If a question may be posed, what is the second greatest threat in the times of a pandemic, with the first being the virus? The answer would be news. And this second level threat is turning out to challenge the position of the one that supersedes it. Be informed why, because you are relatively safe from the virus when you are isolated in your houses but it is the news which penetrates the barrier of social distancing and self-isolation like a bullet through butter. You may not catch the virus but you are very susceptible to the negativity spread by the news.
An Overlooked Threat
Logically thinking, eradication of news from one’s routine is impossible and not exactly advisable in times like these. But there awaits something far more unfortunate. It is misinformation, fake news as you may call it. It is something very comical yet tremendously serious. Ranging from unrealistic home remedies to imbecile tricks of self-diagnosis, fake news spreads the unimaginable.
One of its evident maneuvers is fear mongering but what is more dangerous in today's situation is the courage mongering caused by fake news. People are suggested that this disease is not a big deal, it might even be a hoax and there is absolutely no problem in stepping out and ignoring the suggested safety measures. Sadly, this is a hard slap on the face of the efforts put in by the government and the essential-needs-workers, corona-warriors as they are called.
The Greater Evil
For once, it can be considered that this spread of misinformation is caused by the immature or the mentally underprivileged. But, there has been an emergence of something even more insidious. It is disinformation. Let us have the difference clarified. Misinformation is merely inaccurate or false information, where the source is unaware of the veracity of the news, whereas, disinformation is falsehood deliberately disseminated with an intent to disrupt public tranquility.
Groups of individuals are ignoring this fatal situation and are purposefully producing and circulating fake news in order to manipulate the public, for god knows what reasons. Such individuals can be booked under Section 54 of Disaster Management Act, 2005, which lays down punishment for such act of circulating false information regarding severity of a disaster as imprisonment upto 1 year or fine. This is the primordial provision which can be applied in situations like this. This provision can be accompanied by Section 505, 153 and 295 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, which are concerned with circulation of statements likely to disturb public tranquility, hate speech, defilement of a sacred place or object respectively.
The Problem
It is not always the case that the aforementioned three are the only constituents of fake news, for they are provisions checking disinformation and not misinformation. To our hard luck, we do not have any specific law concerning fake news in our country. Social media platforms, which have developed into a hub of fake news and negative propaganda, have not actively worked in this required direction until very recently. There are fact checking and reporting services being employed by Facebook and Instagram, WhatsApp too now has a fact checking feature of messages containing information about the pandemic. But, these measures simply do not suffice, instead they prove out be highly inefficient.
Are we so stupid that it takes a pandemic for us to understand the gravity of this widespread problem of fake news? If we can have plagiarism checking softwares at a level greater than fact-checking services, it should not be that tough to introduce a filter in the pathway of information which passes around on social media, at the least.
Apart from The Pandemic
Information is one of the defining factors of democracy. In fact, it is what flows through the veins of a political structure. A new and separate act concerned with misinformation is a dire need. The platforms are required to be directed to efficiently check misinformation and spread awareness among its users. It is on the companies to develop mechanisms which impede the spread of inaccurate data, as all the blame cannot be pushed upon the users.
It was held by the Supreme Court in the matter of Sham Sunder and Ors. vs. State of Haryana (1989) 4 SCC 630 that "there is no vicarious liability in criminal law unless the statute takes that also within its fold". Same was followed in the case R. Kalyani Vs. Janak C. Mehta (2009)1 SCC 516. These judgements lead us to the conclusion that a Whatsapp group admin cannot be held vicariously liable for an act of its member as there is no principal-agent relationship and the admin does not hold very great powers in controlling the content shared by the members. Well, of course if the group is made for the purpose of mischief, there lies an exception and the admin would be held liable. This notion is supported by the Delhi High Court’s Judgement in Ashish Bhalla vs Suresh Chawdhary, 2016, wherein it was held that a group admin is not liable for a defamatory text made by a member.
Final Words
We have judicial rulings which show that the individuals cannot be held liable easily. This reinforces the argument that the platforms are required to supervise the information flow. Also it is blatantly impractical to move the courts in every case of dissemination of misinformation. This will simply overburden the courts and do no good. We need laws which direct these companies as well as prescribe sanctions and penalties for the spreaders of misinformation. A provision of fine and imprisonment must be included.
Another great way to go is empowering the Press Council of India, established under the Press Council Act,1978. Presently, the PCI can only censure and admonish the sources of fake news, be it a channel or a newspaper or a journalist. This is no actual power as it can only disapprove the conduct and not impose any penalties.
Development of such a legislation is a huge challenge as it should ensure not to overthrow the freedom of expression and right to speech. There shall be an independent supervising body, not controlled by the government, to ensure that healthy criticism and skeptical opinion does not get subverted. A tyrannical rule over information could be an undesirable outcome, similar to the case of Singapore and Russia. All restrictions shall be reasonable, for this is the spirit of law.
What the virus is to the pandemic, the miscreants are to this nation.
-Shiwang
Comments