By Aditya Kalra

NEW DELHI, (Reuters) – Indian officials had heated discussions with Google (NASDAQ:), Twitter (NYSE:), and Facebook (NASDAQ:). They were concerned that they did not proactively remove fake news from their platforms. Sources told Reuters the latest dispute between Big Tech and Big Government.

The officials, from the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (I&B), strongly criticised the companies and said their inaction on fake news was forcing the Indian government to order content takedowns, which in turn drew international criticism that authorities were suppressing free expression, two sources said.

According to sources familiar with the meeting, the conversations were tense and heated. This signalled a decline in the ties between the administrations of Prime Minister Narendra Modi (American tech giants) and the government of India.

Sources said that officials did not give an ultimatum to companies attending the meeting. Although the government is tightening regulations in tech, it wants to encourage companies to be more careful with content moderation.

The meeting was a follow-up to the I&B ministry’s use of “emergency powers” in December and January to order the blocking of 55 channels on Google’s YouTube platform, and some Twitter and Facebook accounts

The government claimed that channels are promoting fake news and anti-Indian content. It also stated that accounts in Pakistani were responsible for spreading disinformation.

The I&B ministry did not respond to a request for comment on the meeting, which was also attended by Indian content-sharing platforms ShareChat and Koo, which have millions of users in the country.

Facebook is now Meta. ShareChat and Twitter are also known.

Without commenting on the meeting, Alphabet (NASDAQ:) Inc’s Google said in a statement it reviews government’s requests and “where appropriate, we restrict or remove content in keeping with local laws.” Koo said it complies with local laws and has strong content moderation practices in place.

Twitter’s transparency reports show that the Indian government has made the most requests to delete content from their platform. Comparitech, an online technology site, revealed that India received 97.631 requests to remove content in 2020. It was the second highest number of such requests worldwide, behind Russia. Most of these were made to Facebook and Google.

CONSTRAINED TIES

According to sources, the senior tech executives assured the officials they took adequate measures in order to stop or reduce the spread misinformation and respond promptly on legal-valid content removal requests.

According to sources, the officials requested that Google review its guidelines in order to automatically remove any fake content.

Officials also stated that the government is disappointed by how big social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter didn’t detect and remove such content.

According to sources, instead, officials claimed that the government had to be ordered to takedown, which opened it up to criticisms and damaged its public image.

Executives from Google told the I&B officials that one way to resolve that was for the ministry to avoid making takedown decisions public. Google claimed that the two companies could cooperate with each other and address the allegations of fake content. According to one source, Google stated this.

Officials from the government rejected the idea. They claimed that the takedowns would also make it public how companies aren’t doing enough against fake news.

The government ordered the takedown of some online accounts in January. It stated that it did this to “secure India’s overall information environment”, and added that the fake content concerned sensitive subjects such as India’s Army, foreign relations, and elections in India.

Advocates for digital rights claim that such orders by the government would restrict free speech and create a troubling precedent.

Apar Gupta is the executive director of Internet Freedom Foundation. She stated, “Detailed takedown orders cannot be made public by government.” He added that there was no explanation for why the order was taken.

According to him, this enabled authorities to restrict content that did not infringe on public order and security.