People use social media to express their thoughts, interests, and opinions on various things. Every day thousands of presentations are made on all social networks. Everyone can freely express their opinion on social media. These reviews contain positive, negative, and neutral views on a topic. The impact of social media on the mainstream media and the way people communicate with each other and disseminate information has become a serious topic of study for journalists, academics, and policymakers. Although it was an essential balance as a vehicle with which the fundamental right to freedom of expression is guaranteed for all, regardless of class, creed, or geography, these platforms also become spaces in which, under the guise of free expression, disinformation and hatred can flourish.
Anti-national groups use social networking sites to spread propaganda and encourage young Indians to participate in such activities. The term “anti-national” generally means against national interests or nationalism. Political parties increasingly use this word against each other and against people whose positions they disagree with.
Hashtag Trend of Anti-National Sentiments
Participation in social networks has been very high in recent years. The first climax of the talks was around the JNU riots in 2016, but constantly the two sides tend to talk about anti-nationality around the same time, although the aim of the tweet is different. The first case in which the BJP used “anti-national” much more than the INC was in late 2016 when BJP leaders attacked the Aam Aadmi party to demand proof of the “surgical strikes” announced in September 2016.
In 2019 there was increased use of social media for anti-national messages, beginning with the dilution of Article 370 and then peaking during the CAA-NRC protests. However, it is important that after 2019 there is a new and more consistent use of “anti-national” on important topics that increase traffic on social networks. During the Ram Mandir inauguration and the peasant protests in Delhi, there was increased use.
The Taliban takeover of Afghanistan has become the focus of the social media campaign by the Uttar Pradesh unit of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) amid concerns about human rights violations. The BJP is building a social media campaign targeting primarily the Samajwadi Party (SP), which has accused its main rival in Uttar Pradesh of pandering to Muslims. Messages shared on Party-run social media addresses and groups on the WhatsApp instant messaging platform show that approximately a quarter of posts in the last two weeks had to do with the Taliban referring to Prime Minister Narendra Modi as a strong personality and boss Minister Yogi Adityanath as strong Hindutva Brand against these forces.
The BJP’s campaign against the Taliban attracted widespread attention after Samajwadi Party leader and Lok Sabha MP Shafiqur Rahman Barq from the Sambhal constituency drew a parallel between India’s fight for freedom and the takeover of Afghanistan by the Taliban. The #StopAsianHate movement has accelerated on social media. Powered by posts from celebrities, media, and influencers, the hashtag has generated a media impact value of $173 million from more than 40,000 posts, according to Launchmetrics.
Liability of the Intermediary in Anti-National Activities
The reason for such outrage on social media is that people think they can make any statement, no matter how politically controversial or problematic, while keeping their identities anonymous. People create fake accounts by entering the wrong details and wondering if they will not be caught since their identity is kept secret and if they speak or share content that is very contrary to the nation’s interests. Each social media website has its community guidelines governing the types of content that must be posted or shared on their respective websites. Twitter, Instagram all have their content monitoring guidelines. Any posts that violate the guidelines are removed from the website, and the account is terminated for serious violations. Some people try to find loopholes in the guidelines, while others do not even think to take them seriously.
The lack of strict guidelines on these websites has led to the proliferation of anti-national content. The terms used in the guidelines are vague and sometimes difficult to interpret. In addition, people try to hide behind the freedom of expression that the Constitution grants them and they try to evade any form of the allegation by presenting that its content is framed within the freedom of expression. There have also been cases in which social networks themselves have been accused of promoting anti-national content. In February 2020, the Hyderabad Cybercrime Police filed a complaint against Twitter, Instagram, and WhatsApp, alleging that these websites allow people to upload and post messages and videos that violate “Nation and religion.”
Controlling the Menace
The freedom of expression that the Constitution of India grants us under Article 19 allows each of us to speak and express our opinion freely. However, if a person exceeds the limit established by law, they should be held responsible for it. The constitution gives us the right, but it also restricts freedom of speech and expression, just like the other laws that are set out in various laws. In the current scenario, where opinion can be freely expressed, the need for such laws has also increased. The social network has boomed and is now a platform for many people. With such power in their hands, people are prone to abuse it, directed against them.
India is made up of different cultures, religions, regions, ethnicities, etc. The diversity of the country means that people have different views on political and national issues. Due to this diversity, it becomes very difficult to control the controversies that arise. Also, social media companies try to be lenient in their policies so that people do not feel tied to using them and share what they like. Only extreme content is considered a policy violation. Businesses do not want to lose the engagement they have on their websites. To maintain control over such practices, instead of giving these companies the freedom to set their own rules, the government should establish certain rules that cover the types of content posted on these websites. These laws can be applied to any website so that there are no differences in the rules of different websites.
Another problem to consider when interpreting the law of sedition under Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code. In accordance with Section 124A of the IPC, the offense of hate speech is committed when a person, through words or otherwise, incites or attempts to arouse hatred or contempt or attempts to arouse dissatisfaction with the government established by the law. The definition and meaning of agitation are unclear to many people, making it difficult to understand. The definition of hate speech does not take into account aversion to (a) the constitution, (b) the legislature, and (c) the administration of justice.
By considering the following two aspects, the government can create a Limit and set of rules: everyone must comply, and they also increase responsibility when sharing content through social media.
Conclusion
There are differences between the destinations of tweets that mention anti-nationalities. While most attacks are directed against politicians or journalists, there are several citizens in various forms of public life who have been singled out as anti-national. Most of the targeting takes place in the body of the tweets, while separate hashtags are created to target people only when a coordinated attack is attempted. Such targeted attacks are usually related to one issue: attacks against Dalit activists Dilip Mandal or Jignesh Mevani, against Kashmiris such as Shehla Rashid or Mehbooba Mufti, against industrial families such as Adanis and Ambanis, against personalities or issues related to the Hindu right-wing. -political wing-like Nathuram Godse and Vinayak Savarkar, and problems or individuals associated with Muslims, including Tipu Sultan and Mughals.
People can be mentioned specifically or simply in a tweet. Control by the Ministry of the Interior or law enforcement agencies such as city police or prime ministers’ offices is often mentioned in “anti-national” tweets to “draw attention” to government institutions’ power that is being attacked.
Social media is a great tool for sharing opinions and information over the Internet, only if people use it wisely. In the end, the people who use social networks and everyone’s opinions are not the same. Different points of view and opinions lead to conflicts and disputes. When people do not respect the opinions or points of view of others, websites inevitably become toxic. However, the reach of social media itself can be used to great advantage. The public can express their opinions on any matter by sharing the content they deem appropriate. Hate speech or anti-national content can be reduced if people learn to respect the opinions of others and to criticize these opinions positively and constructively.