Grievance Appellate Committee (GAC): While examining an appeal filed in regard to a purported fake interview being circulated on Facebook (Meta) about noted journalist Karan Thapar, where he was seen promoting get-rich-quick schemes and bitcoin platforms; the Committee directed Meta to remove the interview forthwith and advised them to deal with the complaints/appeals received after applying due diligence. The Committee further stated that Grievance Officer at Facebook must act promptly on the Committee’s directives and confirm the action taken to the Committee.
The alleged fake interview endorsing bitcoins and get rich quick schemes had been making rounds at Facebook, a widely used social media platform.
The community guidelines of Facebook states that promoting or encouraging get-rich quick schemes is a violation of their community guidelines as it constitutes fraud.
Grievance Officer (GO) of Meta responded stating that the responded on 08-11-2023 stating that the content does not go against the community guidelines of Facebook. However, Meta subsequently responded on 24-11-2023, stating that there is no URL link provided by the complainant for the content that is being referred to in the appeal. The screenshots provided by the complainant in the complaint form are not legible due to poor resolution and requested the complainant to share the specific URL of the content referred to in the appeal so that they can review the appeal appropriately.
Rule 3(1)(b)(v) of Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 states that “any misinformation or information which is patently false and untrue or misleading in nature not to be hosted, displayed, uploaded, modified by the intermediary”.
Perusing the matter and the response, the GAC noted variance in Meta’s initial response and subsequent response. The GAC noted that META had categorically brought out that content of the subject interview of Thapar does not go against the community guidelines of Facebook. Further GO took cognizance of the complaint and provided ID number also. “This means the GO was in the know of specific URL link, resolution of the screenshots. Therefore, Meta subsequently bringing out the absence of these has no basis”.
[Appeal no 855/2023, decided on 18-12-2023]
Appearing before the GAC- Karan Thapar was represented by Dua Associates through its Partner Munawwar Naseem and Senior Associate Sanjna Dua
Image Source: KaranThapar_TTP/Twitter
