Facebook accused of promoting hate speech in India

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, right, hugs Prime Minister of India Narendra Modi at Facebook offices in Menlo Park, Calif. Facebook India is under fire. (Files/AP)
Short Url
Updated 18 August 2020
Follow

Facebook accused of promoting hate speech in India

  • Ruling party members posted incendiary messages, says Congress Party

NEW DELHI: Facebook was accused Monday of promoting hate speech and destabilizing democracy in India by the country’s main opposition Congress Party.

The social media giant has one of its biggest markets in India, with more than 340 million users.

But a report last week in the Wall Street Journal said the platform had ignored incendiary messages posted by members of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) to protect its business interests.

Facebook did not delete an anti-Muslim video posted by a southern Indian legislator, T. Raja Singh, in March until the newspaper challenged the social network about it.

It added that Facebook India’s public policy executive, Ankhi Das, opposed applying “hate speech rules to Singh and at least three other Hindu nationalist individuals and groups flagged internally for promoting or participating in the violence.”

Das, according to the paper’s report, told employees that “punishing violations by politicians from Modi’s party would damage the company’s business prospects in the country.”

“Across the world, in many countries, Facebook has removed pages citing ‘coordinated inauthentic behavior,’ but why has Facebook never done something similar with rumor-mongering and hate speeches in India?” Congress spokesperson Supriya Shrinate said at a press conference on Monday. “With all responsibility, I will say that Facebook’s inaction destabilizes our democracy. More often than not, Facebook takes no action and, even worse, allows objectionable content to continue despite being brought to notice.”

Facebook denied the accusations, saying that it did not favor any political party in India.

“We prohibit hate speech and content that incites violence, and we enforce these policies globally without regard to anyone’s political position or party affiliation,” it said in a statement to Arab News. “While we know there is more to do, we’re making progress on enforcement and conducting regular audits of our process to ensure fairness and accuracy.”

Congress wants a parliamentary committee inquiry into the issue.

“The Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) should examine how Facebook and WhatsApp are working to help the BJP in the elections and to create an atmosphere of hatred,” it said in a statement.

The BJP mocked the opposition’s demand and said the party should “look within itself.”

“It’s ridiculous,” BJP spokesperson Sudesh Verma told Arab News. “If the allegation itself is ludicrous, the demand for the JPC probe would come in the same category. You imagine something and then make a demand. The country does not work on this. If anything, they should approach Facebook. It has given clarifications already. The Congress leadership is frustrated.”

Experts said that the BJP had “weaponized” Facebook and WhatsApp and was using them as a strategy to “mold” public opinion.

“The top brass of Facebook in India are bending over backwards to placate the ruling BJP led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi,” New Delhi-based journalist Paranjoy G. Thakurta told Arab News.

Thakurta co-authored a book last year - “The Real Face of Facebook in India” - that explored how social media was propagating falsehoods in the country.

“Large numbers of Indians have been receiving fake, false, half-truth, inflammatory, incendiary information, and this influenced political preferences in the run-up to the election in 2019,” he said. “They weaponized WhatsApp, and it has become like an army for the rightwing group. Facebook and WhatsApp are not neutral. The playing field is not level. The Wall Street Journal article has highlighted how deep the nexus is between the top officials of Facebook and India’s ruling regime.”

Another New Delhi-based journalist, Urmilesh Urmil, said Facebook was “ideologically- oriented” and favored the ruling right-wing party.

“This is a matter of concern and affects the functioning of democracy in India,” he told Arab News.

In April, Facebook announced plans to invest $5 billion in Reliance Jio, the largest mobile and internet company in India. It is owned by the country’s richest person, Mukesh Ambani.

The deal is expected to give Facebook an even more significant foothold in India.

“The fact that this international global digital giant is tied up with India’s biggest telecommunication provider Reliance Jio means that global monopoly and the local bigwig have come together,” Thakurta added. “I worry how much control and influence these large conglomerates will have in influencing what people read and watch, thereby influencing attitudes and preferences, including their political behavior.”


Ireland’s defense gaps exposed as EU presidency nears

Cathal Berry, former Irish army special forces member, on The Curragh plain. (AFP)
Updated 7 sec ago
Follow

Ireland’s defense gaps exposed as EU presidency nears

  • Militarily neutral Ireland is not a NATO member, yet its waters — seven times its landmass — account for around 16 percent of the EU’s total

THE CURRAGH: Sheep amble around steel fences skirting Ireland’s largest military base on a grassy plain west of Dublin, a bucolic scene masking an underfunded defense force struggling with outdated equipment.

Ireland’s threadbare military and its long-standing policy of neutrality are under heightened scrutiny as the country prepares to assume the rotating EU presidency from July.

“Ireland is the only EU country with no primary radar system, nor have we sonar or anti-drone detection equipment — let alone the ability to disable drones,” said former Irish special forces member Cathal Berry.

“We can’t even monitor the airspace over our capital city and main airport,” he said as he surveyed Ireland’s main military base at The Curragh.

Militarily neutral Ireland is not a NATO member, yet its waters — seven times its landmass — account for around 16 percent of the EU’s total.

Nearly three-quarters of transatlantic subsea cables run close to or beneath them.

But the Irish army numbers only a few thousand troops, is focused largely on UN peacekeeping missions and has neither a combat air force nor a sizeable navy.

Ireland’s annual defense spending of roughly €1.2 billion is the lowest in Europe at around 0.2 percent of the GDP, well below the EU average of 1.3.

“Neutrality itself is actually a fine policy. If you want to have it, it must be defended,” said retired Irish army colonel Dorcha Lee.

“That’s the whole point. Undefended neutrality is absolutely definitely not the way to go.”

Berry points to a long-standing “complacency” about defense in Ireland that has fueled a vacuum in debate over neutrality and military spending.

“If you wanted to squeeze the EU without any risk of NATO retaliation, Ireland is where you’d come,” he said, adding that also applied to US interests in Europe.

US tech giants like Google, Apple and Meta have their European headquarters in Ireland, supported by vast data centers that analysts say are vulnerable to cyberattacks.

European Council President Antonio Costa said he was still “confident” Ireland could protect EU summits during its presidency.

Defense Minister Helen McEntee has pledged that new counter-drone technology will be in place by then.

Speaking in front of a row of aging army vehicles at the Curragh military site, she also announced a broader increase in military spending, although the actual details remain unclear.

On Dec. 17, the Irish government said it plans to buy a military radar system from France at a reported cost of between €300 and €500 million (around $350-$585 million).

For Paul Murphy, a left-wing opposition member of parliament, “scaremongering over allegedly Russian drones with concrete evidence still unprovided” is

giving the government cover to steer Ireland away from neutrality toward NATO.

“But it’s more important than ever that we’re genuinely neutral in a world that is increasingly dangerous,” he told AFP.

Ireland has historically prioritized economic and social spending over defense investment, he said.

“Joining an arms race that Ireland cannot compete in would waste money that should be spent on real priorities like climate change,” he added.

Pro-neutrality sentiment still holds sway among the Irish public, with an Irish Times/Ipsos poll earlier this year finding 63 percent of voters remained in favor of it.

And very few voices in Ireland are calling to join NATO.

Left-winger Catherine Connolly, who won Ireland’s presidential election in October by a landslide, is seen as a pacifist.

“I will be a voice for peace, a voice that builds on our policy of neutrality,” she said in her victory speech.