Centre for Internet and Society

Portal augurs well for transparency

praskrishna — 2011-07-26T15:16:47Z

Data.gov.in will have meta-data, which will facilitate discovery of data and access from portals of ministries, says T Ramachandra. The article was published in the Hindu on 25 July 2011.

The unveiling of an official data access and sharing policy and the commissioning of a data portal (data.gov.in), which is on the anvil, will pave the way for digitally opening up the Central government data to the public.

"The data portal will be having meta-data [data about data], which will facilitate the discovery of the data and access from the portals of respective government departments/ministries. At present, the data policy is likely to cover the Central government and all activities funded by the Government of India," said R. Siva Kumar, CEO of National Spatial Data Infrastructure, and head of Natural Resources Data Management System, Department of Science and Technology.

Governmental data-holding organisations will prepare a negative list of non-shareable sensitive data, weighing the need to restrict public access given such considerations as security and privacy, against the obligation to share it with civil society and the scientific community. Apart from this, access to certain categories of data will be restricted.

The broad guidelines spelt out in the Right to Information Act will be followed and the list will be periodically reviewed. "All data outside the negative list will be proactively disseminated, and an oversight committee will facilitate policy implementation," said Dr. Kumar.

But does this mean that the public have to make specific requests for the unlocking of data-sets? “Data will be available through the data portal, and there will be no specific unlocking required. However, access to certain data may be through registration/authorisation,” he responded.

The sharing of such data might be tied to a pricing policy. "Pricing will be decided by the respective department/ministry. However, standardised parameters will be made available as guidelines for fixing the price," he said.

The draft of the proposed National Data Sharing and Accessibility Policy the government published some time ago indicates that the departments themselves can decide whether the data belongs to the ‘open access', ‘registered access,' or ‘restricted access' categories, with the policy neither mandating nor coming up with guidelines on how to do so, said Pranesh Prakash, programme manager, Centre for Internet and Society (CIS), a Bangalore-based NGO.

The CIS has recommended that the policy have the same scope as the RTI Act, and that all ‘public authorities,' as defined under the Act, be covered by it. Only the restricted categories (laid down in Sections 8 and 9 of the RTI Act) should be allowable for ‘restricted access.'

In a study on open government data in the Indian context, the CIS suggested that any policy be oriented towards meeting the requirements of a broad spectrum of citizenry. Specifically, sections that do not get to immediately benefit from advances in information technology. “Data mashing and private sector information products are important goals,” but the government itself should be proactive in creating the applications that show potential uses for the data.

The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), the global body that sets web standards, has said governments, by putting their data on the Internet, facilitate greater transparency, deliver more efficient public services and encourage greater public and commercial use and re-use of government information.

Anil Bairwal, National Coordinator of the Association for Democratic Reforms, which is involved in disseminating election-related data through its website Electionwatch, says there is “huge public interest” in data, and that accessibility was of prime importance. For instance, election-related data was made available by the authorities in the PDF/image file formats. “This forces us to do a manual interpretation of every affidavit, which consumes a lot of time and energy. It would be helpful if this data was available in a portable open format via an online tool.”

Other countries have already made strides in furthering open data. Prominent examples are the U.K. government website, data.gov.uk, and the U.S. government's www.data.gov website, which is key to President Barack Obama's Open Government Initiative.

Read the original article published in the Hindu here

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/news/portal-augurs-well-for-transparency

Pornography and the Law

praskrishna — 2010-12-21T11:06:10Z

Word file

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/raw/histories-of-the-internet/pornography-law

Pornography & the Law - A Call for Peer Review

praskrishna — 2012-12-14T12:12:17Z

Namita Malhotra's research project on "Pornography & the Law". is a part of the Researchers @ Work Programme at the Centre for Internet and Society, Bangalore. Her monograph is an attempt to unravel the relations between pornography, technology and the law in the shifting context of the contemporary.

