A recent study has shown that the social media site X was employed to broadcast hate speech and Muslim economic boycott demands in the run-up to the Deepavali festival. The revelations have caused new fears about the role of the internet in fueling communal tensions.
The posts, reports analysts, included content aimed at the Muslim community, calling on Hindus not to buy anything from Muslim-owned businesses and to keep them out of economic activity during the festival season. This kind of content, experts add, can potentially lead to actions in the real world that erode both social cohesion and minority rights.
Though the platform has come back with a clarification that it is examining the content against its policy, rights-groups observe that the quantity and pace of such posts make it difficult to moderate them. They caution that economic boycott campaigns — if disseminated online — can broach topics of discrimination, free speech and platform responsibility.
The timing of the posts also lent urgency to the issue. The pre-period to important festivals tends to witness heightened communal sensitivity, and the spread of hate-speech narratives during such times heightens the possibility of escalation. In this case, the demands for economic exclusion specifically addressed Muslim-owned businesses, which raised concerns about larger trends of communal exclusion through economic routes.
Regulators are said to be looking into whether the posts contravened laws prohibiting hate speech and incitement, and whether processes of governance of platforms were sufficient to identify and take action against them. In the meantime, civil-society groups are demanding increased openness from platforms regarding how this type of content is detected and taken down, and increased coordination with law-enforcement.
The analysts argue that what this incident shows is a gap between policy and practice. Despite guidelines on preventing hate speech, operational capability to do so at scale continues to be the digitalplatforms’ challenge. For festivals or large communal events, proactive monitoring, more definitive counter-speech efforts and greater platform accountability are identified as key steps.
As India grapples with the crossroads of digital platforms, group relations and unrestricted expression, this case is a reminder: the daily platforms we use are not neutral arenas, and the stories they allow, or do not vet, have the capacity to change public opinion and social practices.
