India seeks tougher action from US tech giants on fake news

IndianofficialshaveheldheateddiscussionswithGoogle,TwitterandFacebookfor not proactively removing what they described as fake news on their platforms, sources told Reuters, the government's latest altercation with Big Tech.

Theofficials, from the Ministry of InformationandBroadcasting (I&B), strongly criticised the companiesandsaid their inaction on fake news was forcing theIndiangovernment to order content takedowns, which in turn drew international criticism that authorities were suppressing free expression, two sources said.

Add WION as a Preferred Source

The sources, who were familiar with the proceedings at the virtual meeting on Monday, described the conversation as tenseandheated, signalling a new low in ties between American tech giantsandPrime Minister Narendra Modi's administration.

Theofficialsdid not issue an ultimatum to the companies at the meeting, the sources said. The government has been tightening tech sector regulations, but wants companies to do more on content moderation.

The meeting was a follow-up to the I&B ministry's use of "emergency powers" in DecemberandJanuary to order the blocking of 55 channels onGoogle's YouTube platform,andsomeTwitterandFacebookaccount.

The government had said the channels were promoting "fake news" or "anti-India" contentandthat the disinformation was being spread by accounts based in neighbouring Pakistan.

The I&B ministry did not respond to a request for comment on the meeting, which was also attended byIndiancontent-sharing platforms ShareChatandKoo, whichhavemillions of users in the country.

Facebook, now known as Meta,TwitterandShareChat declined to comment.

Without commenting on the meeting, Alphabet Inc'sGooglesaid in a statement it reviews government’s requestsand“where appropriate, we restrict or remove content in keeping with local laws.” Koo said it complies with local lawsandhas strong content moderation practices in place.

In its transparency reports,Twitterhas said theIndiangovernment makes among the highest number of requests to remove content from its platform. Technology website Comparitech in October said India made 97,631 content removal requests in 2020, the second-highest in the world after Russia, mostly toFacebookandGoogle.

Strained ties

During the meeting, senior tech executives told theofficialsthat they take adequate measures to remove or curb the spread of misinformation on their platforms andact on legally-valid content removal requests, said the sources.

TheofficialstoldGoogleto review its internal guidelines to remove fake content automatically, said the sources.

Theofficialsalso said the government was disappointed that big social media platforms, includingFacebookandTwitter, weren't detectingandremoving such content on their own.

Instead, the government was forced to order takedowns, opening it to criticismanddamaging its public image, theofficialssaid during the meeting, according to the sources.

Executives fromGoogletold the I&Bofficialsthat one way to resolve that was for the ministry to avoid making takedown decisions public. The firms could work with the governmentandact on the alleged fake content, which could be a win-win for both sides,Googlesaid, according to one of the sources.

The idea was summarily rejected by the governmentofficials, who said the takedowns also publicise how the companies weren't doing enough to tackle fake news on their own, the person said.

Watch |Gravitas: Spotify reportedly loses USD 4 billion in market value

While ordering takedowns of certain online accounts in January, the government said it was doing so to "secure the overall information environment in India", adding that such fake content was on "sensitive subjects" such as theIndianArmy, India's foreign relationsandlocal state elections.

Digital rights advocates say such government orders curb free speechandset a worrying precedent.

"Detailed takedown orders are not made public by the government," said Apar Gupta, the executive director at Internet Freedom Foundation, adding that the basis for the action was not explained.

This allowed authorities to censor content even if it does not violate public order or the security of the state, he said.