It is these shifts that push the arguments here to be relevant beyond specific occurrences or phenomenon in the digital world (the moment of video pornography, interactive cyber sex, webcam sex, camfrog, social networking and sexual behaviour, chatroulette, facebook, confessional and sexualized blogging, sexting and mobile phones, etc.) to attempt to understand the nature of affects that surround pornography, especially as reflected in the law and its desire to contain it, and how law’s desire to contain is also about subjectivities and practices around technology. The structure of the monograph is somewhere between a willful literature review and a dressing room, where various concepts, ideas, images or visions around law, film/video, technology and new media are tried on for size to explain or unravel parts or whole of the picture around pornography in the Indian context.

The Researchers At Work Programme, at the Centre for Internet and Society, advocates an Open and transparent process of knowledge production. We recognise peer review as an essential and an extremely important part of original research, and invite you, with the greatest of pleasures, to participate in our research, and help us in making our arguments and methods stronger. The first draft of the monograph is now available for public review and feedback. Please click on the links below to choose your own format for accessing the document.

Word
PDF

We appreciate your time, engagement and feedback that will help us to bring out the monograph in a published form. Please send all comments or feedback to nishant@cis-india.org or you can use your Open ID to login to the website and leave comments to this post.

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/raw/histories-of-the-internet/blogs/law-video-technology/pornography-and-law

pornographic

praskrishna — 2011-05-23T06:37:33Z

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/home-images/page_55_20110530.jpg

Porn: Law, Video, Technology

praskrishna — 2011-09-27T11:25:57Z

Namita’s legal inquiry into the relationship between technologies and the law finds a new point of entry into existing debates by looking at the legal construction of pleasure through different technologies of mass consumption in order to revisit the arguments around pornography and obscenity effect in recent times. She produces a comprehensive overview of different debates, both in the West and in India, to concentrate on how the visual aesthetics of pornography, the new circuits of pornographic consumption and the privilege of affect over regulation lead to possibilities of interaction and negotiation with heteronormative power structures in the country.

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/raw/histories-of-the-internet/porn-law-video

Porn: Law, Video, Technology

praskrishna — 2011-09-28T09:30:40Z

Namita Malhotra focuses on pornography, pleasure and law, where she finds a new point of entry into existing debates by looking at legal construction of pleasure through different technologies of mass consumption. She revisits the arguments around pornography, obscenity and affect in recent times. Malhotra produces a comprehensive over-view of different debates, both in the West and in India, to concentrate on how the visual aesthetics of pornography, the new circuits of pornographic consumption, the privilege of affect over regulation lead to possibilities of interaction and negotiation with heternormative power structures in the country. The monograph demonstrates how the grey zones of pornography and the law’s inability to deal with it, offer new conceptual tools of understanding the spaces of digital interaction and identity.

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/raw/histories-of-the-internet/porn-law.pdf

Porn: Law, Video, Technology

praskrishna — 2012-06-22T07:06:19Z

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/home-images/porn.jpg

Porn. Panic. Ban: A Conversation on Sexual Expression, Pornography, Sexual Exploitation, Consent

praskrishna — 2015-11-29T07:36:58Z

Point of View and the Internet Democracy Project organized a conference to hold and facilitate an informed conversation on sexual expression, pornography, sexual exploitation and consent. Rohini Lakshané was a speaker. Tanveer Hasan also attended this conference held in New Delhi from October 28 to 30, 2015.

The conference was a first attempt to have an in-depth civil society conversation - among activists, lawyers, researchers working on either gender, sexuality or internet rights, or at their intersections. For more information on the event visit the Internet & Democracy website. Rohini presented her research on online amateur pornography and consent.

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/porn-panic-ban-a-conversation-on-sexual-expression-pornography-sexual-exploitation-consent

Porn, Law, Video Technology

praskrishna — 2013-09-26T11:18:40Z

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/raw/porn-law-video-technology.pdf

Popular apps are inaccessible to millions of disabled: Study

praskrishna — 2016-11-30T15:52:13Z

According to a study conducted by Centre for Internet and Society last month, many of the most-commonly used mobile apps for food delivery, online payments, grocery shopping and transportation were not accessible to the visually challenged.

