The Hindu Editorial with Vocab - 14 AUGUST Slanting posts: On | English Group "Only Achievers"
The Hindu Editorial with Vocab - 14 AUGUST
Slanting posts: On social media and level playing field
Several Twitter handles associated with the Congress and its leaders including its former president Rahul Gandhi were blocked by Twitter in the last few days, for violating its user policy and the law of the land. The violation pertains to posts shared by these handles that identified the family of a child who was allegedly raped and murdered in Delhi. The platform has since revealed that the NCPCR brought the violation to its notice. A petition in the Delhi HC seeking legal action against Mr. Gandhi has pointed out that his post was in violation of Section 74 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015 and Section 23(2) of the POCSO Act 2012, both of which mandate that any material that might reveal (directly or indirectly) the identity of a child victim of a crime shall not be published. Additionally, the post also violated Twitter’s own rules. The Congress has not addressed the substantive question raised by the platform regarding these violations. It has alleged double standards by the platform, and questioned its impartiality. That is not a mature response. The party transgressed the norms of discussion in a sensitive case in its campaign. It must, without qualifiers, accept that mistake, and commit to better standards in social media campaigns.
Twitter had flagged posts on several handles associated with the BJP in May, which were intended to target the Congress, as ‘manipulated media’. The BJP and the Centre took umbrage over the decision, claiming that only a police investigation could establish whether the content was altered. Twitter insisted that it had its own mechanism to check whether files uploaded on the platform were tinkered with. Herein lies the core conflict between the state and private companies over controlling the information flow in a democratic society. Both the state and the companies invoke public order and interest to justify their control over information, but the protocol for exercising that enormous power over lives remains open to question. Additionally, private companies also claim a right to unilaterally decide their user policy. This raises the pertinent question of whether a private company that is providing a service that is essential — connectivity in this instance — can set the terms of usage arbitrarily. The state has often shown itself unable to control speech in a fair and even-handed manner. It does even wilfully misuse such powers, going by experience. The age of acceleration has thrown up many such complicated moral and governance questions that society needs to resolve. In the meantime, state agencies must exercise control over speech only in the rarest instances, for the briefest periods, and in the most transparent manner. Private companies must be more transparent in enforcing their guidelines and reassure users that their standards for those in power and those in the Opposition are one.
CREDIT SOURCE - THE HINDU
-------------------------------------------
1. Substantive (Adj)- important, serious, or related to real facts. वास्तविक
2. Double Standards (N)- a rule or principle which is unfairly applied in different ways to different people or groups. दोहरे मापदंड
3. Impartiality (N)- equal treatment of all rivals or disputants; fairness. निष्पक्षता
4. Transgress(V)- to break a law or moral rule. उल्लंघन करना
5. Take Umbrage (Phrase)- to strongly disagree with, take offense at, or become angered by something.
6. Enormous (Adj)- unusually large in size, extent, or degree.
7. Pertinent (Adj)- appropriate or relevant. उचित
8.Throw Up (Phrasal Verb)- to produce something new or unexpected.
Join @Englishkendra for relevant study material of English.
Happy learning!
