erelease.aspx?relid=18954" target="_blank" title="DoT orders Internet Service Providers to block only the specified webpages/websites">chastised ISPs</a></i></b><i> for over-censoring content and blocking unintended websites and pages. Having said that, ISPs have numerous grouses against the government. They do not possess the technical capabilities to implement the government's orders, at times, whether about surveillance or censorship". </i></p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">ISPs that are also telecom services providers, find themselves <b><a href="http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2012-08-25/news/33385182_1_isps-text-messages-smses" target="_blank" title="Blocking Twitter: How Internet Service Providers & telcos were caught between tweets and tall egos">unable to decipher government notifications</a></b> about shutting off content on the Internet or introducing curbs on mobile communication. <b><a href="http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/analysing-blocked-sites-riots-communalism" target="_blank" title="Analysing Latest List of Blocked Sites (Communalism & Rioting Edition)">Prakash's analysis</a></b> of the 300-odd URLs blocked by the Indian government reveals glaring mistakes in the government directives <i>"that made blocking pointless and effectual"</i>. When asked to opine about what ISPs and telcos should do when the orders from the government were not crystal clear, Prakash said, <i>"They should ask for clarifications from the government. The operators sought clarifications from the Ministry of Telecommunications about the recent orders to ban bulk text messages and MMSes. The ministry was unable to resolve them, and in turn, sought further clarifications from the Home Ministry. The government should coordinate better"</i>.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Tata Teleservices was not the only ISP guilty of throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Sify too reportedly imposed a blanket block on the Wordpress domain. Airtel went overboard by temporarily blocking Youtu.be URLs last week citing orders by the court or the DoT.</p>
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/news/tech-2-in-com-aug-30-2012-tata-photon-unblocks-wordpress'>http://editors.cis-india.org/news/tech-2-in-com-aug-30-2012-tata-photon-unblocks-wordpress</a>
</p>
No publisherpraskrishnaSocial mediaFreedom of Speech and ExpressionPublic AccountabilityInternet GovernanceCensorship2012-09-03T01:53:47ZNews ItemWatch out for fettered speech
http://editors.cis-india.org/news/www-business-standard-rohit-pradhan-sep-1-2012-watch-out-for-fettered-speech
<b>The constant attempts at censorship in the name of national security should give all right-thinking Indians pause.</b>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify; ">This article by Rohit Pradhan was <a class="external-link" href="http://www.business-standard.com/india/news/rohit-pradhan-watch-out-for-fettered-speech/485035/">published</a> in the Business Standard on September 1, 2012. Pranesh Prakash is quoted.</p>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify; ">It was always predictable. That the Indian government’s war against social media “hate mongers” would turn farcical and begin targeting all and sundry: from random parodies of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s Twitter account to prominent journalists like Kanchan Gupta and Shiv Aroor. And then Communication Minister Milind Deora discovered that his own Twitter account had been blocked.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The government blames social media for hosting objectionable content and rumour-mongering that allegedly contributed to the exodus of people of northeastern origin from cities like Bangalore and Hyderabad. Despite its best attempts, the government argues, it was unable to control the mass hysteria and was left with little alternative but to block 300 websites as well as ask Twitter and Facebook to delete “objectionable” content.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">It is hardly the first time that social media has been blamed for facilitating riots. The role of BlackBerry’s instant messenger during the London riots of 2011 was constantly highlighted and there was even talk of banning the popular service before saner heads prevailed. Clearly, while rumours and doctored images have always been part of riots, the instantaneous nature of social media and the relative anonymity it affords offer additional challenges.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Nevertheless, the government’s constant attempts at censorship in the name of social harmony and national security should give all right-thinking Indians pause. Four simple reasons.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">First, it is astounding how quickly the attention has shifted away from the governance failures that were largely responsible for the Assam riots and the mass departure of people of northeastern origin from India’s major metropolitan centres. The local government’s laggardly response to the initial bursts of violence allowed the riots to rage for days while the government dithered over calling the army. Social media had little, if any, role to play. And while panic is admittedly difficult to control, it is the poor record of the Indian state in responding to politically motivated violence that contributed to the panic-stricken reaction of people of northeastern origin. What should worry the Indian state are not the ravings of some anonymous Twitter account but the utter lack of faith in its ability to secure the safety of some of its most vulnerable citizens.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Second, while all governments wish to control the flow of information, the track record of the Indian state in the matter of free speech has been spectacularly poor. At the slightest allegation of “hurting religious sentiments”, books are banned, movies censored, and violence is threatened. Lacking an explicit First Amendment protection, Indian citizens are virtually powerless when the government wishes to quell free speech. The draconian Information Technology Act, 2008, orders internet providers to immediately remove content that may be “grossly harmful”, “blasphemous”, “obscene”, or even disparaging with little oversight and virtually no due process of law. As the Centre for Internet and Society’s Pranesh Prakash has demonstrated, internet providers are ready to remove “objectionable” content even in the case of frivolous complaints originating from ordinary citizens. What is particularly disconcerting is that the disregard for free speech extends even to some of India’s most prominent media personalities who can often be heard exhorting the government to regulate the internet or scrub off “hate mongers”. Given this history and the government’s demonstrated contempt for free speech, its attempts at censorship should be strongly scrutinised and vigorously resisted except in the most extenuating of circumstances.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Third, the Luddites in the Indian government may not yet comprehend it, but the internet is virtually impossible to police. The government may be able to threaten giant companies like Facebook and Twitter into cooperating, but that simply means the “objectionable” content would move to darker corners of the Net. Indeed, it is surprising that the government has not considered using technology to counter malicious rumours or to reach a mass audience with a message of reassurance. Technology can be a powerful tool for doing good and it is high time the government properly harnessed its potential. As a first step, the government has to recognise that the days when it had a monopoly on information are long gone and it has to compete for people’s attention.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">Finally, even the most ardent supporter of free speech should have no qualms about admitting that it can offer a platform to the bigoted or can indirectly lead to social unrest. That may be especially true for a country like India where passions run high and an ambivalent attitude towards political violence prevails. That, however, is simply the price of liberty. Yes, a society that lacks free speech may be more stable, but it would lack the spirit of rambunctious discussion, criticism and argument — the hallmarks of a liberal democracy.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify; ">India can adopt a China-lite model, which emphasises social stability over freedom. Or India can go down the path of other liberal democracies and understand that freedom – of speech, thought and behaviour – is an ideal worth cherishing and protecting. As a constitutional republic with genuine claims of being a liberal democracy, it is clear which path India should embrace.</p>
<hr />
<p style="text-align: justify; ">The writer is a fellow at the Takshashila Institution. These views are personal.</p>
<hr />
<p>
For more details visit <a href='http://editors.cis-india.org/news/www-business-standard-rohit-pradhan-sep-1-2012-watch-out-for-fettered-speech'>http://editors.cis-india.org/news/www-business-standard-rohit-pradhan-sep-1-2012-watch-out-for-fettered-speech</a>
</p>
No publisherpraskrishnaFreedom of Speech and ExpressionSocial mediaInternet GovernanceCensorship2012-09-02T09:30:50ZNews Item