In a move that signals a shift in how online content may be regulated, the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology has proposed amendments to the Information Technology Rules, 2021, aimed at bringing online user-generated news and current affairs content within a broader regulatory framework.
While the draft does not explicitly categorize individual users as publishers, it introduces provisions that would subject such content to scrutiny similar to that applied to recognized publishers. Legal experts note that this could extend regulatory oversight to a wider class of digital actors, including independent creators and social media influencers operating across platforms such as Google, Facebook, Instagram and X.
The proposal comes amid a broader policy push to formalize and expand India’s digital ecosystem, including parallel efforts to scale the creator economy through investments in animation, visual effects and gaming infrastructure across educational institutions.
FCRF Launches Premier CISO Certification Amid Rising Demand for Cybersecurity Leadership
Safe Harbour and the Compliance Threshold
At the center of the proposed changes is Section 79 of the Information Technology Act, which provides “safe harbour” protection to intermediaries acting as neutral platforms. This protection shields them from liability for third-party content, provided they comply with due diligence requirements.
However, under Rule 3(b), the exemption may no longer apply if intermediaries fail to remove content after receiving legal notice from the government. Legal observers suggest that the amendments could increase the exposure of platforms to liability if they do not act in alignment with official directives.
The draft further mandates that intermediaries comply not only with formal rules but also with a broader range of executive instruments—including advisories, directions, standard operating procedures and guidelines issued by the ministry. Experts say this could effectively widen the scope of enforceable compliance obligations beyond codified law.
Oversight Mechanisms and Institutional Reach
The amendments also propose strengthening the role of an existing inter-departmental government committee. Previously empowered to review and block content from recognized publishers, the committee’s mandate may now extend to all news and current affairs content hosted online, regardless of its source.
In addition, the committee would be authorized to review unresolved complaints related to violations of the code of ethics by digital media entities. This includes examining decisions made by a publisher’s internal grievance redressal mechanism as well as any affiliated self-regulatory bodies.
If a complaint remains unaddressed within a stipulated timeframe, the committee may intervene directly. This layered oversight structure, according to policy analysts, formalizes a multi-tiered system of review that places greater emphasis on accountability across the content lifecycle.
Concerns Over Executive Power and Free Expression
Legal and policy experts have pointed to the expanding role of executive direction in the proposed framework. By requiring compliance with advisories and guidelines that may not undergo public consultation, the amendments could increase the discretionary reach of the government in content governance.
Kazim Rizvi, founding director of the policy think tank The Dialogue, described the emerging framework as one that creates a “continuous compliance environment,” particularly for large platforms, necessitating stronger internal coordination across legal, policy and operational teams.
Others have raised concerns about the implications for free expression. Meghna Bal of the Esya Centre noted that previous content-blocking orders under the rules had already faced criticism for being overbroad and lacking transparency. The proposed changes, she suggested, may intensify these concerns.
Harsh Walia, a partner at Khaitan & Co., observed that the move indicates tighter scrutiny of “news-like” content circulating on social media platforms—an area that has grown rapidly alongside the rise of independent digital voices.
Together, the proposed amendments reflect an evolving regulatory approach that seeks to reconcile platform accountability with the scale and diversity of online content, even as debates over transparency and speech rights continue to unfold.
