The problem with the internet // Censorship in India

February 12th, 2012

It seems like we’ve had our fair share of online controversies in the last few weeks, with SOPA and PIPA causing the mighty Wikipedia to cast a black veil over its English-speaking site for over 24 hours, and now Kim Dotcom, the Megaupload.com founder awaits a decision in custody over the future of his site and his freedom. A great deal of Western Internet issues have been the face of newspaper front covers, but what is particularly relevant is how the East is reacting to the freedom that the Internet world provides. Whilst for the Western world, much of the controversy about piracy and file-sharing is a serious commercial issue, being a copyright infringement (although censorship is a branch of this) but for the East, the concern is about censorship. China’s Internet access is already characterized by tight government led censorship and it seems India may be heading in a similar direction. So what is the real issue and why does there seem to be an Eastern and Western divide over the crimes associated with the net?

Indian authorities want to remove particular aspects of the internet that they deem superfluous to the point of being offensive: content like hate speeches, child pornography, religious insults etc. However, twenty-one websites including Google and Facebook, have come under scrutiny since they provide the means to find the offensive material. Neeraj Kishan Kaul, a lawyer for Google has argued ‘the search engine only takes you to the website. What happens beyond that is a search engine’s control.’ However, the Indian government is imploring them to develop a screening process that would block such material. Such a screening process seems particularly problematic as words like ‘sex’ or ‘rape’ could block perfectly innocent searches. Moreover, for Indian authorities, such a screening process is unlawful, as the Information Technology Act (ITA) along with the Information Technology Rules (ITR) do not support any form of monitoring or pre-filtering of the internet and Sajan Poovayya, a leading internet regulation lawyer, notes ‘to proactively monitor content or prescreen content would be contrary to the law’.

Clearly there is an issue in guaranteeing a lawful and fully supported censorship. Unlike China, India is split. Whilst the Central Indian government is keen to implement censorship on the web, judicial powers are keen to protect free speech and expression. Free speech in this case is the content uploaded by a user, which is ultimately difficult to screen. Moreover, the ITA ensures search engines are not liable for third party content.

So why is the East concerned with censorship and not copyright? One key feature is that many of the companies prosecuting for copyright infringement are Western business, keen not to lose the monetary value of their work. Sites like YouTube accused of copyright infringement are not Eastern and grounds for copyright would be avail to little commercial gain for Eastern governments. Censorship however, ensures Western cultural influences do not proliferate into the East. China, who have already taken a large percent of talent shows off state television channels for corrupting viewers with too much entertainment, have been the leading force in protecting their culture as well as their government’s control. However, India is not a totalitarian regime like China, so the quest for censorship must be deemed worthy for the protection of decency. However, where the line of decency sits is vastly subjective. Only recently was Salman Rushdie forced to pull out of Jairpur Literary Festival because of apparent death threats in response to Rushdie’s Satanic Verses which is offensive to Muslims. In this instance, a small portion of people deemed his work offensive whilst others may regard it as a champion of free speech. The line of decency is certainly malleable.

Clearly India is keen to maintain freedom of speech as long as it is tasteful and on the surface ridding the Internet with insulting and hate provoking content seems like a good idea. But how this material can be removed, and what material is considered unworthy of public consumption remains a subject still to be finalized. If censorship laws pass, either Western businesses like Facebook and Google will have to develop a monitoring system for their Indian audiences, or simply cut off contact with them. A verdict on the laws’ completion awaits.

Words > Matthew Green

Tags: Jairpur Literary Festiva, Neeraj Kishan Kaul, PIPA, Sajan Poovayya, Salman Rushdie, SOPA, Wikipedia