Use of Internet and social media by non-state actors for subversive activities is a major security concern. How have these been misused in the recent past? Suggest effective guidelines to curb the above threat.
Approach · directive: “how / suggest”
What it asks · Describe how terrorists, insurgents and other non-state actors have misused the internet and social media, and suggest guidelines that reduce the threat without harming freedom of speech.
The question has 2 parts — answer each
- How: the internet and social media have been misused by non-state actors in the recent past
- Suggest: effective guidelines to curb the threat without harming free speech
Open with · The internet lets small groups reach millions cheaply and anonymously, which suits propaganda, recruitment, coordination and rumour as much as it suits ordinary users.
Cover
- Misuse, radicalisation: propaganda videos, online recruitment and grooming of young people by terror groups such as ISIS, including through encrypted messaging apps.
- Misuse, rumours and hate: fake news and doctored videos that incite panic and communal violence, as in the 2012 exodus of northeast people from some cities.
- Misuse, mobilisation and crime: coordination of protests and violence, funding through crowdfunding and crypto assets, arms and drug trade on the dark web, and cyber attacks and hacking.
- Legal tools: the Information Technology Act, 2000, including blocking under section 69A with safeguards, monitoring and interception, and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act.
- Guidelines, platforms: due diligence, quick takedown and grievance redressal by intermediaries, cooperation on user information, and transparency, as in the 2021 IT Rules.
- Guidelines, capacity: strong cyber units, CERT-In and a national cyber crime coordination centre, monitoring of extremist content and counter-narratives, and digital literacy.
- Safeguards: any restriction must be lawful, necessary and proportionate, since free speech can be restricted only on the grounds listed in Article 19(2).
Close with · Security and freedom online can be balanced through clear law, accountable platforms, trained agencies and public awareness.
Add value (verified)
- Article 19(2) lists the only grounds on which free speech may be restricted, including security of the State and public order, so online controls must fall within them. The Constitution of India (as on 1 May 2024), Article 19(2) — Legislative Department ↗“the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, decency or morality, or in relation to contempt of court, defamation or incitement to an offence”
Question: UPSC's CS (Main) 2016, GS Paper III — paper ↗. Approach: Minimalist IAS, checked 30 Sept 2026 (how we verify) — UPSC publishes no model answers. ·
Model answer · 303 words (UPSC limit 200) · Minimalist IAS
The internet lets a handful of people reach millions cheaply and anonymously, which serves propaganda, recruitment and rumour as readily as it serves commerce and education.
Misuse in the recent past
- Radicalisation and recruitment: ISIS used videos, online magazines and encrypted messaging apps to draw recruits, including a few Indian youth.
- Rumour and communal violence: in 2012 doctored images and mass messages triggered the exodus of north-eastern people from Bengaluru and other cities; a fake video helped ignite the 2013 Muzaffarnagar riots.
- Mobilisation: separatist groups use social media to organise stone-pelting and protests, as in Kashmir in 2016.
- Crime and finance: crowdfunding and virtual currencies for terror funds, dark-web markets for arms and drugs, defacement of government websites, and honey-trapping of defence personnel for espionage.
Guidelines to curb the threat
- Law: apply the IT Act, 2000, with blocking under section 69A and the safeguards upheld in Shreya Singhal (2015), which struck down the vague section 66A; use the UAPA against terror content.
- Platforms: due diligence by intermediaries, time-bound takedown on lawful orders, grievance officers and cooperation on user data through mutual legal assistance (since then, the IT Rules, 2021 codified these duties).
- Capacity: a national cyber crime coordination centre, CERT-In, cyber cells and forensic labs in every state police, and social media monitoring to detect rumours early.
- Counter-narrative: credible official information during crises, engagement with community leaders, and de-radicalisation programmes for returnees and sympathisers.
- Awareness and cooperation: digital literacy to verify before forwarding, and international cooperation on servers and evidence located abroad.
- Safeguards: every restriction must fall within Article 19(2), be necessary and proportionate, and face judicial or independent oversight; blanket internet shutdowns should be the rare exception.
Security and freedom online can coexist when clear law, accountable platforms, trained agencies and an informed public work together against those who exploit the medium.
Written by Minimalist IAS from facts checked at source (how we verify) — a little fuller than exam length, so every part of the question is covered; in the hall, keep the structure and trim the detail. UPSC publishes no model answers: compare your structure and coverage with this, then write your own.