Whether the social media platforms perform a public function_.pptx

I wrote an article for which I have created a ppt on Whether the social media platforms perform a public function_.pptx

1. Whether the social media platforms perform a public function? By- Harshit Manwani (190208)

2. Thesis Statement In this paper, I will argue that the functions of these social media corporations in so far as they provide us the right of free speech performs a public function and it is not merely a private function for the sole purpose of earning profits.

3. Objective Today, many people use social media for expressing their views, communicating with each other, for business purposes and many other things. The social media corporations handle database of billions of people, which have in the past raised many questions related to privacy, which still remains unanswered. The recent trends have shown arbitrary suspension of social media accounts which has invited a very important question, whether the right to free speech guaranteed by article 19(1)(a) of the constitution can be enforced against these private social media corporations.

4. Methodology I begin my arguments by examining the scope of ‘Public Function’ by highlighting the previous decisions of the Supreme Court of India (SC) where they have considered extending the writ jurisdiction of article 226 towards private bodies . I then discuss certain foreign judgments which throw a light on the importance of social media to provide the means to the citizens to express their views . I then argue as to how these social media corporations affect the public at large and therefore they perform a public function.

5. Scope of public functions? Zee Telefilms vs Union of India (Zee Telefilms) - The court said that BCCI performs many public functions which are of Socio-economic nature when it comes to selecting the teams, controlling the activities of players and similar other activities which are required to arrange the matches. Ramesh Ahluwalia v. State of Punjab - The court in this case made a very important observation, it said that keeping in mind the increasing privatization which is further affecting the rights of the citizens, timely judicial intervention is necessary, and no legal technicalities should cost a citizen his or her rights. Dr. Janet Jeyapaul v. SRM University - that the petition is maintainable under article 226 of the constitution as the respondents were performing a public function by imparting education to thousands of students and therefore they are providing the means to education to those students

6. Foreign Judgments on Importance of Social media Cengiz and Ors. v. Turkey - “the Internet has now become one of the principal means by which individuals exercise their right to freedom to receive and impart information and ideas. User-generated expressive activity on the Internet provides an unprecedented platform for the exercise of freedom of expression …”

7. Social Media Corporations performs Public Function I have used the observations of the court in the Zee Telefilms case and SRM university case and applied it together on the functions of social media platforms to argue that that it performs a public function. T hese corporations have millions of users, and each of those million users use these platforms to exercise their right to free speech and communication at much higher level. These corporations, through their technology have eliminated borders when it comes to communication and passage of information, therefore the rationale of the court in SRM case fits here. The Social Media Platforms just like BCCI are affecting millions of people at large, it is collecting and controlling sensitive data which is personal to the users which affects the privacy of large number of people. Therefore through the above analysis I conclude my argument that social media corporations performs a public function and therefore fundamental rights can be enforced against them user article 226 of the constitution.

8. THANKYOU