By Priyanshi Jain and Ashit Srivastava
In recent years, the proliferation of misinformation and its impact on public discourse and democratic processes have raised concerns globally. False information can spread rapidly online, leading to confusion, polarization and potentially harmful consequences. To address this issue, governments and tech companies have recognized the importance of supporting and collaborating with fact-checking organizations. In the digital age, fact-checking websites are essential for confirming the veracity of information and dispelling false information and fake news. These platforms assist to stop the spread of fraudulent or misleading content and are useful tools for people looking for trustworthy information. Fact-checking has become increasingly important since the internet has taken over as many people’s major source of news and information.
A variety of materials, including articles, social media postings, videos and photos, are investigated by journalists, researchers and professionals working for online fact-checking platforms. They evaluate the reliability of the sources, cross-reference data, and offer judgments of the veracity of assertions based on the available evidence. Fact-checkers seek to deliver accurate and unbiased information to the public so that people may make educated judgments.
However, online fact-checking platforms have also faced challenges and controversies. While their primary objective is to provide accurate information, they operate in a complex digital landscape where misinformation can be intentionally disseminated to deceive the public. Fact-checkers sometimes encounter resistance or backlash from individuals or organizations whose claims are debunked. Criticism can come from various sources, including politicians, conspiracy theorists or partisan groups who may perceive fact-checking as biased or an attempt to suppress certain narratives.
The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology had previously suggested that news that has been deemed “fake” by the PIB’s fact-checking team will not be permitted on online intermediaries. The reference to PIB was later dropped from the IT (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Amendment Rules, 2023. The social media companies have submitted a proposal to the centre to establish the Misinformation Combat Alliance—a network of fact-checkers that will verify misleading content on their platforms. The Alliance will act as a “certification body” that will serve as a means of identifying “trusted” fact-checkers. Efforts to regulate online fact-checking units have been in place for some time. In April 2023, the government notified Information Technology Rules, 2023, which led to the establishment of a government-backed fact-checking unit. The body has been empowered to label online content pertaining to the Union government as “fake” or “misleading”. However, it has also come under criticism from several quarters, including a court case which called for the repeal of the provision.
Online fact-checking platforms could be required to obtain a registration from the centre. The registration plan could be carried out in phases, with fact-checking units of legacy and reputed media companies being allowed to seek registration in the first phase. There is also a plan to not register “non-legacy” fact-checking bodies. The government is also in conversation with the industry to develop a self-regulatory organisation for fact checking information which does not relate to the government. The Digital India Bill is expected to classify various types of online intermediaries, including fact-checking portals, The Indian Express had earlier reported. A reason behind the classification is that the centre wants to prescribe specific rules to different types of intermediaries. For fact-checking platforms, one of those rules could be to seek registration from a government body, it is understood. A case against the government fact-checking body is already in the Bombay High Court.
In India, the government’s plan to require registration for online fact-checking platforms under the Digital India Bill is an attempt to enhance accountability in the digital space. By establishing a registration process, the government aims to distinguish reliable fact-checking organizations from less reputable or fraudulent ones. The proposed measure could be implemented in phases, starting with established media companies’ fact-checking units.
The registration requirement is part of a broader effort to classify various types of online intermediaries, including fact-checking portals, under the Digital India Bill. The goal is to create a regulatory framework that promotes responsible online behaviour and addresses challenges associated with misinformation, cybersecurity, and online content governance. The specific details and implications of the registration process would need to be outlined in the legislation.
It will be interesting to mention that in the original Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules 2021, under Rule 3(1)(b)(vi) read with Rule 3(2) and 3(1)(g), there was provision for a voluntary complaint which can be filed by any individual in any case where information communicated is patently false or misleading in nature. And the social media intermediary would have been obligated to remove such content. This piece of regulation was competent enough to cover cases of misinformation even against the central government. But, this whole idea of a fact-checking unit (brought by 2023 amendment) for the government is an extra precaution taken by the government to ensure that even by mistake no information is posted/hosted or shared against the government which is patently false. Yet, this will not bring an end to the overall ambiance of political disinformation (we require a more vigil civil society members to flag every false information spread on the social media platform) which is spread within the society, as many political parties are blatantly using the social media platforms for spreading hatred through proxy accounts.
