This article is written by Archak Das of Adamas University, Kolkata, an intern under Legal Vidhiya
ABSTRACT
Free speech has been significantly impacted by the Internet. Without worrying about censorship or retaliation, it has made it possible for people to openly communicate and express their thoughts. No matter how divisive or unpopular a subject may be, anyone can voice their opinions without worrying about being ignored or suppressed. People can now freely express their thoughts and beliefs online without worrying about being rejected or retaliated against. This has facilitated the emergence of novel concepts and the dissemination of knowledge, both of which have benefited society as a whole.
People can now express their ideas and opinions with others thanks to the development of social media platforms, online forums, and blogs. This has facilitated the growth of novel concepts and the dissemination of knowledge on a wide range of subjects. The Internet has additionally made it possible to discuss contentious issues that were before impossible. Overall, free expression has been significantly impacted by the Internet. It has made it possible for people to speak openly and express their thoughts without worrying about being silenced or punished. This has facilitated the growth of novel concepts, the dissemination of knowledge, and the discussion of contentious issues.
INTRODUCTION
The internet has had a significant impact on freedom of speech in both positive and negative ways. On the positive side, the internet has democratized communication and made it easier for people to express their opinions and ideas to a wider audience. Anyone with an internet connection can now create and publish content, bypassing traditional gatekeepers such as publishers, editors, and media outlets. This has led to a proliferation of diverse voices and perspectives, allowing marginalized groups and individuals to have a platform to express themselves and have their voices heard.
On the negative side, the internet has also created new challenges and risks for freedom of speech. While the internet has made it easier for people to express themselves, it has also made it easier for governments and other entities to monitor and censor online speech. In some countries, governments use sophisticated surveillance tools to track and censor online content that is critical of the government or its policies. In addition, online platforms such as social media have been criticized for allowing hate speech, misinformation, and other harmful content to flourish, which can have a chilling effect on free speech. Furthermore, online harassment and threats have become a serious issue for many people who express their opinions online. Women, minorities, and other marginalized groups are particularly vulnerable to online harassment, which can include threats of violence, doxxing, and other forms of abuse. This can create a climate of fear that silences voices and limits the diversity of perspectives that are represented online. Overall, the internet has had a complex and nuanced effect on freedom of speech. While it has opened up new avenues for expression and participation, it has also created new challenges and risks that need to be addressed in order to protect and promote free speech in the digital age.
Internet and freedom of speech by article 19
Article 19 is a human rights organization that advocates for the protection and promotion of freedom of expression and access to information. According to Article 19, the internet plays a crucial role in enabling people to exercise their right to freedom of expression and access to information. Here are some of the key points that Article 19 makes about the internet and freedom of speech:
- The internet has created new opportunities for people to express themselves and access information. The internet has enabled people to connect with others, share their opinions, and access information that was previously unavailable to them.
- The internet has become a vital tool for journalists and other media professionals. The internet allows journalists to report on issues that might otherwise go unreported, and it provides a platform for citizen journalists and bloggers to share their perspectives.
- Governments must respect the right to freedom of expression on the internet. Governments should not use internet censorship or surveillance as a means of controlling the flow of information or suppressing dissent.
- Private companies that provide internet services have a responsibility to respect human rights. Companies should not be complicit in human rights violations, and they should take steps to ensure that their services are not used to facilitate censorship or surveillance.
- Freedom of expression on the internet is not an absolute right. There may be legitimate reasons for restricting certain types of speech, such as hate speech, incitement to violence, or child pornography.
Overall, Article 19 believes that the internet has the potential to be a powerful tool for promoting freedom of expression and access to information, but that this potential can only be realized if governments and private companies respect human rights and uphold the principles of free expression.
Challenges faced by freedom of speech and expression through internet
The internet has undoubtedly provided individuals with unprecedented access to information and communication channels. However, it has also presented significant challenges to the freedom of expression. Here are some of the challenges faced by freedom of expression on the internet:
- Censorship: Governments, private companies, and other entities have the power to restrict access to certain information, websites, or platforms. Censorship can be used to limit the freedom of expression and suppress dissenting voices.
