Last week, the Madras High Court made a crucial ruling on sharing or forwarding posts on social media while refusing anticipatory bail to BJP leader S Ve Shekher who allegedly shared a derogatory Facebook post on women journalists. The court, rightly, stated that no one had any right to abuse women. However, it also held that sharing or forwarding a message in social media was equal to endorsing it.

The ruling may help curb mindless forwarding/sharing of (bad, illegal, libellious) content on social media platforms such as Facebook and WhatsApp. The court has also observed that words are more powerful than acts. When a popular personality forwards messages with harmful content it influences the common public, it has rightly observed.

However, it is unfortunate that courts and regulatory bodies should have to step in to correct such trends. Without doubt, celebrities and opinion leaders must act responsibly while sharing content on social media. However, allowing the authorities to take such corrective measures following a legal complaint could pave the way for outright violations of freedom on expression. It could legitimise crackdowns on social media posts and forwards that merely express an opinion, without that amounting to hate speech or misogyny. In this case, the court is unambiguous when it says that forwarding a social media post is akin to endorsing it. But in other situations, things may not be as black and white.

Those who regularly interact on social media would know that ‘forwards’ happen for myriad reasons. In most cases people share stuff as a Pavlovian response. Many people, especially the temperamental, shallow-thinking crowd, share stuff without even agreeing to most of the content they forward. In such contexts, holding them accountable for the content they’ve forwarded may not be prudent. There is no one-size-fits-all formula here, sadly.

Related Topics