We are anonymous, we are legion

UID and NPR: Towards Common Ground

Mukta Batra — 2014-10-15T13:06:40Z

The UID (Unique Identification) and NPR (National Population Register) are both government identity schemes that aggregate personal data, including biometric data for the provision of an identification factor, and aim to link them with the delivery of public utility services.

The differences between the two exist in terms of collection of data, the type of identification factor issued, authorities involved and the outcome.

Despite the differences, there has been talk of combining the two schemes because of the overlap.[1] In the same breath, it has been argued that the two schemes are incompatible. [2]

One of the UIDAI’s (Unique Identification Authority of India) functions is to harmonize the two schemes. [3]

As it stands, the schemes are distinct. Enrolment for a UID does not lead to automatic enrolment in the NPR. The NPR website expressly states that even if a data subject has undergone census or has been granted a UID Number, it is necessary to visit a data collection centre to provide biometric data for the NPR.[4]

UID and NPR: The Differences

The Basis of identity/ Unit of Survey

The most striking difference between the UID and NPR Schemes is their notion of identity. The UID is individual based, whereas the NPR scheme focuses on the household or the family as a composite unit. Thus, the UID seeks to enroll individuals while the NPR seeks to gather data of the members of a household or family as a composite unit during the census and later register each person for an NPR Card, on the basis of the census data. To this extent, analysis of the data gathered from the two schemes will be different and will require differing analytical tools. The definition of the data subject and the population is different. In one scheme, the unit is an individual; in the other it is the household/family. Though the family is the composite unit in the NPR, the data is finally extracted it is unpaired to provide individuals NPR cards, but the family based association is not lost and it is argued that this household association of NPR should be used to calculate and provide subsidies. Some states have put on hold transfer of cooking gas subsidy, which is calculated for each household, through Aadhar-linked bank accounts.[5] If both schemes were merged, the basis for determining entitlement to subsidies would be non-uniform.

Differences in Information Collection

The UID and NPR have different procedures for collection of information. In the UID scheme, all data is collected in data collection centres whereas NPR data is collected door to door in part and in collection centres for the other part.

UID data is collected by the UIDAI themselves or by private parties, under contract. These contractors are private parties: often, online marketing service providers.[6] The data subjects were initially allowed registration through an introducer and without any documentation. This was replaced with the verification system where documents were to be produced for registration for UID.

The NPR involves a dual collection process- the first stage is the door-to-door collection of data as part of the Census. This information is collected through questionnaire. No supporting documents/ proof is produced to verify this data. The verification happens at a later stage, through public display of the information. This data is digitized. The data subjects are then to give their biometric data at the data collection centres, on the production of the census slip. The biometric data collectors are parties who are empanelled by the UIDAI and are eligible to collect data under the UID Scheme. A subject’ s data is aggregated and then de-duplicated by the UIDAI. [7]

This shows two points of merger. It can be suggested that when data is collected for the UID number, then the subject should not have to give their biometrics for the NPR Scheme again. The sharing of biometrics across the schemes will reduce cost and redundancy. While sharing of UID data with NPR is feasible, the reverse is not true, since UID is optional and NPR is not. If NPR data is to be shared with UID, then the subject has the right to refuse. However, the consent for using NPR data for the UID is a default YES in the UID form. [8] Prohibiting the information sharing is no option.

Differences in Stated Purposes

The NPR is linked to citizenship status. The NPR exercise is being conducted to create a national citizen register and to assist in identifying and preventing illegal immigration. The NPR card, a desired outcome, is aimed to be a conduit for transactions relating to subsidies and public utilities.[9] So is the UID Number, which was created to provide the residents of India an identity. The linkage and provision of subsidies through the NPR and UID cards have not taken off on a large scale and there is a debate as to which will be more appropriate for direct benefit transfer, with some leaders proclaiming that the NPR scheme is more suited to direct benefit transfer.[10] Since the UID Number is linked to direct benefit transfer, but not to citizenship, benefits such as those under the MNREGA scheme, may be availed by non-citizens as well, though only citizens are eligible for the scheme.[11]

