Tag: social media regulation

  • India Supreme Court Urges Stricter Social Media Safeguards for Minors

    India Supreme Court Urges Stricter Social Media Safeguards for Minors

    India is moving toward tighter regulations on children’s access to social media, with the Supreme Court directing the central government to examine statutory safeguards for users under 18. The focus is not on banning internet access for minors but on whether they should be allowed to independently create and manage social media accounts.

    What the Supreme Court Said

    A bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, along with Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana, asked the Centre to consider strengthening existing intermediary rules to ensure social media platforms comply with Indian laws concerning minors. Justice Bagchi emphasized that safeguards should have a statutory basis rather than remain mere guidelines. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta assured the court that the government would examine possible measures.

    The proceedings follow a petition filed by the Just Rights for Children Alliance (JRCA), which seeks enforceable safeguards for minors using social media and other digital platforms.

    Why Age 18 Matters

    The petition relies on Section 11 of the Indian Contract Act, which addresses the legal capacity to enter into contracts. Senior advocate H.S. Phoolka, representing JRCA, argued that existing law already covers minors’ contractual capacity, making it unnecessary to wait for the proposed data protection framework. Signing up for social media involves accepting a platform’s terms and conditions, raising questions about how platforms allowing younger users align with Indian law.

    Parental Consent Under Consideration

    One proposed option is requiring parental or legal guardian consent before users under 18 can enter into contracts with social media platforms. The petition also suggests identity verification or e-KYC for parents or guardians. These changes would require platforms to build systems compliant with Indian legal requirements, rather than relying solely on their existing minimum-age policies. Currently, platforms like Facebook and Snapchat allow account creation from age 13.

    What Happens Next

    The JRCA petition highlights risks including online grooming, sexual exploitation, trafficking, sextortion, cyberbullying, behavioral profiling, misuse of personal information, and exposure to age-inappropriate content. The Centre is now examining whether stronger safeguards can be incorporated into the statutory framework governing digital intermediaries. The Supreme Court is expected to hear the matter again after the government reviews the issue.

  • India Presses Meta for Answers on Instagram Algorithm and Legal Compliance

    India Presses Meta for Answers on Instagram Algorithm and Legal Compliance

    The Indian government has formally requested Meta to explain how its Instagram and Facebook algorithms determine content reach and visibility. Officials are also demanding stronger cooperation on child sexual abuse material (CSAM), online fraud, deepfakes, and automated bot accounts.

    IT Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw chaired a second meeting with Meta officials on Thursday. Meta’s delegation included global affairs chief Joel Kaplan and public policy vice president Neil Potts. Discussions covered technical systems, legal duties, and content distribution practices.

    Scrutiny Over Algorithmic Bias

    Government officials focused on how Instagram recommends, reduces, or promotes posts. They also examined allegations that the platform’s systems favored anti-government material and handled comparable content differently.

    The scrutiny is linked to concerns about political and public-interest content. During the CJP-led Gen Z protests, users relied on Instagram to share videos, personal accounts, and protest updates. Recommendation systems influenced which posts reached larger audiences.

    Meta controls the rules and data behind those decisions. Users can appeal when the company removes a post, but they may receive little information when Instagram limits a post’s reach or excludes it from recommendation sections.

    The government wants Meta to explain the signals its systems use when ranking content. Officials also seek details about reduced distribution and the treatment of Indian-language posts compared with English-language material.

    Indian Law Guides Platform Operations

    Government sources said every social media company operating in India must follow Indian law. The requirement covers Meta, X, and other online platforms serving users across the country.

    “We are a constitutional democracy. The rule of law is paramount,” a government source said. “Platforms operating in India cannot function according to the US Constitution or the Constitution of Europe.”

    The source added that platforms must operate under India’s Constitution and national laws. Officials also cited Article 19, which protects freedom of speech, and Article 19(2), which permits reasonable restrictions under defined grounds.

    Authorities summoned Meta after Facebook briefly restricted a video post from Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Kaplan later apologized for the error. Government sources said Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg also apologized over the incident and other platform concerns.

    Officials said any legal proceedings would follow the required legal process. For now, authorities are assessing Meta’s conduct under Indian rules. They also seek answers across technical, policy, and legal areas.

    Meta’s Technical Team Continues Talks

    Meta’s technical team will continue discussions with government technology officials after Kaplan leaves India. The talks will cover recommendation systems, alleged bias, CSAM, fraudulent posts, deepfakes, and bot activity.

    Meta told officials that it was working to address harmful content and automated accounts. However, the meetings also covered how its systems rank lawful posts before any removal decision occurs.

    Government officials want clearer information on how automated tools separate harmful mobilization from legitimate reporting and political criticism. They also seek stronger cooperation when Indian law enforcement agencies investigate CSAM and fraud.

