Should Social Media Content Be Regulated? Supreme Court Weighs In
Supreme Court Directs Govt to Suggest Social Media Content Regulations
The Supreme Court of India has asked the Central Government to draft regulations for social media content while ensuring that free speech is not compromised. The directive came during a hearing on podcaster Ranveer Allahbadia’s controversial remarks, which sparked public outrage. While the court clarified that it does not support censorship, it emphasized that social media cannot remain an unregulated space. The proposed regulations will be open for public suggestions, involving all stakeholders in the process.
Balancing Free Speech and Content Control
On Monday, the Supreme Court stated that while it does not advocate for censorship, social media platforms cannot operate without any restrictions. The court was addressing a case linked to Allahbadia, who faced multiple FIRs over his remarks on comedian Samay Raina’s show, India’s Got Latent.
"We don't want any regulatory regime which is about censorship, but it also cannot be a free-for-all platform," said Justice Surya Kant.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the government, stressed the need for a regulatory mechanism to prevent the spread of content that violates societal norms. He highlighted the difference between India and other countries regarding free speech.
"Our notions of morality are far different from other countries. In the USA, burning the national flag is a fundamental right. In India, it's a criminal offense," Mehta argued.
Supreme Court’s Proposed Action Plan
The Supreme Court directed the Centre to draft regulations that uphold the right to free speech while ensuring content stays within the boundaries set by Article 19(4) of the Indian Constitution. The court emphasized the importance of public participation in shaping these regulations.
"We have requested SG to deliberate upon and suggest such measures which shall not impinge the fundamental right of free speech and expression but also be effective enough to ensure that it is within the bounds of Article 19(4) of the Constitution," the court stated.
The proposed regulations will be shared with the public, inviting feedback from legal experts, media professionals, and the general public before any legislative action is taken.
Defining Acceptable Content Standards
The debate over content regulation also touched upon the definition of acceptable humor. The Supreme Court distinguished between creative comedy and offensive language.
"Humor is something that the entire family can enjoy. Using filthy language is not humor. We have some excellent comedians in Bollywood and good writers in terms of writing humor," Justice Kant remarked.
Mehta echoed this sentiment, noting that many individuals critique the government without resorting to vulgarity.
"There are many who are critical of the government but without vulgarity. There are very good people," he added.
The court responded by suggesting a balanced approach:
"Please look into it. So it’s not censorship, but there’s some control."
Ranveer Allahbadia’s Show Allowed with Conditions
Despite the ongoing controversy, the Supreme Court allowed Allahbadia to continue airing his YouTube segment, The Ranveer Show, but with conditions. The content must maintain "morality and decency" and be suitable for all age groups.
Allahbadia, popularly known as BeerBiceps, landed in trouble after his remarks about parents and sex went viral, leading to public outrage and multiple FIRs.
What’s Next for Social Media Regulation?
The Supreme Court’s move signals a shift toward greater accountability for digital content while safeguarding free speech. As the government prepares draft regulations, public and industry feedback will play a crucial role in shaping the final framework.
Should there be stricter regulations on social media, or does this risk limiting free expression? The debate is far from over. What do you think?