C. Chandramouli, the Registrar General and Census Commissioner of India, states that the conflict between the two schemes is only perceived, and results from a poor understanding of the differences in objective. The NPR, he states is created to provide national security through the creation of a citizen register, starting with a register of residents after authentication and verification of the residence of the subjects. On the other hand, the UID exercise is to provide a number that will be used to correctly identify a person.[12]

Difference in Legal Sanctity

The UIDAI was set up through an executive notification, which dictates a few of its responsibility, including: assigning a UID number, collating the UID and NPR schemes, laying down standards for interlinking with partner databases and so on. However, the UIDAI has not expressed responsibility to collect, or authorize collection of data under this scheme. The power to authorize the collection of biometrics is vested with the National Identification Authority of India (NIAI), which will be set up under the National Identification Authority of India Bill, (NIAI Bill, which is at times referred to as the UID Bill).

The NPR Scheme has been created pursuant to the 2004 Amendment of the Citizenship Act. Under S. 14A of the Citizenship Act, the central government has the power to compulsorily register citizens for an Identity Card. This gives the NPR exercise sanctity. However, no authority to collect biometric information has been given either under this Act or Rules framed under it.

Future of Aadhaar

The existence of both the UID and NPR Schemes leads to redundancy. Therefore, many have advocated for their merger. This seems impractical, as the standards in collection and management of data are not the same.

For some time, it was thought that the Aadhaar Scheme would be scrapped. This belief was based on the present government’s opposition to the scheme during and before the election. This was further strengthened by the fact that they did not expressly mention the continuance of the scheme in their manifesto. The Cabinet Committee on UIDAI was disbanded and the enrolment for the UID Number was stopped, only to be resumed a short while later.[13]

However, recent events show that the Aadhaar scheme will continue. First, the new government has stated that the UID scheme will continue. In support of the UID Scheme, the government has made budgetary allocation for the scheme to enable, inter-alia, it being sped-up. The Government even intends to enact a law to give the scheme sanctity. [14]

Second, the Government is assigning the UID Number new uses. To track attendance of government employees, the Government shall use a biometric attendance system, which is linked to the employees UID Number. [15] The attendance will be uploaded onto a website, to boost transparency.

Third, direct benefit transfers under the UID will become more vigorous.

The UID is already necessary for registration under the NPR, which is compulsory.

Providing one’s UID Number for utilities such as cooking gas is also compulsory in several areas, despite the Courts diktat that it should not be so.[16]

Conclusion

The government is in favour of continuing both the schemes. Therefore, it is unlikely that either scheme will be scrapped or that the two schemes will be combined. The registration for UID is becoming compulsory by implication as it is required for direct benefit transfers and for utilities. Data collected under NPR is being shared with the UIDAI by default, when one registers for a UID number. However, the reverse is unlikely, as the UID collects secondary data, whereas NPR requires primary data, which it collects through physical survey and authentication. Perhaps the sharing of data could be incorporated when one goes to the data collection centre to submit biometrics for the NPR. The subject could fill in the UID form and submit verification documents at this stage, completing both exercises in one go. This will drastically reduce the combined costs of the two exercises.

[1] Rajesh Aggarwal, Merging UID and NPR???, Igovernment, accessed 5 September, 2014 http://www.igovernment.in/igov/opinion/41631/merging-npr-uid; Bharti Jain, Rajnath Hints at Merger of NPR and Aadhar, Times of India, accessed 5 September, 2014 http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Rajnath-hints-at-merger-of-NPR-and-Aadhaar/articleshow/35740480.cms

[2] Raju Rajagopal, The Aadhar-NPR Conundrum, Mint, accessed 5 September, 2014 http://www.livemint.com/Opinion/tvpoCYeHxrs2Z7EkAAu7bP/The-AadhaarNPR-conundrum.html .