    Available reports do not confirm that Meta shared internal distribution data or a formal audit of protest-related recommendations. Discussions will continue between the company’s specialists and government teams.

    “The first question is whether they are functioning in accordance with the law of the land,” an official said. The government’s primary demand is compliance with Indian law, along with clearer answers about the automated systems that determine content visibility for Instagram and Facebook users.

  • Meta Faces $567 Million Penalty and Mandatory Teen Safety Overhaul in New Mexico Ruling

    Meta Faces $567 Million Penalty and Mandatory Teen Safety Overhaul in New Mexico Ruling

    A New Mexico court has ordered Meta to pay $567 million into a five-year fund dedicated to youth mental health services and to implement sweeping safety measures for users under 18 on Facebook and Instagram. The ruling, issued by Judge Bryan Biedscheid, follows a separate jury verdict that imposed $375 million in civil penalties for violating the state’s consumer protection law. Combined, Meta faces $942 million in financial liability from the two judgments, though the company has vowed to appeal both decisions.

    Court Finds Meta Created a Public Nuisance

    New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez filed the lawsuit in 2023, alleging that Meta designed its products to encourage heavy use among minors and failed to protect children from sexual exploitation. The state argued that Meta concealed internal knowledge about risks to young users and misrepresented platform safety. Judge Biedscheid rejected Meta’s Section 230 defense for the public nuisance claim, stating the case concerned company conduct and platform design rather than liability for user posts. However, he declined to order changes to recommendation systems and certain engagement features, citing legal, technical, and competition concerns.

    Youth Mental Health Fund

    The $567 million fund will operate for five years under the court’s abatement plan. Of that amount, $420 million is allocated to treatment services for young people in New Mexico, including community programs and family-based behavioral healthcare. The remaining $147 million covers awareness, prevention, screening, referrals, administration, and evaluation. State officials will oversee the programs, and the court reduced the state’s proposed fifteen-year plan to five years.

    Mandatory Safety Measures for Teens

    The order requires Meta to implement several safety measures across Facebook and Instagram for users under 18:

    • Monthly usage limits for teen accounts
    • Restrictions on some notifications during school hours and overnight
    • Tighter controls on adult contact with minors
    • Enhanced age-assurance tools and a model to identify users under 13 within two years
    • A reporting channel for schools or child safety groups
    • AI chatbot safeguards and reviews of child sexual abuse reports

    Meta must report compliance progress twice each year.

    Meta’s Response and Appeal

    Meta disputed the findings and confirmed its planned appeal. “We disagree with the ruling and will appeal,” a company spokesperson said. Meta stated it works to identify harmful content and remove bad actors, and defended its existing parental controls and teen safety systems. The appeal could delay or alter parts of the order.

    Broader Implications

    Attorney General Torrez called the ruling a model for other governments pursuing child safety cases. More than 40 states and over 1,300 school districts have filed related public nuisance claims against social media companies, seeking financial recovery, product changes, or both. New Mexico’s order directly combines a treatment fund with court-supervised platform rules.

  • India Parliamentary Panel Puts Meta on Notice Over PM Modi Video Removal, Threatens Safe Harbour Repeal

    India Parliamentary Panel Puts Meta on Notice Over PM Modi Video Removal, Threatens Safe Harbour Repeal

    Meta is facing mounting pressure in India after a video featuring Prime Minister Narendra Modi was temporarily removed from one of its platforms. The video showed the Prime Minister assuring students that strict action would be taken against those responsible for a paper leak incident. Following the brief takedown, a parliamentary panel has demanded an apology from Meta, warning that the company could lose its safe harbour protections if it fails to comply.

    The Parliamentary Committee on Communications and Information Technology issued a three-day ultimatum to Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, insisting on an apology to Prime Minister Modi. BJP MP Nishikant Dubey, who chairs the panel, called the removal an “attack on democracy.” The safe harbour clause currently prevents the Indian government from filing First Information Reports (FIRs) directly against social media platform officials. Removing that clause would allow the government to take legal action.

    Meta had previously apologized for what it described as a technical glitch that caused the video to be removed. However, India’s Ministry of Information and Technology found that explanation insufficient and unconvincing.

    CSAM Scrutiny Intensifies

    The video removal is not the only regulatory challenge Meta faces in India. Last month, the company came under scrutiny over child sexual abuse material (CSAM) on its platforms. Reports indicated that such content was appearing in paid advertisements on Instagram, prompting the government to send Meta a formal notice.

