Social media companies in India are imposed by the Government to be governed under a single policy, with the center already discussing the merits derived from the policy. This policy is said to cover actions such as tagging tweets or media, blocking or suspending accounts among others regarding the user's request.

Many perceive most US-based social media’s internal policies as ‘online harm’ and ‘discrimination’ for users which are pumping up the government’s initiative. One of whom is said to have described the government’s actions as ‘they some ideas’ and that they are evaluating options as discussions take place within the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology.

While it falls true that every user in India deserves fundamental rights and that there shall be no discrimination. Therefore, it’s widely being talked referring Article 19, that is, the right to speech as well as the right to privacy under Article 21, voices are heard saying that every platform should consider the rights of its users.

If in case, a user happens to be blocked on any social media platform, the company is asked to not only only look into its internal policies, but it’s firmly told to such companies that their decision should undergo a test under Article 14 and Article 19. This is especially when they are compliant with the Indian law and that they respect the Indian user, then the ministry has no business to involve itself into the matter.

At the same time, Indian users using social media are said to be strong while under such resolutions. Meaning, users should have options without having the need to take it to court when their account is blocked or suspended.

What is mainly being implied here is that the need for a digital economy, which should be similar to that of how there are real manufacturers and consumers and then the existence of consumer courts.

Besides Twitter’s incident of being under scrutiny for tagging tweets by a certain senior politician as manipulated media, with the microblogging site not budging to take down the tweets after the government saying that the issue is under police investigation.

Incidents such as these prompt how social media companies are applying their internal policies which are said to reflect lack of uniformity. Since it’s viewed that these platforms only take actions on some individuals while leaving the rest. This is coupled with ordinary users being unable to have easy resolutions when these companies have their own set of rules.

As these discussions are still in the early stages, there is yet to be a voice heard from the social media companies or stakeholders.

In terms of the dynamic growth of the internet and the digital market, some say that the jurisprudence must also evolve. Since the internet usage that is happening now, is nowhere close to how it was when the IT Act of 2000 was amended in 2008.

Some have expressed that there is no telling when the law and compliance will be complete, as it’s also an evolving process. Since it’s said that these issues that are experienced now are like never before emphasizing the need for new modern laws, mainly stating that it’s time for the country to pick up the pace in this regard.

One among those who were at the ongoing discussions with the IT said that most states are unaware of the power of adjudication under Section 46. The present IT Rules address some of the difficulties by requiring companies to file monthly compliance reports, but the wider process must be addressed by the IT Act, which is now being amended.