India Will Fact-Check Online Posts About Government Matters (techcrunch.com) 32
An anonymous reader quotes a report from TechCrunch: In India, a government-run agency will now monitor and undertake fact-checking for government related matters on social media even as tech giants expressed grave concerns about it last year. The Ministry of Electronics and IT on Wednesday wrote in a gazette notification that it is amending the IT Rules 2021 to cement into law the proposal to make the fact checking unit of Press Information Bureau the dedicated arbiter of truth for New Delhi matters. Tech companies as well as other firms that serve more than 5 million users in India will be required to "make reasonable efforts" to not display, store, transmit or otherwise share information that deceives or misleads users about matters pertaining to the government, the IT ministry said. India's move comes just weeks ahead of the general elections in the country. Relying on a government agency such as the Press Information Bureau as the sole source to fact-check government business without giving it a clear definition or providing clear checks and balances "may lead to misuse during implementation of the law, which will profoundly infringe on press freedom," Asia Internet Coalition, an industry group that represents Meta, Amazon, Google and Apple, cautioned last year.
Meanwhile, comedian Kunal Kamra, with support from the Editors Guild of India, cautioned that the move could create an environment that forces social media firms to welcome "a regime of self-interested censorship."
Meanwhile, comedian Kunal Kamra, with support from the Editors Guild of India, cautioned that the move could create an environment that forces social media firms to welcome "a regime of self-interested censorship."
Nothing new about this? (Score:2)
Many countries have had laws against spreading false news for some time now. Steps to encourage/enforce compliance vary though.
Re: (Score:3)
Well, that's why I said it varies by country. I wasn't just thinking of China, Russia, and North Korea, but also others that one would consider more wholesomely democratic.
I just did a search and found this report [poynter.org] with an interesting map showing what steps various countries are taking with regard to misinformation.
Re: (Score:3)
Well, that's why I said it varies by country. I wasn't just thinking of China, Russia, and North Korea, but also others that one would consider more wholesomely democratic.
I just did a search and found this report [poynter.org] with an interesting map showing what steps various countries are taking with regard to misinformation.
It always starts by calling things "misinformation". Maybe some of those things even are. The problem is in giving government that power over speech.
Of course you can point to cases where it is (at least according to you) "good". Making the trains run on time is "good" too (while also being the classic example of what dictatorships supposedly do better).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
It's an almost impossible balancing act. You have Russia using misinformation campaigns to screw up other countries. Russia was known to have interfered in the UK's brexit campaigns, which at the very least crippled the UK's economy, and may have gone as far as breaking up the Union for good. Russia was also found to have interfered in US election campaigns, although depending on your political views that may have helped or hindered the country.
Russia and other state actors make their misinformation seem or
Re: (Score:2)
The EU didn't secretly try to influence the brexit vote by pretending to be ordinary British citizens. Every comment was made openly by EU politicians and staff, with no attempt to disguise the source.
Re: (Score:1)
The EU didn't secretly try to influence the brexit vote by pretending to be ordinary British citizens. Every comment was made openly by EU politicians and staff, with no attempt to disguise the source.
Oh of course, on every billboard there was a tiny print that everyone could have read and all it takes is a ladder and a magnifying glass, then everyone could have easily tracked the funding of that foundation or think tank that was named there through the 10 different think tanks charities and other obfuscation layers back to EU. Easy peasy, noone has any excuse to not have done it. And that makes it information campaign, not propaganda. And of course it is perfectly just to fund it from my taxes.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't remember those billboards. Got any photos of them?
I remember Farage's recycled Nazi propaganda one...
Re: (Score:2)
Googled it, there weren't any.
Re:Nothing new about this? (Score:5, Informative)
Many countries have had laws against spreading false news for some time now. Steps to encourage/enforce compliance vary though.