[3] Cl, 4 of the Notification on the creation o fthe UIDAI, No. A-43011/02/2009-Admin.1 of the Planning Commission of India, dated 28 January, 2009

[4] FAQ for NPR, accessed: 3 September, 2014. http://censusindia.gov.in/2011-Common/FAQs.html

[5] A Jolt for Aadhar: UPA Shouldn’t Have to Put on Hold its Only Good Idea,Business Standard, accessed 5 September, 2014 http://www.business-standard.com/article/opinion/a-jolt-for-aadhaar-114020301243_1.html

[6] Prakash Chandra Sao, The Unique ID Project in India: An Exploratory Study, accessed: 21 August, 2014 http://subversions.tiss.edu/the-unique-id-project-in-india-an-exploratory-study/

[7] NPR Activities, accessed 5 September, 2014, http://ditnpr.nic.in/NPR_Activities.aspx

[8] R. Dinakaran, NPR and Aadhar- A Confused Process, The Hindu BusinessLine, accessed: 4 September, 2014 http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/blogs/blog-rdinakaran/npr-and-aadhaar-a-confused-process/article4940976.ece

[9] More than sixty-five thousand NPR cards have been issued and biometric data of more than twenty-five lakh people has been captured, as on 28 August, 2014 http://censusindia.gov.in

[10] NPR, not Aadhaar, best tool for cash transfer: BJP's Sinha, accessed: 3 September, http://www.moneycontrol.com/master_your_money/stocks_news_consumption.php?autono=1035033

[11] Bharati Jain, NDA's national ID cards may kill UPA's Aadhaar, accessed 3 September, 2014 http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/NDAs-national-ID-cards-may-kill-UPAs-Aadhaar/articleshow/36791858.cms

[12] Id.

[13] Aadhar Enrolment Drive Begins Again, accessed 3 Spetember, 2014 http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/gurgaon/Aadhaar-enrolment-drive-begins-again/articleshow/38280932.cms

[14] Mahendra Singh, Modi govt to give legal backing to Aadhaar, Times of India, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Modi-govt-to-give-legal-backing-to-Aadhaar/articleshow/38336812.cms

[15] Narendra Modi Government to Launch Website to Track Attendance of Central Government Employees, DNA, accessed: 4 September, 2014 http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-narendra-modi-government-to-launch-website-to-track-attendance-of-central-government-employees-2014684

[16] No gas supply without Aadhaar card, Deccan Chronicle, accessed: 4 September, 2014, http://www.deccanchronicle.com/140829/nation-current-affairs/article/no-gas-supply-without-aadhaar-card

Note: This is an anonymous post.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/uid-npr-towards-common-ground

UID Act may be released for debate, may be introduced in monsoon session

praskrishna — 2011-04-02T11:27:53Z

An article by Karen Leigh & Surabhi Agarwal in livemint on June 30, 2010.

The government has moved to create a legal basis for its ambitious project to provide all residents with numeric identity cards and guarantee the safety of demographic and biometric data being collected for it.

The draft National Identification Authority of India Act, 2010, was put up for public debate on Tuesday, and is likely to be introduced when Parliament convenes for its monsoon session.

The Act provides for the creation of the National Identity Authority of India to oversee the implementation of the Aadhaar project, but its jurisdiction will not extend to Jammu and Kashmir.

“This Bill will give the authority a legislative framework to function,” said R.S. Sharma, director general of the Unique Identification Authority ofIndia (UIDAI), the nodal agency currently overseeing Aadhaar.

Sharma said the Bill contains provisions that will make sure that sensitive data is protected and there are no hacking attempts. It lays down that “the authority shall ensure the security and confidentiality of identity information of individuals”.

UIDAI is collecting fingerprints and eye scans of all residents, along with other information, for Aadhaar.

The Bill “will also make sure that data related to a citizen’s caste or religion is not collected or chronicled”, Sharma added.

The Bill lays down that impersonation using Aadhaar data can lead to a three-year jail term and a fine of Rs10,000. Unauthorized collection or dissemination of identity information will also invite a three-year jail term, or a Rs1 lakh fine, or both.