The article by Arpita Raj was published by the Times of India on November 21, 2016 and also mirrored in ET Brand Equity.

Booking cabs, buying food and making payments online seem like they're just a swipe and a tap away, but for millions of disabled Indians, these apps are not designed for them to use.

The 2011 census puts the number of disabled in the country at 26 million, while advocacy groups say the real figure is closer to 150 million.Last year, India recorded nearly nine billion downloads of mobile-based applications last year.

“The national policy for universal electronic accessibility says that all IT products and services should be accessible. However, the government is still unable to implement it. Several government apps are inaccessible,“ said Nirmita Narasimhan, policy director at CIS. CIS's survey of some key government mobile based applications like My Gov, E Pathshala and Prime Minister Narendra Modi's official app found them to be severely lacking. The illiterate, aged and those not proficient in English would also struggle with the apps, the study found. The guidelines for government websites laid out accessibility standards in 2009. The 2013 national policy on universal electronic accessibility clearly upholds equal rights “ensuring that accessibility standards and guidelines and universal design concepts are adopted and adhered to.“

However, most commonly-used apps fail to follow this. All 22 of the apps studied were privately owned but not all were fully compliant with universal standards. Of taxi-hailing apps Meru, Ola and Uber, only Uber was completely accessible to the disabled. The others had mis-labelled or unlabeled buttons and graphics.

When it came to food delivery, Zomato was the best at replicating the user experience for disabled people. Swiggy and Foodpanda were difficult for new users, and Fresh menu was completely inaccessible.

Of the marketplace apps, Amazon and Snapdeal were the only accessible ones. Myntra and Flipkart had incorrectly labelled buttons and misleading graphic tags, which made them impossible for the disabled to use. For instance, customers would be able to select the product they wanted to buy but had no way of choosing the quantity, the study said. Online grocery delivery apps Grofers and Zop Now were hard for the disabled to use, while Big Basket was relatively better though pages change during orders. Online payment portals Paytm, Oxigen and FreeCharge were relatively accessible, the study found.

“Designers, developers and industries need to realize that there are more people out there who use this technology .The market is much bigger and they should work towards being inclusive,“ said Narasimhan of CIS.

Albinder Dhinda, co founder of grocery delivery service Grofers, said their app meets all accessibility requirements. “However, the disability tools provided by Google Play Store or the App Store often don't benefit the user and are hard for them to use. We are trying to make it better. Things like online payments won't be accessible to the disabled as those apps are supported by third party sites, and don't fall within our settings. We're trying to make it better.We're three years behind the US, in the playground they made. It'll be a while before we reach their level,“ he said.

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/accessibility/news/economic-times-arpita-raj-november-21-2016-popular-apps-are-inaccessible-to-millions-of-disabled

Poor Guarantee of Online Freedom in India

praskrishna — 2012-06-17T04:18:26Z

The debate over the "Intermediaries Guidelines" as part of the Information Technology Act, 2000 in Parliament brought focus to the issue of censorship and lack of accountability of governing bodies vis-à-vis the internet in the country. This cannot be divorced from the larger questions related to the threats to freedom of expression from both the state and various societal actors today.

This article by Geeta Seshu was published in the Economic & Political Weekly, Vol XLVII No. 24, June 2012.

An annulment motion against the Information Technology (Inter-mediaries Guidelines) Rules, 2011 moved by Member of Parliament (MP) P Rajeev of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) in the Rajya Sabha, was the first serious attempt by internet freedom activists to get the Information Technology (IT) Act, 2000 discussed and reviewed by the country’s lawmakers.

