Policy Approaches to Digitally Instigated Violence from Misinformation on Online Platforms

15 May

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This policy brief focusses on the problem of mobilised violence instigated and exacerbated by online platforms and communication apps through the spread of misinformation, and discusses approaches toward its mitigation, with a final recommendation.

It was estimated that by 2025, India will have over 900 million internet users. This would not only involve people passively consuming information over the internet, but also actively transmitting and communicating it, without necessarily checking for its accuracy. A glimpse of this has unfolded in the last few years, with the spread of misinformation online and through virtual channels leading to violence toward different groups of people.

A common response from the authorities, such as governments and law enforcement agencies, towards stabilising such situations has been to cut off internet access to affected areas to stop the flow of information (and misinformation) and allow the situation to calm down. This paper attempts to understand and analyse the various policy approaches to digitally instigated violence from misinformation on online platforms, including internet shutdowns, in order to recommend possible ways forward.

To this end, three approaches towards the mitigation of such violence are discussed: the creation of an engaged community and well-prepared law enforcement; surveillance of suspects, followed by preventive detention and punitive arrests; and internet shutdowns. As may be evident, these approaches are a mix of preventive and corrective interventions.

These approaches are analysed and scored across a range of five criteria: constitutionality (does the intervention remain within the bounds of the Indian constitution?); effectiveness (does the benefit of the intervention outweigh its costs?); acceptance (is the intervention acceptable to various stakeholder groups, such as citizens, political representatives, and law enforcement agencies?); timeliness (does the intervention produce the desired result in a timely manner?); and finally, civil liberties (does the intervention safeguard (or minimally infringe) upon citizens’ civil liberties?).

This paper concludes that while all three approaches have their place in the larger law-and-order situation in a country, it is extremely important to build up both the citizens and law enforcement to a state of readiness so that they can work in tandem to prevent the spread of misinformation and associated violence and instability. It is also important to bring policing into the digital age, given the fast-moving digitisation of the world.

I: INTRODUCTION

The number of internet users in India is set to exceed 900 million in 2025, spurred on by factors such as affordable data plans, increased access to smart phones, Indic language content, and the government’s push toward digitisation. This digitally connected India is also changing patterns of information dissemination and consumption, with increasing dependence on online platforms (social media platforms such as X, Facebook and Instagram) and communication apps (chat and messaging platforms such as Telegram and WhatsApp).

In fact, per a 2024 report by Reuters Institute, almost 71 per cent of Indians prefer accessing news through online media, with 54 per cent Indians consuming news through YouTube, 48 per cent through WhatsApp, 35 per cent through Facebook, 33 per cent through Instagram and 20 per cent through Telegram. These statistics speak to not just the levels of consumption of online content, but also a indicate a high level of trust for the information circulating on these platforms and apps. It is, therefore, not surprising that the same online avenues are “weaponised” to spread misinformation and disinformation among societal groups.

In the last few years, there have been incidents of misinformation campaigns via digital means in the Indian context as well. One such incident happened in 2018 in a village in Maharashtra, where five people were lynched by a mob on suspicion of being child kidnappers based on rumours circulating on WhatsApp.

One way that law enforcement agencies and governments have attempted to quell the spread of such misinformation has been through internet shutdowns in the affected areas. Such shutdowns typically continue to remain in place until the situation is deemed to have normalised. For instance, in 2024, the state of Manipur saw an extended period of internet shutdown to curb misinformation after the discovery of six bodies in Jiribam district led to widespread protests and ethnic violence. In fact, internet shutdowns have become so common that 283 documented shutdowns were reported globally in 2023, with India at the top of the list, enforcing 116 shutdowns. (In 2024, this reduced to 60 times; however, the steep decline does not necessarily indicate a trend but could be the result of specific law and order situations in certain states.) This was the sixth consecutive year that India experienced the world’s highest number of internet shutdowns.

In its 2020 judgement in the landmark Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India case, the Supreme Court of India held that “an indefinite suspension of internet services would be illegal under Indian law and that orders for internet shutdown must satisfy the tests of necessity and proportionality.” Additionally, the court mandated that any shutdown by the government would have to be made public, and would be subject to judicial review. This case was an important milestone in the context of internet shutdowns in India, given that it helped safeguard against its arbitrary implementation.

In the context outlined in this section, this brief will now evaluate different mitigation strategies for mobilised violence instigated and exacerbated by online platforms and communication apps, including internet shutdowns, in order to recommend the most effective intervention to prevent the spread of misinformation.

II: POLICY INTERVENTIONS

This section explores three possible interventions to curb the spread of mobilised violence instigated and exacerbated by online platforms and communication apps. These interventions are a mix of preventive (Approach 1) and corrective (Approaches 2 & 3) action, as shall become evident. The proposed options may be implemented over time, in a phased and sequential manner. Approach 1 can serve as the foundational level, focusing on building baseline capacity within law enforcement agencies. Approach 2 may be activated selectively in situations where a heightened response is warranted. Approach 3 should be considered only as a last resort, reserved for scenarios involving imminent threats to life or property. Over time, the goal should be to strengthen Approach 1 as the primary mode of operation, supplemented by limited and targeted use of Approach 2 where necessary.