- Surveillance: Surveillance on the internet can stifle free speech as individuals may be hesitant to express themselves if they believe they are being monitored.
- Cyber bullying and harassment: People who express their thoughts or beliefs online may be subjected to harassment and bullying in this hostile environment.
- Disinformation and misinformation: The internet provides a platform for the spread of false information, which can have serious consequences for public discourse and democracy.
- Technical limitations: Technical limitations such as network outages, slow internet speeds, and limited access to technology can restrict people’s ability to access information and communicate their views.
- Lack of access: Not all people have access to the internet, limiting their ability to exercise their freedom of expression.
- Corporate control: Private companies that own social media platforms and search engines have significant power over what information is seen by their users. This can result in biased algorithms and decisions that limit the freedom of expression.
- Hate speech: The internet can also be a breeding ground for hate speech, which can be harmful and restrict the freedom of expression of targeted individuals or groups.
Overall, the internet has the potential to greatly enhance the freedom of expression, but it also presents significant challenges that need to be addressed to ensure that the internet remains a place where people can speak freely and informally. When it comes to the internet and freedom of speech, Article 19 recognizes the crucial role that the internet plays in enabling individuals to exercise their right to freedom of expression. The internet has opened up new channels for communication and information sharing, allowing individuals to express their opinions and ideas in ways that were not possible before.
How to ensure freedom of speech and expression through internet
However, Article 19 also recognizes that the internet can be a double-edged sword when it comes to freedom of expression. On the one hand, the internet has the potential to facilitate free and open communication, but on the other hand, it can also be used to spread hate speech, disinformation, and other harmful content.
To ensure that freedom of expression is protected on the internet, Article 19 advocates for a number of measures, including:
- Ensuring that laws and regulations related to freedom of expression are consistent with international human rights standards, including the right to freedom of expression and the right to access information.
- Promoting access to information and digital literacy, so that individuals can make informed decisions about the content they consume and share online.
- Protecting journalists, bloggers, and other online content creators from harassment, intimidation, and censorship.
- Encouraging online platforms and intermediaries to adopt transparent and consistent content moderation policies, and to ensure that their policies are consistent with international human rights standards.
- Ensuring that internet shutdowns and other restrictions on internet access are only used in limited circumstances and in accordance with international human rights law.
Overall, Article 19 believes that freedom of expression is essential to a healthy democracy, and that the internet has the potential to be a powerful tool for promoting and protecting that right. However, they also recognize that there are challenges and risks associated with the internet, and that it is important to take steps to ensure that the benefits of the internet are balanced against the need to protect individuals from harm.
Why is freedom of speech on internet a powerful weapon?
Freedom of speech on the internet is a powerful weapon because it allows individuals to express their opinions and ideas without fear of censorship or retribution. The internet has become a global platform for sharing information, and it allows people to connect with others who share similar views or experiences. This has enabled individuals to organize and mobilize around social and political causes, and to hold those in power accountable.
One of the key benefits of the internet is that it provides a level playing field for individuals to express their views. Unlike traditional media outlets, which are often controlled by a small number of corporations or individuals, the internet allows anyone with a computer or Smartphone to publish their thoughts and ideas for the world to see. This has enabled marginalized groups to have a voice and to challenge the dominant narratives that have been perpetuated by the mainstream media. However, the power of freedom of speech on the internet can also be a double-edged sword. The same platform that allows individuals to share their ideas and opinions can also be used to spread misinformation, hate speech, and propaganda. The internet has become a breeding ground for conspiracy theories and extremist ideologies, and it can be difficult to distinguish between credible sources of information and those that are not.
In summary, the freedom of speech on the internet is a powerful weapon because it enables individuals to express their ideas and opinions without fear of censorship or retribution. However, this power also comes with responsibility, and it is important to ensure that the information being shared is accurate and does not harm others.