Not unexpectedly, the motion, specifically against the rules governing intermediaries – clause (zg) of subsection (2) of Section 87 read with subsection (2) of Section 79 of the >IT Act, 2000 – was not carried. However, the discussion that preceded it at least demonstrated the concerns of parliamentarians about what internet freedom activists have termed the “draconian” provisions of the IT Act.

It is about time, really, that parliamentarians sit down to review what they very quickly acquiesced to in December 2009. It is also about time that the debate over the provisions of the IT Act be conducted in the public domain, instead of in closed-door meetings with expert groups and committees comprising a narrow set of stakeholders favoured by the government or its various wings.

The discussion in the Rajya Sabha largely centred around the vague and sweeping terminology of the range of content that anyone could take objection to. P Rajeev said that while he supported the regulation of the internet, he was not in favour of its control. The rules were ultra vires the IT Act, he said. Echoing his concern, leader of the opposition Arun Jaitley of the Bharatiya Janata Party, D Raja of the Communist Party of India and N K Singh of the Janata Dal (United) – to name just a few – also said that the internet was different from other media and censoring it was untenable.

Finally, union minister for information technology, Kapil Sibal, was forced to give an assurance to the house that he would call a meeting of MPs, industry and all stakeholders and implement whatever consensus emerges after a discussion on the specific words members had objections to.

There was no mention from the minister on a host of other problem areas in the rules as they are currently framed, including the very sweeping definition of an “intermediary” itself (any entity which on behalf of another receives, stores or transmits any electronic record – which means internet service providers, web hosting providers, search engines, online payment sites, cybercafes and bloggers too). No mention either of the rules for intermediaries to takedown notices within 36 hours of receiving a complaint, irrespective of whether these are fair and reasonable. No mention of whether the rules need to provide procedures for hearing and adjudicating complaints before any content is taken down.

The IT Guidelines

In several ways, the rules have gone way beyond what was laid down in the IT Act, but they also add considerably to the original reasonable restrictions laid down under Article 19 (2) of the Constitution of India. Some of the terms that can invite objections under the guidelines are:

(a) Belongs to another person and to which the user does not have any right to; (b) grossly harmful, harassing, blasphemous, defamatory, obscene, pornographic, paedophiliac, 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; (c) harm minors in any way; (d) infringes any patent, trademark, copyright or other proprietary rights; (e) violates any law for the time being in force; (f) deceives or misleads the addressee about the origin of such messages or communicates any information which is grossly offensive or menacing in nature; (g) impersonate another person; (h) contains software viruses or any other computer code, files or programmes designed to interrupt, destroy or limit the functionality of any computer resource; (i) threatens the unity, integrity, defence, security or sovereignty of India, friendly relations with foreign states, or public order or causes incitement to the commission of any cognisable offence or prevents investigation of any offence or is insulting any other nation.

With this wide-ranging and entirely arbitrary set of potential violations, the possibility of misuse is also immense. In its comments submitted in response to the draft rules, Privacy India and the Centre for Internet and Society (CIS) pointed out that Sections 79(1) and (2) of the amended IT Act itself did provide for exemptions for third party liabilities of intermediaries, something that the rules have now virtually set aside.[1]

Other comments submitted by these organisations about security and privacy of cybercafe users deal with minors and with the general architecture of cybercafes. In the first instance, the organisations expressed concern that undue restrictions on the use of the internet by minors (photo identity cards, accompanied by adults, etc) would hamper their access to the internet and would actually discourage poorer children from using the internet.

In the second instance, the detailed restrictions on the layout of the cybercafés – the height of cabins and the directions of the screens, etc, would, they felt, be intrusive and violate the privacy of internet users in cybercafes. Besides, vulnerable sections like sexual minorities or HIV positive patients may even be open to identity theft, they feared.

The discussion on the rules unfortunately did not come close to addressing these fears. While the lawmakers generally accepted the importance of regulation of the internet and electronic communication, there is still very little clarity on exactly how this must be done, the extent to which regulation must take place and the agency that will be entrusted with this task.