Approach 1: Creation of an engaged community and a well-prepared law enforcement force

This approach advocates preventive action in order to effectively manage situations of mobilised violence spurred on by digital communication. It may be split into two sub-approaches:

1. Create an engaged community

A trust deficit between local communities and law enforcement often leads to the breakdown of law and order in that area as well as public safety. In a diverse country like India, "building trust through accountability and transparency" becomes all the more crucial. One of the ways law enforcement has begun to build a relationship of trust and accountability is through community policing, a strategy "that involves the active engagement of police officers with members of the community they serve". One such example is the Government of Kerala’s 'Janamaithri Suraksha' initiative that involves active co-operation between the police and citizens in crime prevention in local communities.

Another way to build active participation of the community is through the setting up of peace committees. Such committees typically include several members from different communities in a particular area who get together—or are brought together, often by law enforcement—to discuss matters of local relevance and significance. For instance, in 2023 Nuh and Sohna districts of Haryana saw communal clashes. The local administration in Nuh convened a peace committee meeting to calm communal tensions, discuss issues of concern, as well as to identify any anti-social elements that may worsen the law-and-order situation. Interestingly, the peace committee in Sohna was requested by the administration to ensure "no one from either communities post anything insensitive on social media", thus indicating the influence of local leaders. While in this case, the peace committee was brought together post facto, we recommend regular interactions between such committees and law enforcement as well as local administration to build trust as well as to prevent situations destabilising to the extent that they did in this particular example.

An example of a “preventive” peace committee meeting of the sort discussed in this brief was held in 2022 in Varanasi right before Eid-ul-Azha, where the police commissioner appealed to all religious leaders to support the maintenance of order in the city. Peace committee meetings were held in each police station area, highlighting the hyperlocal preventive action being taken. Similar peace committee meetings have been held in Hyderabad as well, to discuss sensitive religious issues.

While it is important for local authorities to be acquainted with local leaders in the community, it is also important to recognise the realities of an increasingly digital world. For readier and easier access to the community, it may be pertinent for law enforcement to consider connecting not just in the physical world, but also in the digital one. A possible strategy is for police officers to bring community leaders together in a group on a messaging app such as WhatsApp, beyond what may be considered business as usual. Shutting down misinformation and rumours in real time and instantly is possible through such groups.

At a larger civic level as well, building the populace’s digital literacy, especially the use and misuse of social media, needs to be introduced at the school level.

Unintended Consequences: The downside to more active digital communication between police officers and the local community would be excessive access, and potential overburdening of law enforcement with minor day-to-day grievances of the citizens.

2. Build a well-prepared law enforcement force

Even in peacetime, it is important to ensure that the preparedness of law enforcement continues at the levels that may be required during times of crisis. This preparedness can manifest in several ways.

The first would have to do with actual operational preparedness, specifically, whether officers would be able to respond effectively and efficiently when a situation asks for it. Towards this end, it is important to have standard operating procedures (SOPs) such as emergency response plans in place. This strategy essentially allows for an action plan with detailed protocols and guidelines for law enforcement to fall back on when emergencies arise. Parallelly, operational preparedness also includes an appropriate availability and supply of resources that may be utilised in controlling situations, for instance, anti-riot gear.

There is also a need to regularly take stock of operational preparedness and update SOPs as well as ensure availability of resources. Reviews by senior officers as well as mock drills for officers on the ground are crucial in ensuring that such SOPs are effective. Mock drills must be held to ensure that officers are trained in the use of equipment and gear.

It is important for law enforcement to build its own digital presence, especially as a trusted source of information. This will come especially handy to proactively debunk misinformation as well as actively share updates with the citizenry.

There has also been a move towards digital policing in recent years. This has included CCTV surveillance of public areas with the objective of enhanced public safety. With the advent of Artificial Intelligence, this form of surveillance has also incorporated facial recognition.

Unintended Consequences: This has, however, led to a concerning phenomenon called “dragnet surveillance”, or “indiscriminate data collection beyond just suspects or criminals”, thus infringing on the right to privacy of the citizenry at large.

Approach 2: Surveillance of suspects, followed by preventive detention and punitive arrests

Traditionally, law enforcement has relied on undercover officers as well as informants to carry out its duties. Given the increasing digitisation of the physical world, it is important to transpose and adopt these established offline police networks online for prevention as well as management of law-and-order situations. In fact, in 2013, Delhi Police recognised the need for a digital extension of their force in order to "pre-empt terror and law and order situations" through a form of "cyber patrolling" to monitor social networking platforms for certain kinds of content. A new form of digital surveillance is the use of metadata by the police. This includes accessing information that “records an individual’s electronic device and network activities, including call detail records (CDR), location data, IP addresses, image properties, message timestamps, device details, and social media profiles”.

