Nishikant seeks Zuckerberg’s apology over PM reel removal

The chairperson of the Parliament’s Standing Committee on Communications and Information Technology on Monday said that Meta’s chief executive Mark Zuckerberg should apologise for the temporary removal of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Facebook Reel or the company could lose the “safe harbour” protection available to intermediaries under Section 79 of the Information Technology (IT) Act

The chairperson of the Parliament’s Standing Committee on Communications and Information Technology on Monday said that Meta’s chief executive Mark Zuckerberg should apologise for the temporary removal of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Facebook Reel or the company could lose the “safe harbour” protection available to intermediaries under Section 79 of the Information Technology (IT) Act.

HT Image

The warning came during a committee meeting with senior officials from Meta, Google, YouTube, X and Snapchat, along with representatives of the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) and the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA). The meeting was convened days after Meta briefly took down Modi’s Facebook Reel, prompting the government to seek an explanation from the company.

Committee chairperson Nishikant Dubey told reporters that the panel had conveyed two clear messages to the company. “Meta’s mindset is to destabilise the country. PM Modi’s video was taken down from 12.30 am to 5 am. This is a very serious issue. Our committee has said two things — the apology must come from Mark Zuckerberg or else we will take back the safe harbour given to Meta under Section 79,” he said.

The reel in question was uploaded by PM Modi on July 23 late at night. The reel, posted amid nationwide protests over the NEET-UG paper leak, acknowledged students’ concerns and announced a series of measures, including a proposed law providing for fast-track courts and stricter punishment for those involved in exam paper leaks.

Section 79 of the IT Act grants intermediaries such as social media companies immunity from liability for third-party content hosted on their platforms, provided they comply with due diligence requirements and lawful directions issued by the government.

The proposal, however, saw pushback from Opposition MPs during the meeting, according to people aware of the matter. While they supported stronger regulation to tackle child sexual abuse material (CSAM), deepfakes and cyber fraud, they argued that criticism of the government should not be treated as anti-national content and opposed any recommendation to revoke Meta’s safe harbour protection.

“We are talking about regulating technology and not democracy. This is regulation and not censorship,” an Opposition MP who attended the meeting told HT. The MP also said that the government in the meeting was trying to portray the students’ protest as an anti-national element and that Meta’s and other platforms’ algorithm helped the protesters to destabilise the country.

According to another MP, Meta apologised during Monday’s meeting, attributing the incident to an algorithmic error.

“An executive of Meta apologised for taking down PM Modi’s video from Facebook. He said there was some algorithm mistake. He also assured next time it won’t be repeated and that Meta will amend their algorithm and send it to the home ministry,” the MP told HT.

Meta did not respond to HT’s emailed request for comment.

According to the opening speech delivered by Dubey at the meeting, text of which has been seen by HT, the committee’s examination of the subject ‘Social and digital platforms and their regulation’ extended far beyond the PM’s post. It questioned social media companies on cyber fraud, content moderation, misinformation, deepfakes, AI-generated content, transparency in enforcement and compliance with Indian laws.

The chair’s speech described the removal of the PM’s Facebook Reel as “a highly serious issue” and asked: “Why was the post removed? How long did the post remain unavailable?” It added, “Either there is a serious failure of the system or there is a deliberate attempt to tarnish the image of PM of our country... Such a failure cannot be dismissed merely as a technical error.” The committee sought the “complete audit trail from report to restoration” and asked Meta what safeguards it had put in place to prevent similar incidents involving government communications.

The chairperson also underlined the scale of cybercrime in India, noting that 2.81 million cybercrime complaints were registered in 2025 involving losses of ₹22,495 crore, with investment fraud accounting for around ₹16,800 crore, or over three-fourths of the total losses. “Platform governance is no longer merely a technology issue; it is a matter of public safety, economic security and trust,” the chairperson said.

He questioned the usefulness of transparency reports published by social media platforms, noting that one platform reported 72,14,702 Indian account bans in a single month without disclosing the reasons for enforcement, while around 92% of user grievances were grouped under the undefined category of “Other issue”. It asked whether compliance reports should follow uniform standards across platforms.

The committee also devoted considerable attention to Meta’s handling of CSAM after the BBC Eye investigation alleged that Instagram carried paid advertisements directing users to channels distributing child sexual abuse material. Calling the allegations “not merely a moderation failure but a failure of advertising review system itself”, the speech asked Meta: “How were these advertisements approved despite your paid advertisement review process?”

It also sought details of disciplinary action taken, technological changes introduced after the incident and whether the company could guarantee that such advertisements would not reappear. MeitY had asked Meta on July 4 to submit a report on the same, which the ministry is currently examining.

The chairperson also pulled up authorities for acting only after the BBC investigation became public and asked both MeitY and MHA whether they were aware of the violations beforehand and what steps they would take to detect such content proactively in future.

On misinformation and AI, the committee questioned why users still do not have a dedicated option to report deceptive AI-generated content despite the amended IT Rules introducing obligations relating to AI-generated content earlier this year. The chairperson further sought safeguards against deepfake investment scams and harmful advertisements targeting children.

People aware of the discussions said Home Secretary Govind Mohan also questioned Meta over fake identities allegedly being used to create misleading perceptions against the government and asked how the company planned to tackle the issue. Government representatives also questioned social media companies over delays in complying with takedown requests and discussed whether existing laws should be strengthened to enable more effective regulation of online platforms, the people said.