Section 66A of the IT Act has been struck down. But does it mean that people can make objectionable comments and get away with it?
There are sections in IPC like 153, 153A, 504, 506 etc which have been invoked in the past, and will continue to be invoked in the future too.
What has been struck down is only a section that was introduced specifically mentioning electronic communication.
Since more communication today happens online rather than offline, undoubtedly we need clear idea of what is okay and what is not okay.
NEW AGE DILEMMA
I remember being told when I was a child how I should be careful while talking when elders are around. That's no longer the case now. The new generation particularly is very outspoken. However, not all their comments are objectionable.
Very often, what we see online is only an extension of what we see offline, probably a bit more as the virtual setting works as an incentive to open the minds out.
Free expression of thoughts, ideas, comments, suggestions, criticisms, alternative ways of approaching issues and problems should be seen as healthy rather than objectionable. They might look on the face of it cut-and-dried or irreverent or sometimes even outrageous. But as long as the intentions are good, it should be okay.
What should actually be seen as objectionable and clamped down strictly are incitement to violence, hatred, enmity among sections of people, statements that are coloured and discriminatory from the point of view of caste, religion, gender, language etc. made to show sections of people in poor light etc.
NEED FOR PRUDENCE
We may all have the freedom to speak out our minds. But we should also be mature enough to exercise discretion and ensure that we speak the right thing, at the right time, in the right place, in the right manner.
All of us do that in our daily lives. So many times we would have decided not to say something to someone at a particular time in a particular place, because we thought it was inappropriate. So exercise of such prudence and discretion is nothing new or unusual.
On the internet many of us tend to get carried away because we are physically way from the real world. In one way that is good, because some fresh, original thoughts flow out of our minds. At the other end, when we see such postings and comments, we need to understand that these are unfettered, true feelings of people. We need to acknowledge the genuineness behind the thoughts.
As we see more free expressions of thoughts, parallely we also need to develop greater amounts of tolerance. They are interlinked.
Sometimes I see people who actively support free speech are highly intolerant when other people exercise their right to free speech. That won't do.
There are sections in IPC like 153, 153A, 504, 506 etc which have been invoked in the past, and will continue to be invoked in the future too.
What has been struck down is only a section that was introduced specifically mentioning electronic communication.
Since more communication today happens online rather than offline, undoubtedly we need clear idea of what is okay and what is not okay.
NEW AGE DILEMMA
I remember being told when I was a child how I should be careful while talking when elders are around. That's no longer the case now. The new generation particularly is very outspoken. However, not all their comments are objectionable.
Very often, what we see online is only an extension of what we see offline, probably a bit more as the virtual setting works as an incentive to open the minds out.
Free expression of thoughts, ideas, comments, suggestions, criticisms, alternative ways of approaching issues and problems should be seen as healthy rather than objectionable. They might look on the face of it cut-and-dried or irreverent or sometimes even outrageous. But as long as the intentions are good, it should be okay.
What should actually be seen as objectionable and clamped down strictly are incitement to violence, hatred, enmity among sections of people, statements that are coloured and discriminatory from the point of view of caste, religion, gender, language etc. made to show sections of people in poor light etc.
NEED FOR PRUDENCE
We may all have the freedom to speak out our minds. But we should also be mature enough to exercise discretion and ensure that we speak the right thing, at the right time, in the right place, in the right manner.
All of us do that in our daily lives. So many times we would have decided not to say something to someone at a particular time in a particular place, because we thought it was inappropriate. So exercise of such prudence and discretion is nothing new or unusual.
On the internet many of us tend to get carried away because we are physically way from the real world. In one way that is good, because some fresh, original thoughts flow out of our minds. At the other end, when we see such postings and comments, we need to understand that these are unfettered, true feelings of people. We need to acknowledge the genuineness behind the thoughts.
As we see more free expressions of thoughts, parallely we also need to develop greater amounts of tolerance. They are interlinked.
Sometimes I see people who actively support free speech are highly intolerant when other people exercise their right to free speech. That won't do.
I am all for freedom of speech as long as they do not use foul or filthy language. I would want people to express their opinion (whatever it may be) in a civilized language. Just like the diplomats. Say "you go to hell" in a polite way.
ReplyDeleteYes. More important than what is said is probably how it is sia
Delete