The question of whether freedom of speech on the internet should be restricted to protect public welfare is a complex one that requires a nuanced answer. On the one hand, there are legitimate concerns about the harm that can be caused by hate speech, misinformation, and other forms of harmful speech online. These can have serious consequences for individuals, communities, and even society as a whole.
On the other hand, freedom of speech is a fundamental human right that is enshrined in many international and national laws and constitutions. It is a cornerstone of democracy and is essential for promoting the free exchange of ideas, fostering innovation, and holding those in power accountable. Any restrictions on freedom of speech must be carefully balanced against these important values. In general, restrictions on freedom of speech should be limited to cases where there is a clear and imminent danger to public welfare. This might include speech that incites violence, promotes terrorism, or threatens national security. In such cases, the restriction on speech should be narrowly tailored to address the specific harm in question, and it should be subject to judicial review to ensure that it is not overly broad or discriminatory. It is also important to note that restrictions on freedom of speech should be the exception rather than the rule. In general, it is better to promote free speech and to rely on counter-speech, education, and other forms of public discourse to address harmful speech. This requires a commitment to promoting media literacy, critical thinking, and digital citizenship, and to fostering an online culture that values open dialogue, respect for diverse perspectives, and a commitment to the common good.
Provision for freedom of speech through internet under the IT Act
Anyone who uses a computer resource or communication device to communicate “grossly offensive” or “menacing” information is guilty of a penal crime under Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000. Additionally, the clause made it illegal to repeatedly communicate false information in an effort to annoy, inconvenience, danger, obstruct, insult, harm, criminally intimidate, incite hostility, hatred, or ill will. Additionally, Section 66A made it illegal to send a “electronic mail message” with the intent to irritate or inconvenience the receiver or to deceive or mislead them regarding the communication’s origin.
The Section’s ambiguous and arbitrary terminology caused extensive misuse of both personal and political communication, and various innocent online expressions—including political commentary and humor—has become the target of criminal prosecution. The IT Act’s sections 66A and 79, as well as any rules adopted in accordance with the Act, imposed a strict liability system on internet intermediaries.
Important cases
Shreya Singhal v. Union of India
A two-judge Supreme Court of India panel issued a ruling in Shreya Singhal v. Union of India[1] in 2015 on the subject of online speech and intermediary responsibility in India. The Information Technology Act, 2000’s Section 66A, which deals with restrictions on online expression, was declared illegal by the Supreme Court on the grounds that it violates the right to free speech provided by Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution. The Court further determined that the Section was not safeguarded by the fact that it constituted a “reasonable restriction” on the right to free speech as defined by Article 19(2). The Supreme Court also repealed Section 79 and the Rules that follow it.
It was decided that content removal requests from courts or other government agencies would be the only times online intermediaries would be required to remove something. In India, the case is regarded as a turning point for online free speech.
In the case of Shreya Singhal v. Union of India, the Supreme Court struck down Section 66A, giving “Freedom of Speech & Expression” in India a new lease on life. The Hon’ble Apex Court also successfully carried out its role as a court of law for Indian citizens by reaching its decision in this landmark case. The Court provided extraordinary and improved clarity to India’s free expression jurisprudence in Shreya Singhal v. Union of India. The Shreya Singhal v. Union of India decision is still recognised as an important court rebuke of government interference with the right to free speech and expression.
CONCLUSION
Thus it can be seen that the internet has had both positive and negative effects on freedom of speech. On one hand, it has provided a platform for individuals to express their opinions and thoughts freely, without fear of censorship or persecution. The internet has also made it easier for people to access information and to engage in public discourse. On the other hand, the internet has also enabled the spread of hate speech, fake news, and misinformation. In some cases, the anonymity provided by the internet has led to increased harassment and threats directed towards individuals who express unpopular opinions. Overall, the internet has had a profound impact on freedom of speech, both positively and negatively, and it is important for society to work towards finding a balance that allows for the free exchange of ideas while also protecting individuals from harm.
References
https://mckinneylaw.iu.edu/iiclr/pdf/vol12p243.pdf
https://cdn.ifla.org/wp-content/uploads/files/assets/faife/publications/ife03.pdf