Unintended Consequences: While Delhi Police assured citizens that their intent was simply to monitor, rather than censor, such forms of surveillance can potentially cross the line into curbing citizens’ freedom of speech and expression.

Detention of suspects would also indicate a more active and sweeping use of provisions of the National Security Act (NSA), 1980, while also increasing the risk of its misuse.

Both surveillance as well as detention of suspects may lead to concerns of abuse of power, including the infringement of privacy of potentially non-guilty individuals. This can be exacerbated by the biases and prejudices that exist within the police forces as well, with certain individuals as well as certain communities being monitored. Such surveillance may ultimately lead to the creation of an environment of fear and mistrust, where citizens not only feel wary of approaching the police but actively distrust them. It is, therefore, important to ensure the necessary and appropriate oversight on such activities.

Approach 3: Internet shutdowns

Governments around the world, including in India, have used internet shutdowns as a silver bullet in order to halt any and all communication towards the preservation of law and order. The use of internet shutdowns is attractive in two main ways – first, it severely slows down the spread of misinformation or incendiary rumours, and second, it makes it difficult for people to mobilise. This is especially useful in cases where the cause of the mobilised violence is some form of online or digital communication.

Unintended Consequences: However, internet shutdowns result in several unintended consequences. As the Software Freedom Law Center notes, they have a human as well as economic impact. Specifically, such a shutdown contravenes fundamental rights, including the right to freedom of speech and expression and the right to internet access. Furthermore, lack of internet access can often mean a lack of access to essential services as well.

It was estimated that between January and June 2023, internet shutdowns cost India US$1.9 billion. Moreover, the shutdowns in that six-month period also led to a loss of nearly $118 million in foreign investment and over 21,000 job losses. As is evident, shutdowns have been found to be extremely disruptive to economic activity.

Given the far-reaching impact of internet shutdowns, the Supreme Court has put down certain guiding principles for situations where decisions on the imposition of internet shutdowns are to be taken. These are centred on the principle of proportionality, which essentially asks for a balance between ‘rights’ and ‘restrictions’:

Transparency –Make public all orders relating to internet shutdowns to provide the affected populace the opportunity to challenge such actions before the courts/other bodies.
Duration –Any restrictions on the freedom of speech and expression to be for a limited time.
Governance –Timely reviews of such decisions, including revocation of the shutdown, if found to be against the principle of proportionality.
Essentiality –Essential services, such as e-banking and health, must continue to operate.
Minimisation –Shutdowns to be enforced only in cases deemed to be ‘emergencies’ to minimise and avoid misuse.

SECTION III: ANALYSIS

In order to assess the policy interventions discussed in the previous section, we determined five criteria against which to evaluate each of the three approaches. These criteria were then assigned weightages based on their perceived importance in determining the final policy recommendation. The chosen criteria, their ideal scenario, and weightages are as follows:

Constitutionality (20 per cent) – The intervention remains within the bounds of and adheres to the Indian Constitution.
Effectiveness (25 per cent) – The benefit of the intervention (mitigation of mobilised violence) outweighs its cost (human and economic).
Acceptance (25 per cent) – The intervention is acceptable to various stakeholder groups, such as citizens, political representatives, and law enforcement agencies.
Timeliness (15 per cent) – The intervention produces the desired result (mitigation of mobilised violence) in a timely manner.
Civil Liberties (15 per cent) – The intervention does not infringe upon (or minimally infringes upon) citizens’ civil liberties.

As may be observed from Table 3.2, ‘Approach 1 – Creating an engaged community and well-prepared law enforcement’, which focuses on prevention, scores the highest. It performs especially well in the sphere of civil liberties, that is, it minimally infringes upon citizens’ rights in its implementation.
It may be noted that both the weightages as well as the scores accorded to each criterion and approach were a result of consensus among the authors of this paper.

SECTION IV: CONCLUSION

This brief evaluated three approaches to mitigate situations of mobilised violence instigated and exacerbated by online platforms and communication apps. Of these three approaches, two focussed on corrective action (internet shutdowns and surveillance of suspects), while one discussed preventive action (in the form of an engaged community and well-prepared law enforcement). The ideal framework would focus on a prevention-detection response; in other words, all three approaches have their place in maintaining law and order situation and have to be utilised as per the ground realities.

It may especially be important to note that the prevention of such violence is extremely important in the larger scheme of things. Prevention is also the approach that will take the longest time to implement, as it involves building and improving the communities’ trust in law enforcement, while also training police officers to tackle unstable situations in an effective manner.

The paper also discussed the importance of adapting traditional policing to the meet the needs of the ever-growing digitisation. Age-old policing methods such as the use of informers and undercover officers have to be transposed online to ensure citizens are safe in not just the physical but digital world as well.

With an ever-connected digital world, it is important for law enforcement to take the “cyber bull” by the horns and actively develop mitigation strategies and protocols that can be used in conflicts.