While critics have railed against the Indian government's recent demands that Internet service providers block hundreds of pages and sites, current and former government officials say the action is necessary to maintain the peace.
The government demands, which come on the heels of unrest in India's northeast and riots in Mumbai, have been widely criticized as arbitrary and puzzling. Some of the pages the government has sought to block are from general news sites, such as those for the British newspaper The Telegraph and the TV network Al Jazeera. Others were instrumental in debunking false reports of widespread violence against Muslims.
Kuldeep Singh Dhatwalia, a spokesman for India's Home Ministry, defended the recent efforts to crack down on social media in a telephone interview, and said that complaints that the government is engaging in censorship s hould not be believed.
“This decision should not be decided by the person putting out the information,†Mr. Dhatwalia said. “The objection has to come from the other side. Whether it's Assam or another situation, the country for which the concerns have been placed has the responsibility to make the complaints.â€
The government has sought to remove or block access to about 310 Web pages and sites, Mr. Dhatwalia said. Mr. Dhatwalia said that Internet service providers have been amenable to the government's request, with the exception of Twitter, the micro-blogging Web Site.
“With regard to Twitter, they were asked to remove certain pages,†he said. “There have been certain inquiries. Those inquiries are being addressed.â€
While the discussion between the government and Twitter continues, Mr. Dhatwalia expressed confidence that the issue would be resolved amicably.
“They have expressed certain technical difficulties in finding and r emoving those pages,†Mr. Dhatwalia said. “There is a discussion about this.â€
He insisted that India values a free press. “But full freedom cannot be misinterpreted for creating law-and-order security problems,†he said. “What happens is that if certain information through social media is floating around which is objectionable to a certain country, that information is required to be stopped or removed from the public domain.â€
Harish Khare, a former media adviser to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, also defended the government's actions in a telephone interview, while insisting that the prime minister himself was probably uncomfortable with such curbs.
“This balancing between freedoms is a problematic area for all governments,†he said by telephone. While the “freedom of individuals is very important, social harmony is very important as well,†he said.
Still, he said, the demands are unlikely to have come from the prime minister's o ffice. “Having worked with him I can say that the prime minister is a liberal to the core, he is not comfortable with such steps curbing individual freedoms,†he said.
Mr. Khare, who was media adviser to the prime minister from June 2009 until January 2012, said that changing technology has put new demands on the government. “When I was the media adviser, we were not so much concerned with social media,†he said. “I cannot say if it has been a boon or a bane but new technology does cut both ways it is a question of finding the right mix.â€
Demands from outside the country that India allow unfettered freedom of speech on the Internet are misguided, he said. “If someone sits in Morocco or Boston and says we should have absolute freedom, just to satisfy them we cannot have riots in our country,†he said.
