Spreading Rumours through WhatsApp and Other Social Media

Of late, it has become fashionable to post all and sundry information on social networking sites like Facebook and WhatsApp. In a nation with a tech-savvy Prime Minister taking selfies with other dignitaries, and encouraging his visitors to take selfies with him, this selfie mania is quite understandable. But when it comes to posting someone else's picture or a controversial opinion or spreading rumours, or even just information without knowing the genuineness and authenticity of the news, it becomes a serious issue.

For a nation marching ahead in Digital India, e-governance and digital communication, it is a major concern

i) if the people are not aware of the repercussions of spreading falsehood in a social networking site, or

ii) if the law is inefficient to curb such menaces, or

iii) if the police is incapacitated technically or legally to handle such activities.

Earlier, there was a powerful Section 66A in the Information Technology Amendment Act, 2008 that stipulated punishment for sending offensive messages through communication services. It spoke of 'grossly offensive' messages of 'menacing character' and messages transmitted 'for the purpose of causing annoyance', knowing to be false, to deceive or mislead etc. All these expressions were best suited to define an offence of spreading falsehood, cyber stalking or even alarming the public through an electronic communication. Unfortunately, this section was repealed by the Supreme Court in an historic judgement in March 2015.

Spreading rumours and disturbing public peace continues to be a punishable offence, as per the 155-year old time-tested Indian Penal Code and the police still have the powers to book culprits who spread unfounded messages on a public post like Facebook or WhatsApp and cause public disturbance. It is better to think twice about the genuineness of a post in WhatsApp or about its necessity to be made available in a public domain. Those posting the photos of their private domestic functions should think twice before posting it on Facebook. Would they display their wedding album or the photo album of their domestic function at a railway station, and would they call the people on the street to their house to show them these photographs! Then, why post them in public domains?

Most of the media rejoiced when the Section 66A was removed by the Supreme Court in a misguided comfort that freedom of expression has been protected. The government in an overt move to project itself as a saviour of the freedom of press, did not defend the strength of the Section, and allowed it to die. Now, during the massive rains in the states of Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh and in other similar critical situations, when people resort to and spread some unfounded news through WhatsApp, the same media is now concerned that a powerful weapon in the hands of the police has been lost.

On the question of posting some indecent selfies and socially disturbing photos on the networking sites, just as the originator of the news should behave responsibly and desist from posting them, the subsequent users too, who simply forward the mail or the information, should show the responsibility and discretion of a mature netizen.

By V.Rajendran, Editorial Team