The IT Act, 2000 was first passed in an era when the country was transitioning to an electronic age. E-commerce was uppermost in the minds of policymakers, their eyes firmly fixed on the new economy. But soon enough, it was clear that technology was developing rapidly and an expert committee was constituted to revise the act and suggest amendments that would incorporate technological changes.

Lack of Accountability

In the wake of the 26 November 2008 attack in Mumbai, national security and intelligence were powerful emotional catchwords and few questioned some of the sweeping provisions laid down by the rules under the IT Act. While the annulment motion focuses on the pernicious nature of the guidelines for intermediaries, this is only one amongst a series of rules that seek to change the very manner in which Indians can access and use the internet. Other rules relate to decrypting, monitoring and blocking of communication, data security and privacy (Section 69: interception, monitoring and decryption of information, Section 69 A: blocking, Section 69 B: monitoring of traffic data or information) and of course, the complete absence of checks and balances for the powers given to authorities like Computer Emergency Response Team India (CERT-In).

In fact, there has been little or no review of the responsibility vested in an agency like CERT-In, which describes itself as the nodal agency to oversee the security of the nation. Conflating security concerns with content that may be objectionable to some is one thing but also providing this agency with the powers to block sites without even the creators of these sites getting to know about it is another.

Most of our attention today is on the censorship rampant on the internet in India. Most recently, there have been several instances of internet sites being blocked and takedown notices sent to bloggers. In the last few months, we have had the arbitrary blocking of the website cartoonsagainstcorruption.com which was run by Kanpur-based cartoonist Aseem Trivedi, the arrest of Jadavpur University professor Ambikesh Mohapatra and the controversial move last year by the Indian government to get internet service providers to remove so-called objectionable content on Facebook, Orkut and Youtube, apart from other sites. A complaint against these sites by journalist Vinay Rai followed soon after, though it strangely did not invoke provisions of the IT Act, preferring to cite alleged violations under the Indian Penal Code.

Trivedi did not even know that his site was blocked till some friends called him to tell him that they could not access his site. After an exchange of emails with his webhost, the portal “Big Rock”, he was informed that the site was suspended because it contained cartoons that showed disrespect to national emblems. A complaint had been received by Mumbai’s cybercrime cell by a Mumbai-based advocate, R P Pandey. The Kanpur resident also learnt later from newspaper reports that another case, this time under charges of sedition, were lodged against him in Beed district of Maharashtra.

While this method of embroiling someone in cases in far-flung geographical areas is not new (the complaint by the Indian Institute of Planning and Management against New Delhi-based Caravan magazine in Silchar, Assam is a good case in point), Trivedi quickly moved the content on his site onto another blogging platform, also got together friends and supporters to launch “Saveyourvoice”, an online and offline campaign, with a cheeky celebration of All Fool’s Day on 1 April 2012 with a greeting to the minister Kapil Sibal “for his foolish attempts to try censoring internet” and another campaign – “Freedom in a cage” – at Jantar Mantar, Delhi, in April 2012.

Other internet freedom activists have got together to secure information on censorship. Last year, a right-to-information (RTI) application by the CIS revealed that 11 websites were blocked on orders from the department of information technology. A writ petition against the IT Act has been filed in the Kerala High Court and the Software Freedom Law Centre, which was instrumental in campaigning for the annulment motion in the Rajya Sabha, has launched an online petition against the IT Act rules that refers to government authority to censor facebook posts, monitor emails and skype conversations, access private information and mine sensitive personal data.[2]

Governments the world over are exercised about the need to impose restrictions on online freedom and a good indication is the bi-annual Google Transparency Report that monitors the number and categories of requests sent by different governments to take down content. In the last report for the period January to June 2011, the report recorded requests to remove 358 items and 68 content removal requests, 58% of which were fully or partially complied with. In addition, there were government requests to remove Youtube videos that were protests against local leaders or used offensive language against religious leaders, besides 236 communities and profiles from Orkut which were critical of a local politician.

