'Zuckerberg must apologize for Modi reel removal or Meta will lose safe harbor,' IT panel chief warns

Nishikant Dubey, chairman of India's Parliamentary Standing Committee on Communications and Information Technology, has issued a stern warning to Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg. Dubey demanded an apology for the temporary removal of Prime Minister Narendra Modi's Facebook reel, stating that Meta could lose its "safe harbor" protection under Section 79 of the Information Technology (IT) Act if it fails to comply.

“

Meta’s mindset is to destabilise the country. PM Modi’s video was taken down from 12.30 am to 5 am. This is a very serious issue. Our committee has said two things, the apology must come from Mark Zuckerberg or else we will take back the safe harbour given to Meta under Section 79.

The demand arose after Meta briefly took down Modi's reel, which addressed nationwide protests concerning the NEET-UG exam paper leak and announced measures like proposed fast-track courts. The government had sought an explanation for the removal, which occurred between 12:30 am and 5 am on July 23. Dubey asserted that Meta's "mindset is to destabilize the country" and that the committee requires an apology directly from Zuckerberg, or the company's intermediary immunity will be revoked.

During a meeting attended by officials from Meta and other tech companies, along with government ministries, Meta representatives apologized, attributing the reel's removal to an "algorithmic error." They assured the committee that such mistakes would not be repeated and that algorithms would be amended. However, some opposition Members of Parliament present at the meeting expressed reservations about revoking Meta's safe harbor protection.

“

An executive of Meta apologised for taking down PM Modi’s video from Facebook. He said there was some algorithm mistake. He also assured next time it won’t be repeated and that Meta will amend their algorithm.

While supporting stronger regulations against child sexual abuse material, deepfakes, and cyber fraud, these MPs argued that criticism of the government should not be equated with anti-national content. They emphasized the distinction between regulating technology and censoring democracy, suggesting the government might be mischaracterizing student protests as anti-national and blaming social media algorithms for amplifying them. The committee's review also encompassed broader issues like platform transparency and compliance with Indian laws.

“

We are talking about regulating technology and not democracy. This is regulation and not censorship.