Lack of geographical boundaries makes social media regulation an arduous task. Nonetheless, increasing ambiguity of content, rickety sentiments around fragile subjects and varying public opinion in general have given rise to a sharp need of touchstones that sunder acceptable from something that is not.
Not
many days ago, Twitter made its user guidelines available in vernacular languages.
This is however limited to readers who actually have the patience to read those
guidelines – slim pickings indeed.
Between,
July to December 2014, Twitter received 41 account information requests from
the Indian government. So, who actually requires building a regulation
mechanism, Twitter, Indian government or the users who actually post ambiguous
content?
Self regulation &
Government
In 2007
Indian law enforcement entered an agreement with the then popular social
networking site Orkut to track down what it deemed as defamatory content which,
in their example, included content critical of Bal Thackeray.
Additionally,
in 2011 Kapil Sibal, the then acting Telecommunications minister of India
bought in pre – screening of content on popular websites such as Google,
Facebook and Yahoo!
However,
that has been the extent of it. Not to mention that taking off content on Bal
Thackeray neared more to anarchism and not regulation.
On
similar lines, in 2012 Australian MPs started using their legislative powers,
compelling social networks to swiftly delete offensive content. The move was
taken, briefly after Facebook refused to take action against a “controversial
humour.” (Yes, the page did disappear miraculously after a few days).
Where
does one draw a line between anarchy and regulation?
A
change in Violent Threat policies by Twitter or other such generic movements
need to be translated into niche solutions basis culture of individual
countries. Look at it this way, buddhi (old lady) might not be a violent word
according to Twitter. However, when placed it in India in a tweet by KRK,
everything becomes violent.
The
need is of customised solutions which require the Government to team up with
social media platforms to nurture content.
Also,
when there is an IBF for television, ASCI for advertising, then why not a
regulatory body for social media?
Self regulation & users
While we
discuss the responsibilities that social networking sites and the Government
need to take up, we also need to vouch for the fact that a major chunk of
responsibility lays with us citizens.
How
many of us actually approved to the tweets put up by Farah Khan and Abhijeet on #SalmanVerdict?
As a
socially responsible citizen we need to account for what we put up on our
social media pages. Yes, it is our personal page to voice our personal
opinions. But there has to be a shade of regulation to it. If we draw a line
between strong opinions and hate speech, the Government may actually not have
to resort to anarchism.
The
final step
From
backlash on Deepika’s cleavage post to varied responses on received on AIB
Knockout, India so far has not incorporated self regulation in its social media
deeds. Will we take an action before it’s too late?
No comments:
Post a Comment