Interestingly, while content removal requests for the Orkut profiles remained as Google maintained it did not fit its own community standards or local law, Google chose to “locally” restrict the videos that may incite enmity between communities. With minor variations, this is a stance adopted by other online companies, like Facebook and Twitter, with the latter coming out with a policy earlier this year that it would remove content that appeared to violate local laws.

In the struggle to keep the internet free and protect communication from surveillance and blocking by governments, it would be naive to expect commercially-driven internet companies to put up much of a stand. Most of these stakeholders have agreed with lawmakers that the internet does need regulation. On their part, the Indian government, which has flexed its desire to regulate the internet, has also been sensitive to criticism of its role in censoring online freedom. Other stakeholders – the vast community of users of the internet, bloggers, website hosts, creators and producers of online videos, file-sharers, software developers, etc, are only engaged in a race to protect their content and shift it to more amenable sites every time they run into trouble.

Threats to Freedom of Expression

However, it must be noted that the censorship of online media is but a reflection of the curbs on freedom of expression in general. The attacks on freedom of expression in “offline” media, the attacks on journalists and the deaths of eight journalists since 2010,[3] the alarming regularity with which we are witnessing a ban on books and cinema, art or theatre, the increasing intolerance of dissenting or differing opinions in society, the abject fear of free and independent debate and discussion and the role of the government in actively furthering this intolerance are suggestive of a dangerous trend.

Almost all these instances are marked by the clear absence of any due procedure in addressing the content that becomes objectionable to someone or some sections of society, instead arbitrarily and speedily removing this content from the public domain. Whether it is the withdrawal of Rohinton Mistry’s book Such a Long Journey, a prescribed textbook by Bombay University, midway through the academic year, or that of recent issue of the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) textbook on the Constitution of India, institutional redressal mechanisms were simply not given a chance.

The woeful absence of similar redressal mechanisms for so-called objectionable content under the rules of the amended IT Act only exacerbates this situation further.

Notes

[1].http://privacyindia.org/2011/03/10/comments-on-the-information-technology-guidelines-for-cyber-cafe-rules-2011/
[2].www.softwarefreedom.org
[3].The Free Speech Hub, which has been tracking violations of freedom of expression as part of a project from the media-watch site, The Hoot (www.thehoot.org), has this list: Hemchandra Pandey (July 2010), Bimala Prasad Talukdar (September 2010), Sushil Pathak (December 2010), Umesh Rajput (January 2011), J Dey (June 2011), Ramesh Singhla (October 2011), Chandrioka (February 2012) and Rajesh Mishra (March 2012).

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/news/poor-guarantee-of-online-freedom-in-india

Pondering Copyright and Recasting Openness

praskrishna — 2013-11-08T09:50:03Z

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/openness/blog-old/pondering-copyright-and-recasting-openness

Politics of FB

praskrishna — 2014-04-03T11:25:07Z

Politics of FB

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/home-images/PoliticsofFB.png

Political war on the web

praskrishna — 2012-09-05T05:27:24Z

Twitter is not only the ‘people’s voice’. It is also a forum for orchestrated propaganda.Kunal Majumder tracks the BJP-Congress online duel.

Kunal Majumder's article was published in Tehelka Magazine, Vol 9, Issue 36, Dated 08 Sept 2012. Pranesh Prakash is quoted.

New battlelines Digvijaya Singh (left) and Sushma Swaraj are active tweeples
Photos: Shailendra Pandey

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.

“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”.

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.

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.

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.

#Emergency2012 and #GOIBlocks started trending, with various BJP supporters turning their display pictures to black	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.

#Emergency2012 and #GOIBlocks started trending,
with various BJP supporters turning their display pictures to black

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.

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.

Poli-Tweeting

Poli-Faking

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.

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.

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.

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.