The heftiest penalty of Rs1 crore along with three years’ imprisonment has been specified for unauthorized access to the central database, which will contain all individual details collected for Aadhaar.

Although the Bill lays down that no information stored in the database shall be revealed by UIDAI officials, it allows disclosure of personal information in a case of national security. Information can be disclosed on the direction of an officer of joint secretary level or above in the Union government, with the approval of the minister in charge.

But civil rights activists say the safety measures in the Bill are not enough.

“It doesn’t have any of the safeguards and provisions necessary to protect the rights of citizens. It’s only protecting the interests of the UIDAI,” said Sunil Abraham, executive director of the Bangalore-based Centre for Internet and Society and a critic of the Aadhaar project.

“They have criminalized an imaginary crime—if the technology were infallible, which is what they claim biometrics is, then you can’t create ghost identities. They’re saying that ghost identities will still be there; that the technology is, in fact, not foolproof.”

Rahul Matthan, founding partner of law firm Trilegal, said the Bill will give a legal basis to UIDAI for collecting data and allotting identities.

“Provisions in the Act on data protection are limited as it can’t be a substitute for an over-arching data protection legislation in the country, which will deal with all kinds of citizen data,” he said.

The Union government is mulling over a separate privacy Bill to safeguard individual data privacy, as reported by Mint on 21 June. The move is aimed at deflecting worries over the safety of the immense amount of data it proposes to collect about its citizens for various programmes, including Aadhaar.

Read the original article in livemint.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/UID-in-monsoon-session

UID & Privacy - A Call for Papers

elonnai — 2012-03-21T10:03:44Z

Privacy India is inviting individuals to author short papers focused on Unique Identity (UID) and Privacy. Selected candidates will have their papers published on the CIS website, and their transportation and accommodation provided for the “Privacy Matters” conference being held in Kolkata on 22 January 2010.

Topic

Privacy and the UID

Submission Deadline

By 15 January 2010 to admin@privacyindia.org

Word Length

3,000-5,000 words

Topic Summary

The Aadhaar scheme, or Unique Identity (UID) scheme is a plan to provide citizens identity cards that are tied to their unique biometric data – such as their fingerprints or retinal scans. Although the most frequently cited justification for this project is to ensure the secure delivery of relief to beneficiaries of government aid schemes, it is clear that the uses to which it will be put exceed this narrow mandate.

As India embarks on one of its most ambitious techno-administrative projects to date, there is surprisingly little clarity or introspection into the implications of having such a concentrated identity locked into a single card. In particular it appears that the grave threats to privacy the scheme poses have not received due attention. Although the final draft UID Bill circulated by the UIDAI in October 2010 contains some provisions that reference privacy, there seems to be a tacit assumption that privacy is an expendable or at least a less-desirable privilege that can be attended to fully once the scheme is in fully in place.

We invite individuals to author short inter-disciplinary papers that engage various topics on the theme of Privacy and the UID, including but not limited to the following:

Comparative studies on privacy and national identity card schemes in other countries

Privacy and the UID Bill

How will a project such as the UID change the relationship between the state, the individual, and the market?

Selected candidates will have their papers published on the CIS website, and their transportation and accommodation provided for the “Privacy Matters” conference being held in Kolkata on January 22nd 2010.

Who We Are

Privacy India was set up with the collaboration of the Centre for Internet and Society (CIS) and Society in Action Group (SAG), under the auspices of the international organization ‘Privacy International’. Privacy International is a non-profit group that provides assistance to civil society groups, governments, international and regional bodies, the media and the public in a number of countries (see www.privacyinternational.org). Privacy India's objective is to raise awareness, spark civil action and promoting democratic dialogue around privacy challenges and violations in India. In furtherance of this goal we aim to draft and promote an over-arching privacy legislation in India by drawing upon legal and academic resources and consultations with the public.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/privacy/privacy_callforpapers

UAS License Agreement Amendment regarding the Central Monitoring System (CMS)

maria — 2014-01-30T12:43:56Z

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/blog/uas-license-agreement-amendment

Two women arrested over Facebook gripe on Mumbai shutdown

praskrishna — 2013-01-15T09:26:33Z

A woman who complained about the Indian city of Mumbai shutting down for the funeral of divisive Hindu nationalist politician Balasaheb Thackeray was arrested for "hurting religious sentiments," local police told reporters amid public anger over the case.

