Blog Assignment #3

Our rights end when those of others start. In India, the government is currently discussing if whether it should intervene or not with the “grossly offensive” or otherwise indecent user interactions in a communication service that may take place inside their borders. At first, I thought this article wanted to limit freedom of speech in another context. As in publishing defamatory allegations against the country or its government, or spreading controversial information about upcoming protocols or policies; in other words, I thought the section 66A of the Information Technology Act was an effort to censor the press. Soon enough, after two paragraphs and a half, it was clear that this document wanted to get rid of the offensive messages that could circulate in a communication service. As for any other discussion, there are certain grey areas that need to be clarified before reaching a veredict.

As you may be able to tell, freedom of speech holds a dubious position in this Act. For one, who are we tell people what to say and what to keep to themselves? However, on the other hand, this shouldn’t be an open window for rude citizens to commit profligacy (which means ignoring moral restraints). It is hard to put a standard on a term as broad as “offensive”. Besides, in reference to the question at the beginning of this paragraph, who will decide what goes into this category and how? This discussion will be filled with biased arguments based on feelings and speculation. Many more heated battles could arise from the categorization of a single word. Governments may not be able to regulate morale, but they can certainly encourage it.

The concept that this document wishes to promote sounds very promising, but it involves conflicting actions that circulate one of the most basic human rights. Until what extent will the government be allowed to even discuss such topics until it becomes life threatening? this act should be turned into a campaign promoting tolerance and respect in their communities as a whole. As S.A. Bobde mentions in the discussion about section 66A, individuals can place their own “self-imposed limits”. The awareness of such a thought is what should be spread because this problem can only get worse if younger generations are not taught about basic moral values. As for the offensive interactions that are happening right now, people need to take advantage of how easy it is to spread the word and speak up whenever this happens. There may be no law to keep it from happening, but everyone deserves to know who are their thoughtless neighbors.