What is top court’s order on social media?, Pg14.

Key Highlights:

• SC directed Union govt. to draft guidelines for social media regulation in consultation with NBDA.
• Triggered by a case filed by an NGO supporting Spinal Muscular Atrophy (SMA) patients against comedians for derogatory remarks.
• Bench held commercialised free speech must not offend sentiments of vulnerable sections.
• Comedians ordered to issue public apologies on YouTube and other platforms.
• Attorney-General assured guidelines will balance free speech with dignity and respect.
• India has 491 million active social media users, raising regulation challenges.

Detailed Insights:

• Constitutional limits: Article 19(1)(a) guarantees free speech; restrictions permissible only under Article 19(2) (sovereignty, security, public order, decency, defamation, etc.).
• Judicial precedents:
  • Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015) – struck down vague Section 66A IT Act, affirmed that “offensive or disturbing” speech is protected.
  • Kaushal Kishore v. State of U.P. (2023) – reiterated Article 19(2) grounds are exhaustive.
  • March 2025 – SC quashed FIR against MP Imran Pratapgadhi, underscoring need to zealously protect free speech.
• Commercial speech evolution:
  • Hamdard Dawakhana (1959) – denied free speech protection to commercial ads.
  • Tata Press (1995) – recognised commercial speech in public interest as protected.
  • Courts now distinguish between public-serving commercial speech vs private profit-driven speech.
• Existing framework: Social media firms already governed by IT Act, 2000 & IT Rules, 2021, requiring removal of harmful content. Influencers also subject to ordinary criminal law.
• Concern: Any new regulation must be narrowly tailored to avoid excessive restrictions beyond constitutional limits.

Concepts Involved:

• Spinal Muscular Atrophy (SMA): A rare genetic disorder affecting motor neurons, leading to muscle weakness.
• IT (Intermediary Guidelines & Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021: Legal framework regulating online platforms, requiring content moderation and grievance redressal.
• Commercial Speech Doctrine: Legal recognition of advertising/monetised speech as a form of expression, subject to balance between public interest and private profit motives.