Censorship is a phenomenon as old as writing itself. Despite thousands of years of accumulated warnings on the perils of aggregated power people still persist in perusing it and compliant masses still tolerate those pursuits.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
they won't tolerate right away, but just sell them on something like "it's okay if it stops drugs"
did that run out? call it Terrorism, then when that runs out switch to Misinformation
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Exactly - I have lived my entire life with the possibility of a nuclear war, I have seen the country turned inside out over any number of crises, but I have never been more genuinely scared or pessimistic about the future than I have by the quite obvious trend for people to not only not oppose dictatorship, but actively seek it out as some sort of ideal state of affairs. COVID-19, loony enviromentalists, wokies, are all thrilled with the idea of the government *forcing*, AKA *dictating* everyone's behavi
Re: (Score:1)
COVID-19 killed more Americans than WW2 and all subsequent conflicts. Millions more with chronic health problems. If there should be any pessimism, it should be that your follow citizens would prefer to risk your health, your life, your family, rather than wear a bit of cloth on their face.
Same with environmental damage. Your lungs, wildfires threatening your home, your kids having to deal with catastrophic climate change, and your fellow citizens doing all they can to make it worse.
Wokies, that's what used
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, and those countries are making a huge mistake that is very likely to lead to a totalitarian government.
Re: (Score:2)
The only countries with laws like this are extreme anti-citizen dictatorships. Criticism of the government is a fundamental right of a real free democracy, and having the government (or anyone, really) arbitrarily decide what is "fake news" based on what they don't like or don't want to hear is a great way to mask their dictatorshipness.
If it's actually false, there are laws already existing to prosecute that. Like fraud, libel, defamation, etc. If it doesn't run afoul of one of t
Ministry of Truth (Score:4, Informative)
1984 was not intended as a guide book.
Re: (Score:3)
Modi's people don't fact check, they "fact check" (Score:2)
I'm no expert on India, but if you've been paying much attention to India lately, it seems clear that Modi has had enough of this "democracy" thing. Seems he's not only been eyeing Putin, Orban and Ergodan with envy, but taking a lot of notes as well.
A typical discussion of "democracy" in India looks like this: [journalofdemocracy.org]
Re: (Score:3)
especially the liberals want to cancel other people's opinions.
There's no inherent predilection to censor based on political ideology. It's an inmate human failing. The BJP is right wing, as is Putin. China is nominally Communist but is actually fascist, achieving political superposition and being the poster child of the independence of totalitarianism from ideology.
Re: Isn't that just a nice word for censorship? (Score:1)
Putin was a KGB member and is a Stalin devotee. His goal is to reassemble the communist Soviet Union. If you think that is somehow right wing in your Overton window, then you must be off the deep end. Modi likewise is a nationalist but he is a neo-liberal when it comes to policy, when you are praised by Joe Biden and the rest of the Democrat party, you arenâ(TM)t even moderately right wing.
Re: (Score:1)
Communism isn't defined by people in fur hats talking with a funny accent. Soviet Union was Communist (I prefer the term Marxist) because it didn't allow private ownership of means of production. Putin has no problem whatsoever with people - the oligarchs - owning enormous amounts of means of production so long as they don't oppose him politically. He seems to want to restore some features of the old Soviet Union - the territory it used to control, the bunker mentality, and of course the lack of free electi
Re: (Score:2)
Technically, a spam filter is censorship.
There is still a difference between not being allowed an opinion, and not being allowed to claim as fact that which isn't true.
Good (Score:2)
You don't say ... (Score:2)
Meanwhile, comedian Kunal Kamra, with support from the Editors Guild of India, cautioned that the move could create an environment that forces social media firms to welcome "a regime of self-interested censorship."
So if an Indian comedian says it, instead of an old white guy like me, does it become non-crazy then?
Well, whatever it takes :)
This will further curtail press freedom in India (Score:1)
Big Surprise (Score:2)
Color me fucking shocked.
It's hard for me to decide which country would be better to delete; Russia or India.
Fact Checking = Censorship (Score:1)