Kunal Majumder is a Principal Correspondent with Tehelka.

For more details visit 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

Political Economy, Activism and Alternative Economic Strategies

praskrishna — 2013-08-05T05:59:45Z

The fourth annual conference in political economy was organized by the International Institute of Social Studies, Erasmus University of Rotterdam at the Hague from July 9 - 13, 2013.

Nishant Shah participated as a speaker and presented the paper on Citizen Action in the Time of Network. Click to read the full details of the conference here.

About the Conference

The financial crisis revealed its first signs over five years ago, on August 9, 2007, when BNP Paribus suspended payment on three of its funds. It has since morphed into the deepest US and then world economic crisis since the Great Depression. The “green shoots” of recovery of some Third World economies, that the IMF had acclaimed in 2010, had withered within a year. By 2012 it was admitted that the “world recovery had stalled”, as even the handful of large, better-performing, developing economies slowed. But, ever upbeat except when imposing adjustment, the IMF predicts not only an improved 2013 but continual yearly growth over the following four years as well.

Yet, the world’s largest economy remains stuck. While even the weak economic growth in the USA looks good by comparison with Europe, measured unemployment remains around 8%. Home loss, homelessness, poverty and hunger remain at their highest levels in decades. Nor is there a prospect of a recovery across Europe. The northern economies, and especially Germany, that until now have performed better in the core- periphery division of the continent, have stagnated, inevitable perhaps given the prolonged implosion of the economies of their most important foreign customers. There is a particularly severe crisis of youth unemployment. And the stagnation of the economies of the First World has caused a sharp slowing of growth in their BRIC counterparts and the few other better-performing Third World economies that the recovery Pollyannas had projected for several years as the engines that would drive the world rebound. Popular discontent has manifested itself in varieties of ways, from the Arab Spring to the renewal of Latin American left radicalism. In the global North, it has erupted in the form of the movements of the Indignados in Spain, Occupy Wall Street in the USA, and popular resistance in Greece. Whilst the Greek political system has been transformed beyond recognition but without resolution of the ongoing economic and political crisis, action in the rest of the North has appeared to have limited lifespan and effects, even with polls showing very high dissatisfaction with the current economic and political situation. It is striking how no broadly supported political movements have arisen, successfully promoting and engaging in a struggle for alternative economic policies. And, in their absence, finance has slowly , if not rapidly, and surely restored its economic, political and ideological hegemony over everything from our daily lives to our longer-term prospects, from the environment to our social and economic prospects.

The ongoing economic and political crises place two related questions on history’s agenda. In the face of the dismal failure of the continuing, mostly overt neoliberal policies to resolve the deep problems, what alternative economic strategies should be pursued? And a more radical form of that same question, are alternative economic structures and an entirely different system of economic structures and practices necessary? The second question is concerns the sorts of actions that must be engaged to move the political process on to a path of alternative outcomes, from mild reforms to major transformation (and the connection between the two).

The 2013 Annual Conference of IIPPE will focus on these questions. In doing so, it will need to acknowledge: the breadth and depth of discontent and the more or less spontaneous protest and conflict against the consequences of the crisis; how struggles have been conditioned by the crisis and the failure to resolve it without either determining their form and strength, their diversity and their complex dependence on non-economic factors; and the lack of strength, unity and coherence of oppositions and posing of alternatives. In this light, the conference will bring together scholars from all strands of political economy and heterodox economics, in seeking to engage debate with political parties and other progressive organisations in order to explain the incidence of struggles and how they might best be supported in bringing about broader, deeper and more unified responses to the crisis. In particular, it will be necessary to interrogate how continuing general conceptualisations, such as financialisation and neoliberalism, can (or cannot) be put to these purposes, when set against the diverse experiences of, and response to, the crisis.

Read the original published at the IIPPE website.

For more details visit http://editors.cis-india.org/news/iippee-july-8-2013-fourth-annual-conference-in-political-economy