- 04 June | MGP Strategy Series | GS Paper 4 (Ethics) with AIR 7 A.R. Rajah Mohaideen Click Here to register for the session →
- 04 June | GS Advance Program begins from 4th June 2026 | First 2 classes open to all Click Here to register for the event →
- 05 June | MGP Strategy Series | GS Paper 3 Strategy Session with AIR 406 Mannat Luthra Click Here to register for the session
- 06 June | Open Orientation on Essay Guidance Program (EGP 2026) Click Here to register →
- 07 June | Open Orientation for Current Affairs for Mains 2026 Click Here to register →
- 07 June | Sociology Optional Strategy Session with AIR 10 Ujjwal Priyank Click Here to register →
Source: This post is based on the article “Let Them Think”, published in The Times of India on 5th July, 2023.
Syllabus topic: GS Paper 2, Government Policies for various sectors
News: The article discusses the recent rejection by the Karnataka High Court of a petition by Twitter, Inc., which challenged the validity of the Union government’s blocking orders.
Read More about the case– A case of unchecked power to restrict e-free speech
The court ruled that Twitter, as a foreign entity, could not invoke the constitutional guarantee of free speech and expression on behalf of its users.
It also imposed a fine of ₹50 lakh on Twitter for indulging in “speculative litigation” despite not complying with the blocking orders for a long period.
Court refused to entertain all arguments based on:
- The absence of notice to users and
- Lack of proportionality involved in large-scale suspension of accounts and posts on few topics.
What are the issues reported by the author with the judgment?
The court’s decision will potentially encourage account-level blocking rather than the removal of specific tweets, links, or URLs deemed harmful to public order or national security.
It will have significant implications for freedom of speech and expression in India, particularly in the context of social media platforms.
It also raises questions about the rights and obligations of large media companies in relation to user-generated content. A definitive verdict from the Supreme Court may be needed to clarify these issues.
What should be done?
Laws in most countries allow intermediaries such as social media platforms and Internet service providers to remove any offending content.
Democracies should formulate policies and regulations rooted in fairness and natural justice.
Government should avoid imposing undue restrictions on freedom of speech and expression.
In Shreya Singhal case (2015), Section 69A of the IT Act was upheld by the Supreme Court, because, the section provides adequate procedural safeguards.