Moreover, fact-checkers themselves must uphold rigorous standards of accuracy, impartiality and transparency. They are constantly under scrutiny to ensure that their own work is fair, objective and free from bias. Challenges can arise when fact-checkers make mistakes or when their methodologies or conclusions are questioned. Maintaining public trust is essential for the effectiveness of fact-checking initiatives. The main ones are:
Alt News: It is an Indian fact-checking website that has gained prominence for debunking misinformation and fake news. In 2019, Alt News faced criticism and online harassment from individuals and groups who disagreed with its fact-checks and attempts to debunk false narratives. However, Alt News continues to operate and has garnered a significant following for its work.
Boom Live: Boom Live is another well-known fact-checking organization in India. In 2020, Boom Live faced legal threats from a political party after publishing fact-checks that contradicted the party’s claims. The party sent a legal notice to Boom Live, alleging defamation. However, Boom Live defended its fact-checks and continued its work without major disruptions.
SMHoaxSlayer: SMHoaxSlayer is an independent fact-checking platform that focuses on debunking hoaxes and misinformation. In 2019, the website faced temporary suspension by its hosting provider due to alleged violations of their terms of service. The suspension was eventually lifted, and SMHoaxSlayer resumed its fact-checking activities.
Postcard News: Postcard News, an online news portal, faced scrutiny in 2018 for publishing false and misleading information. The Karnataka Police initiated a criminal investigation against the website’s founder for spreading fake news. The case highlighted the importance of holding platforms accountable for disseminating misinformation.
The potential challenges that online fact-checking platforms may face due to regulations and the requirement for registration include:
- Government control and censorship: The registration process and government oversight can potentially lead to increased government control over fact-checking platforms. This may raise concerns about censorship and interference with the freedom of expression. If the registration process is not transparent and fair, it could allow governments to exert undue influence over fact-checking organizations and potentially manipulate the dissemination of information.
- Bias and partisanship: There is a risk that government registration requirements may lead to the favour of certain fact-checking units associated with “legacy and reputed” media companies. This could create a bias in favour of established media organizations and hinder the entry of new, independent fact-checking platforms. It is crucial to ensure a level-playing field for all fact-checking units to maintain impartiality and credibility.
- Impact on smaller and independent fact-checkers: Registration requirements could pose significant challenges for smaller and independent fact-checking organizations. Compliance with the registration process may involve substantial administrative burdens, costs and resources, which could disproportionately affect smaller players in the industry. This may limit diversity and competition in the fact-checking ecosystem and undermine the overall effectiveness of combating misinformation.
- Threats to privacy and anonymity: Registration processes may require fact-checking platforms to disclose personal information and data, which could compromise the privacy and anonymity of fact-checkers and their sources. Protecting the identity and safety of fact-checkers is crucial to ensure their independence and protect them from potential retaliation or harassment.
- Burden of compliance: The introduction of registration and regulatory requirements can impose additional burdens on fact-checking platforms, diverting their attention and resources away from their primary task of verifying information. Compliance with regulations may involve legal and administrative complexities, creating hurdles for fact-checkers and potentially hindering their ability to operate effectively.
- Trust and credibility: The imposition of regulations and government oversight may have unintended consequences on the perception of fact-checking platforms’ independence and credibility. Public trust in fact-checkers relies on their ability to operate impartially and without undue influence. If the registration process and regulatory measures are not perceived as objective and transparent, it could erode public trust in the fact-checking ecosystem as a whole.
It is essential to strike a balance between regulating online fact-checking platforms to ensure accountability and preventing the misuse of information, while also safeguarding their independence, impartiality and effectiveness in countering misinformation.
—Priyanshi Jain is a student at Dharmashastra National Law University, Jabalpur, while Ashit Srivastava is Assistant Professor at Dharmashastra National Law University, Jabalpur