New Delhi — The Indian government has put forward new changes to its existing IT regulations, targeting a broader range of online news contributors, including influencers and podcasters on platforms like Facebook, YouTube, and X. This has sparked significant backlash from digital rights activists and independent news creators.
Recently, the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) proposed adjustments to India’s IT rules that oversee digital media content. These updates, known as the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Second Amendment Rules, 2026, aim to tighten existing rules and tackle issues of fake news, hate speech, and deepfakes. The government has welcomed public feedback, which is open until April 14.
The proposed changes will extend existing regulations to cover “users who are not publishers,” meaning that anyone sharing information on “news and current affairs” will now fall under a new “code of ethics” similar to that applied to registered news publishers.
If these amendments take effect, social media platforms will be required to comply with government orders if they wish to maintain their “safe harbor” provisions—an important legal protection for online users. Experts have pointed out that this could give the government increased control over news-related posts shared by regular users, including independent journalists and podcasters.
Worried about these developments, digital rights advocates and independent creators have voiced fears that the government could implement strict censorship across social media. Akash Banerjee, a creator from the YouTube channel The Deshbhakt, expressed his concern that these changes might create a “climate of fear,” pushing many content creators to self-censor. He noted that despite many regulations, issues like hate speech and fake news persist, while critical posts are increasingly removed.
Though officials deny any targeted censorship, instances have been reported of accounts being blocked, particularly those known for their satirical content about the government. One user, Kumar Nayan (@Nehr_who?), mentioned that he received no prior notice for his account being blocked, although a court later ordered its restoration.
Nikhil Pahwa, a digital rights activist, criticized the amendments as a means to reinforce government censorship. He highlighted that citizens often receive no explanation or chance for a hearing when their speech is restricted.
S Krishnan, Secretary of MeitY, defended the new rules by stating that they align with the law and the Constitution, emphasizing the need for a unified framework to manage news content that’s increasingly shared by everyday citizens.
In the midst of this, a recent report from the U.S. government showed that American social media companies have seen an uptick in takedown requests that seem to be politically motivated.
Sandeep Singh (@ActivistSandeep), whose account was blocked in March, shared his views, stating that he started posting critical content due to his perception of bias in mainstream media. As of now, his account remains blocked.
Nayan pointed out that while he can legally challenge such actions, many individuals may not have the means or willingness to fight for the restoration of their content. He raised a vital question about the nature of democracy in India, asking why it has become so challenging for people to express themselves freely.
