An ideal approach to social media grievance redressal

News: Recently, the govt released a set of draft amendments to the IT (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021.

Once enacted, digital intermediaries will have to ensure that the community standards to which they hold their users answerable comply with Indian law and India’s constitutional principles.

This, the govt clarified, has become necessary because a number of intermediaries have taken it upon themselves to act in violation of the rights of Indian citizens.

What has been proposed in the draft amendment?

Constitution of a Grievance Appellate Committee: It will be tasked with dealing with “problematic content” in an expeditious manner.

– Users unsatisfied with how their complaint to an intermediary has been handled will be able to appeal the decision at this body. And have it resolved within 30 days.

For more: Read here

Are the draft amendments a threat to free speech ?

In the view of civil society, the proposal of setting up a Grievance Appellate Committee is being called as yet another attempt by the government to either curtail or interfere with free speech.

– What the government sees as an escalation mechanism to provide redress to users against unfair decisions of the social media platforms they subscribe to, many members of civil society view as just another tool of government censorship.

Moreover, if an appeal is made by a government agency whose take-down notice has been rebuffed, it is likely that a government-appointed appellate committee will rule in favor of its own agency.

Need for the Grievance appellate committee: Not all appeals to the Grievance Appellate Committee will be about government take-downs. Some will address illegal content—like violations of copyright. Hence, allowing social media platforms to have last word on all such content moderation issues is problematic.

Way forward

As much as social media platforms are designed to enable free speech, they must also eliminate—or at least mitigate—the harms that could arise from speech unfettered.

They need to arrive at a balance between the rights of persons who post and those they offend.

The industry can establish a self-regulatory appellate body to which appeals from all content moderation decisions can be referred. The government has already indicated that it is open to considering self-regulatory alternatives.

– It could be staffed with experts from industry and the domain of law, so that its decisions will be sufficiently robust, i.e. informed both by industry context and applicable laws and judicial precedents taken into account.

– Ideally, this body should operate as an appellate forum for all content moderation decisions, regardless of the platform from which the appeal originates. This will keep it beyond the power hierarchy of the platforms themselves, offering the process a measure of independence that is absent in internal grievance redressal systems.

– Since it will not be operated by the government, it will, hopefully, have the neutrality required to remain impartial while deciding on take-down notices issued by the government.

Source: This post is based on the article “An ideal approach to social media grievance redressal” published in Livemint on 13th June 22.