Content Regulation on Online Platforms

Content regulation of the Internet has recently come to the fore of public debate as an issue that both governments and Net users are concerned about. Net users appear puzzled by governments' intention to regulate the Internet. Often users say that the Net is a powerful medium that will be stifled by regulation. However, the power of the Internet is precisely the reason that governments want to regulate it. In a letter dated 4th April, 2018, the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting ordered Constitution of a Committee for framing regulations for online media/ news portals and online content which includes entertainment portals like Netflix, Amazon Prime etc., news portals like scroll, the wire, Google news etc. and social media which includes facebook, twitter etc.

With so many status updates each day and a number of videos that are uploaded online every minute, it is not clear as to how this committee will regulate the online content or expect different online platforms to carry out this job pro-actively. Though there is a broadcasting code for TV Channels and code of ethics which mandates the regulations on the same. But, the Internet does not have guidelines or policies since it’s a grey area. The first question which must strike in our mind is that who is a broadcaster? Till date, broadcast has been about terrestrial delivery of content but there is a need for change. Content can be delivered from alternative sources even on the same cable TV and thus the meaning of content aggregators as broadcasters needs to change. To understand it in a better way, a company like Netflix produces content in the same way as Star Plus or Sony and they are able to deliver the content without any restriction, but at the same time people who fall under the definition of broadcasters aren’t able to. The definition of the word broadcasters needs to be reviewed. Thus, the people who are called broadcasters are actually content aggregators, and we need to review whether they will come under the same umbrella. According to me, everyone should fall under the same umbrella so long as they are producing or aggregating content.

The internet on the other hand has broken many regulatory distinctions and thus allowing everyone the freedom to create a content for everyone else. The difference between the Internet and other media is the element of interactivity and responsiveness. If I put up a video in response to another video then would it be ‘content’ or would it be ‘communication’? A number of video bloggers have gone professional and claim to provide ‘infotainment’. Hence, if there are greater restrictions on online content platforms, will that create a regulatory barrier for smaller content makers? Is news breaking on twitter an act of journalism? How will it be regulated and who will regulate it? Well, journalism is no longer exclusively tied to journalist and it shouldn’t be too. If the amount of restrictions that can be imposed on a journalist is more than on bloggers then why would someone choose to be a journalist? If we start creating these distinctions then they will harm the creation of diverse and plural content.

There are safeguards available under the Information technology Act, 2000 which is administered by Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology for the content that appears during online streaming. Under section 69A of the Act, Universal Resource Locators (URLs) could be blocked in specific scenarios like Defence, Sovereignty and Integrity of India, Public Order etc. Sections 67, 67A and 67B of the Information Technology Act makes publishing/transmitting/hosting of pornographic content including child pornographic content a criminal offence. Law enforcement agencies regularly monitor the web and social media and take appropriate action for blocking of such URLs whenever they notice of objectionable contents as per provision under section 69A of the Act.

At present there is no regulatory framework for online streaming services and the content telecast on private satellite TV channels is regulated as per provisions of Programme and Advertising Codes prescribed under the Cable Television Networks (Regulation) Act, 1995 and Cable Television Network Rules, 1994 framed there under. The said codes are not applicable to online streaming services such as Netflix. What will YouTube do with content that might violate a content code? How will it even check for a violation of the content code? Will it restrict access to content to just verified Indian content? Will Reddit be restricted only to the Indian sub-reddit? Will there be regional bans, or will there be censorship?

The expectation will be on these platforms to regulate the content from their users, and this lends itself to censorship from these platforms. Note that take-down of content used to previously be based on Section 79 of the IT Act, wherein content was taken down based on a complaint from users, and this led to excessive censorship from aggregators and publishers. Any kind of control is only possible with the shrinking of the open web: that access to content and services is now largely in the hands of behemoths like Google, Facebook (and WhatsApp), Amazon, Netflix and others, means that there is a centralisation of access with these entities. Governments have struggled to control the decentralised Internet, but now can use these “platforms” and “aggregators” to control the Internet.

Historically, the government gives itself broad and vague parameters for regulating content, which in turn gives itself discretionary power to censor or take-down. Remember that with 66A, people could be arrested for messages that were “annoying” or “disparaging”. This did not meet the constitutional standards of Article 19(1), and was seen as unreasonably restrictive; there is little doubt that any code of conduct that is brought in, and goes beyond the reasonable restrictions in Article 19(2) (and its interpretation) will be challenged in courts.

Three main qualities of the filtering techniques should be considered as:

 ? ‘Reliability’, defined as the capacity to take into account the context of a given content;

 ? ‘Scalability’, i.e. the capacity to manage the increasing number of web sites; and

 ? ‘Adaptability’ which is considered in this paper as the capacity to cope with the evolution and the possible changes of a given web site.

To sum up I would like to throw some light on the fact that why Internet should be regulated in the present generation. First factor being that the Internet is now open for everybody. Originally, use of the Internet was confined to the American military. Later it was broadened to the American Schools and Universities; now the Internet is used in every country and by every age group. When only a limited group of professional people were using the Internet, there was no need for regulation (specific rules or laws). However, today a young child in the privacy of his or her bedroom can access the Internet at any time of the day or night. In these circumstances, there must be some procedure for tackling illegal content on the Internet and some mechanism controlling what is accessed on the Internet.

The Internet is no different from other electronic networks. Stripped of all its mystery, the Internet is an electronic delivery system for messages and information. In that sense, it is not very different from other electronic communications networks such as radio, television and telecommunications (phones and cell phones). These other types of communication networks are regulated and therefore, the Internet should also be regulated. Broadcasting and telecommunications have different regulatory committees and similarly the Internet will need its own distinctive system of regulations. There is harmful content on the Internet. Children are able to access the inappropriate content on the Internet quite easily, even when they are “surfing” the web to find games or information for school or personal use. While these inappropriate web sites and newsgroups may be a tiny proportion of the total information on the Internet, this type of material does exist in volume. In many cases, the production of this material has involved child abuse; the users of such material are interested in, and may have indulged (participated) in child abuse. Groups who are concerned with the welfare of children have considerable evidence of criminals using the Internet to make contact with, and arrange meetings with minors with the intent to abuse. Freedom of expression is no excuse to allow this type of activity to take place and be a threat to the safety of children.

There is a huge amount of offensive content of all kinds on the Internet. Many children have come across web sites that upset or embarrass them. There are sites that broadcast extremist views, often of a racist nature. While almost all of this content is legal in a free society, many people, especially parents and teachers, believe that limitations should be put on access to this material. The most practical way to do this is by using filtering software; indeed, filters are in place in most schools today. But these filters are not often installed in private homes. Some people believe that filtering is a form of regulation or control, or even censorship. The essential point to emphasize is that rating and filtering techniques provide end users (such as parents and teachers) with personal choice as to the content to which they limit or control access.

The Internet exposes users to viruses, spam, dangerous spyware and identity theft. Many people have been victims of identity theft; a person finds out personal information about another person and impersonates that person, even hacking into their bank and credit card accounts. Most people have received spam mail and some of these contain viruses that can damage or destroy a computer. Spyware allows personal information about Internet users to be shared with others. Sometimes the information is simply used to try to sell products, but often, spyware is used to gather personal information such as emails, passwords, bank account numbers and more. Regulation of the Internet would provide protection from these types of threats.