India's government questions whether Meta's algorithms and paid content push it beyond intermediary status under IT Act, sources say. Loss of safe harbour would open legal exposure.
Alpha Score of 60 reflects moderate overall profile with weak momentum, weak value, strong quality, strong sentiment.
The Indian government is examining whether Meta still qualifies as an intermediary under the Information Technology Act, or whether its recommendation systems and paid content promotion push it into publisher territory, sources told PTI.
“If Meta, other platforms decide what content is shown, it's akin to 'publishing'; they must take responsibility for actions,” the sources said.
Section 79 of the IT Act grants social media intermediaries a “safe harbour” from liability for third-party content, provided they follow due diligence rules. Lose that exemption and Meta faces legal action under both the IT Act and the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
The government is focused on two things: how Meta’s algorithms determine “what is shown to whom,” and whether paid content promotion crosses the line from passive hosting to active curation. Under Indian law, a social media intermediary “primarily or solely enables online interaction between two or more users.” A publisher, by contrast, “means a publisher of news and current affairs content or a publisher of online curated content.” The government argues that a platform that decides what users see – and takes money to boost certain posts – looks more like a publisher than an intermediary.
Meta’s team, led by global affairs head Joel Kaplan, met IT Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw and IT Secretary S. Krishnan on Wednesday and Thursday after the government summoned the company over the temporary restriction of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Facebook post.
Over two days of questioning, the government pressed Meta on algorithmic guardrails, deepfakes, child sexual abuse material, unlabelled synthetic content, and the reappearance of AI-generated harmful content after it had been flagged. Officials asked why AI-generated videos without labels remain visible despite IT rules requiring labels.
The government also pushed for greater human oversight in content moderation, with better understanding of Indian languages and local nuances.
Meta assured the government it is “working hard” to address the concerns, sources said. The company detailed its plans to tackle deepfakes, CSAM, and unlabelled synthetic content.
Sources said the government will review the outcome of these engagements before deciding whether to seek a legal opinion on Meta’s intermediary status. It also plans to question other platforms on the same issue.
The objective is not censorship, government sources said, ensuring compliance with Indian law. For Meta, the stakes are high: India is its largest market by users, and a reclassification could reshape how the company operates in the country. The liability question also echoes broader debates around platform accountability and AI Rogue Agents: Who Bears Liability for Breaches.
Drafted by a large language model from the source reporting linked above, then screened by automated publishing checks. It is not read by a journalist before publication. Some articles cite our Alpha Score. Verify prices and figures against the original source. Educational coverage, not personalized advice.