    According to data from the National Crime Records Bureau, 1,238 cybercrime cases were registered against children in 2024. Of those, 1,099 involved the publication or transmission of sexually explicit material involving minors. Nishikant Dubey warned social media platforms, stating: “Pornographic content cannot be allowed in India. Child sexual abuse material is a heinous crime. AI-generated fake videos of women or obscene depiction of women are also heinous crimes.” He added that this issue “is above political parties, religion, and caste because this country is extremely sensitive when it comes to children and women.”

    The Indian government has warned social media platforms to either comply with CSAM rules or face legal action.

  • Indian Parliamentary Panel Rejects Meta’s Apology, Demands Action Over PM Modi Video Takedown

    Indian Parliamentary Panel Rejects Meta’s Apology, Demands Action Over PM Modi Video Takedown

    Meta has apologized to a parliamentary panel in India over the removal of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Facebook video, but lawmakers are pushing for more than just an apology. The company described the takedown as a technical error and restored the video after government concerns were raised.

    Panel Demands Accountability

    During a meeting of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Information Technology in New Delhi, Meta officials faced questions about the removal, its authorization, and who was responsible. Committee members, led by BJP MP Nishikant Dubey, demanded accountability and called on Meta to identify the official involved and consider legal action.

    “The committee is seeking accountability,” a senior BJP member reportedly said, adding that an apology alone would not be sufficient. The panel wants answers and stronger action against those responsible for the incident.

    Broader Scrutiny of Content Moderation

    The meeting focused on social media regulation and platform accountability, with representatives from Meta, Google, YouTube, X, Snapchat, the Union home ministry, and MeitY in attendance. The temporary restriction of PM Modi’s video—which addressed India’s youth and promised strict action against paper leaks—raised concerns about content moderation systems handling sensitive political communications.

    Meta had earlier described the restriction as a glitch, but MeitY called the explanation inadequate and demanded greater clarity. Lawmakers also questioned Meta about controversial and objectionable content remaining on its platforms, seeking details on moderation measures.

    Growing Pressure on Foreign Tech Platforms

    The incident adds to mounting pressure on Meta as Indian authorities examine platform compliance with national laws. Government sources have linked the broader debate to concerns over public order and national security. The committee’s questions now shift attention from Meta’s apology toward stronger platform accountability, highlighting the intense scrutiny foreign technology platforms face in India.

  • Meta India Head Arun Srinivas Faces Legal Action Over Alleged Morphed Posts Targeting PM Modi

    Meta India Head Arun Srinivas Faces Legal Action Over Alleged Morphed Posts Targeting PM Modi

    Hyderabad Cybercrime Police have registered cases against Meta India head Arun Srinivas and several Facebook and Instagram accounts over the alleged circulation of morphed and objectionable content targeting Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi during the recent Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) protests in Delhi.

    The FIRs were filed based on complaints alleging that manipulated videos and images of the Prime Minister were shared on social media platforms.

    Complaints Allege Morphed Content Was Shared

    According to the complaints, two individuals came across multiple digitally altered videos and images of the Prime Minister while browsing Instagram. They alleged that the content portrayed him in an obscene, derogatory, and misleading manner and was accompanied by abusive comments that increased its reach.

    “The comments contain offensive language, ridicule, and indecent remarks directed at the Hon’ble Prime Minister and other individuals depicted in the manipulated content, thereby amplifying the offensive nature of the posts and encouraging their wider circulation and engagement. The above content appears to have been digitally altered or AI-generated and circulated on social media,” the complaints stated.

    Complainants Cite Risk of Misinformation

    The complainants argued that the alleged posts could have wider implications beyond social media.

    “Such content has the potential to mislead the public, spread misinformation, incite hatred or public unrest, outrage public decency, defame or insult the dignity of public figures, disturb public order, promote hostility among different sections of society, and otherwise violate the applicable provisions of law,” they added.

    The complaints were filed by S. Aravind Reddy, a 29-year-old businessman, and T. Saikiran Goud, a Telangana BJP activist. Police are also examining several posts and comments shared during the student protests, many of which allegedly contained abusive remarks targeting the Prime Minister.

    Meta Tightens Oversight After Earlier Controversy

    The latest action comes days after Meta drew criticism from the Indian Government when a video posted from the Prime Minister’s official Facebook account was briefly blocked.

    According to sources, Meta has assured the government that it has strengthened safeguards for posts published from the Prime Minister’s account. Prominent accounts will now receive additional oversight, and only senior company officials will be authorized to review such posts. Sources added that every moderation decision will undergo scrutiny by at least two senior executives before any action is taken.

    Government Meeting Expected Soon

    Sources said Meta representatives are expected to meet Indian government officials later this week to discuss content regulation and other policy-related issues.

    Separately, Delhi Police have issued notices to several social media accounts, including some news portals, directing them to remove allegedly offensive and abusive posts targeting Prime Minister Modi that were shared during the recent student protests in Delhi.