"Shreya Singhal v. Union of India shields Twitter from any liability for failing to take down content unless a court order is passed asking it to do the same."
source: https://internetfreedom.in/joint-letter-to-twitter-about-rem...
Facebook’s ties to India’s ruling party complicate its fight against hate speech
11–20 of 117 posts
Re: Facebook’s ties to India’s ruling party complicate its fight against hate speech
#12Facebook's actions in India are absolutely despicable. The head of policy at Facebook in India is a radicalized member of the Indian rightwing and recently put up a post stating that Muslims are a "degenerate community" and was forced to apologise just a couple of days ago because of pressure on FB from their employees. She gave a half hearted apology. Facebook should have immediately suspended her or sacked her: htt…
Whatsapp is also used extensively to share misinformation and hateful content, fueling mob violence and hate, especially targetting the minorities across the country.
https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2018/09/whats...
besides that, the ruling party actively uses whatsapp for political reasons, with it's infamous "It Cell" known for manufacturing fake news. https://theprint.in/politics/9500-it-cell-heads-72000-whatsa...
So much so, that the current Home Minsiter of India, Amit Shah was seen in public bragging about the power of the IT Cell to "We can keep making messages go viral, whether they are real or fake, sweet or sour" https://www.thequint.com/news/politics/amit-shah-real-fake-c...
Re: Facebook’s ties to India’s ruling party complicate its fight against hate speech
#13Earlier quoted context omitted.
Indian Population doesn't take digital world seriously, and majority have no digital literacy, so it is difficult for that to happen.
Hard to take this comment seriously in a country where about 50% have access to the internet, very likely 100% of influential people have access to the internet, and very likely 100% of people are 1 degree of separation from someone who has access to the internet.
I would interpret ashleshbiradar's point :
>Indian Population doesn't take digital world seriously,
as: Indian population do not think nor understand deeper, father enough to foresee these risks.
Re: Facebook’s ties to India’s ruling party complicate its fight against hate speech
#14India is a very lucrative market for FB and other companies. 1 billion people, 2 billion eyes. No privacy laws, can easily share and sell data, govt is in the hands of Reliance (in which FB, Google and others are all investing a lot), most Indians are just getting used to the vast internet and are easily tricked.
Ideally they should have some morality to put basic human rights and safety above profits. Even from long term perspective if they continue to ignore hate speech against Islam on their platform I am sure they would lose a lot of users.
Re: Facebook’s ties to India’s ruling party complicate its fight against hate speech
#15Also, FB's proximity to the mega corporation that's known to be very friendly to the ruling party. FB's WhatsApp pay getting clearances / approvals soon after they made a large payment to Jio Platforms.
Timeline:
26Nov2019: India puts WhatsApp's impending payments service on ice due to data localisation fracas. Both the security breach by Pegasus malware and WhatsApp's reluctance to adhere to India's data localisation norms have caused it to sit on the sidelines of one of the hottest digital payments markets in the world. [1] [1] https://www.zdnet.com/article/india-puts-whatsapps-impending...
24Apr2020: Facebook is spending $5.7 billion to capitalize on India's internet boom. [2] [2] https://edition.cnn.com/2020/04/22/tech/facebook-india-relia...
08June2020: WhatsApp gets a raw deal from India in payments. WhatsApp needs a nod from the National Payments Corporation of India to throw open the switch. [3]. [3]https://cio.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/enterprise-ser...
16June2020: WhatsApp launches payments service, 2 yrs after it began testing in India. [4] [4]https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/magazines/panache/whats...
03Aug WhatsApp a step closer to pay play. [5] [5]https://www.livemint.com/industry/banking/whatsapp-a-step-cl...
04Aug2020: WhatsApp Pay has now met all data localisation rules, NPCI tells RBI [6] [6]https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/small-biz/startups/news...
05Aug2020: 'NPCI gave ICICI Bank go ahead for WhatsApp Pay in June', RBI informs SC [7] [7]https://www.medianama.com/2020/08/223-npci-approves-whatsapp...
Re: Facebook’s ties to India’s ruling party complicate its fight against hate speech
#16Facebook's actions in India are absolutely despicable. The head of policy at Facebook in India is a radicalized member of the Indian rightwing and recently put up a post stating that Muslims are a "degenerate community" and was forced to apologise just a couple of days ago because of pressure on FB from their employees. She gave a half hearted apology. Facebook should have immediately suspended her or sacked her: htt…
I don’t think people have realized that Zuckerberg’s intent is to be the Rupert Murdoch of the 21st century. He’s no ally of liberal society or democracy.
Re: Facebook’s ties to India’s ruling party complicate its fight against hate speech
#17It is a strategically risky move for Facebook to take an active role in shaping India's political landscape. I imagine that the Indian population might object to American companies deciding what is and isn't appropriate to discuss.
"I imagine that the Indian population might object to American companies..."
Does the average Indian person even consciously reflect on Facebook being an American company? I get the impression that for so much of the developing world where Facebook/Whatsapp/Instagram are just about the only internet people know (because these sites don’t count against their mobile data, because they don’t even have e-mail and this is the only way they communicate with people, etc.), people don’t even think about where all this infrastructure comes from. It’s just “the internet”, and it exists with no particular origin or nationality like the air they breathe or the rain that falls from the sky.
Re: Facebook’s ties to India’s ruling party complicate its fight against hate speech
#18Facebook's actions in India are absolutely despicable. The head of policy at Facebook in India is a radicalized member of the Indian rightwing and recently put up a post stating that Muslims are a "degenerate community" and was forced to apologise just a couple of days ago because of pressure on FB from their employees. She gave a half hearted apology. Facebook should have immediately suspended her or sacked her: htt…
Whatsapp is also used extensively to share misinformation and hateful content, fueling mob violence and hate, especially targetting the minorities across the country. https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2018/09/whats... besides that, the ruling party actively uses whatsapp for political reasons, with it's infamous "It Cell" known for manufacturing fake news. https://theprint.in/politics/9500-it-cell-heads-…
So, I completely understand the concerns about moderation on Facebook itself.
But what would you actually have anyone do about WhatsApp? It's an end-to-end encrypted messaging app, and the whole purpose of end-to-end encryption (which, last I checked, HN was generally in favour of) is that there is no way to surveil or moderate the content of someone's communications.
Re: Facebook’s ties to India’s ruling party complicate its fight against hate speech
#19Here's a report by Equality Labs about Facebook India and Hate speech.
Re: Facebook’s ties to India’s ruling party complicate its fight against hate speech
#20Removing posts by elected officials is running really close to foreign interference in domestic affairs. Given the history of the East India Company, I am sure India is especially sensitive to foreign companies trying to influence or curtail the speech of their elected officials.
> Removing posts by elected officials is running really close to foreign interference in domestic affairs.
No, it's not. If anything, it's opting out of interfering in domestic affairs.
Facebook is not an official channel. The elected official has many other platforms, including the country's media, that will publish their message. They can create a blog if they want.
If Facebook is the only viable channel for reaching a large part of the electorate, the core issue is having only that one channel. You solve it by forcing competition, not by stifling Facebook's right to decide what they want to allow on their platform.
I deeply loathe Facebook and think they're undermining democracy in every country, but there should never be a way for a government to force a publisher to distribute an ideology that the publisher disagrees with.