This article by Emily Alpert appeared in Los Angeles Times on November 19, 2012. Pranesh Prakash is quoted.

Indian media identified the woman as Shaheen Dhada, 21, who reportedly wrote, "People like Thackeray are born and die daily and one should not observe a bandh [shutdown] for that.”

Police also arrested a friend of hers who "liked" the comment.

The Facebook remark spurred angry backers of Thackeray, a controversial figure who once openly called for attacks on Muslims, to assault a clinic owned by Dhada' uncle. Analysts told the Associated Press that the arrests appeared to be a move by police to head off any further violence from Thackeray supporters.

Free-speech groups were outraged by the ransacking and arrests. In a blistering letter to the chief minister of Maharashtra state, a former Supreme Court justice who now heads the Press Council of India called the charges absurd and unlawful and demanded that the police officers involved be prosecuted.

"We are living in a democracy, not a fascist dictatorship," Markandey Katju wrote.

The Maharashtra director-general of police ordered a probe into the arrests Monday, Indian television station IBN reported. The two women were reportedly released on bail during the day.

The Shiv Sena political party that Thackeray founded has polarized Mumbai over the years with campaigns against Muslims and migrants. His death put the city on high alert over the weekend amid fears of violence. As shops were shuttered and taxis sat idle, some Mumbai residents grew frustrated.

"When tens of thousands were making similar comments ... how did the police single out Shaheen Dhada and her friend for arrest?” wrote Pranesh Prakash of the Center for Internet and Society. He added, "This should not be written off as a harmless case of the police goofing up."

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/la-times-nov-19-2012-emily-alpert-two-women-arrested-over-facebook-gripe-on-mumbai-shutdown

Two Indians in Global Commission on Web Governance

praskrishna — 2014-04-04T09:56:05Z

Two Indians are among 25 internationally recognised experts named to assist a global body in identifying and prioritising web governance and Internet policy-related issues.

The article was published in Outlook,in the Economic Times and in Matters India on April 1, 2014. Sunil Abraham has been named as one of the experts.

Subimal Bhattacharjee, former country head of General Dynamics in India and a well known cyber security expert hailing from Assam, and Sunil Abraham, executive director of the Bangalore-based Centre for Internet and Society appointed to Research Advisory Network (RAN) of the Global Commission on Internet Governance (GCIG) are the two Indians named.

GCIG is a two-year initiative launched by the Centre for International Governance Innovation and Chatham House. RAN will assist in identifying and prioritising Internet governance and Internet policy related issues within the commission's mandate.

Members of RAN will provide expert briefings to the members of the commission and conduct research and analysis for the commission's preparatory work and final report.

Chaired by Sweden's Foreign Minister Carl Bildt, the commission will produce a comprehensive stand on the future of multi-stakeholder Internet governance.

Bhattacharjee works on cyber security and critical infrastructure protection policy issues.

He was one of the 31 experts invited by the UN through UNIDIR in 2008 to deliberate on the agenda for the 20 nations Group of Governmental Experts that was set up in 2009 to study the impact of cyber on international security.

He was also a member of the Expert Group on Global Initiatives under the Sam Pitroda Expert Committee to review the functioning of Prasar Bharati.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/outlook-april-1-2014-two-indians-in-global-commission-on-web-governance

Twitter’s Censorship Move Aimed at Regaining China?

praskrishna — 2012-01-30T04:54:51Z

Twitter, the popular social networking site for micro-blogging, has announced it is open to content censorship and region-based filtering, if required by law. The service boasts nearly 300 million users from across the world. Vinod Yalburgi writes this in the International Business Times.

In a Twitter post - "Tweets Must Still Flow", the service's management has stated: "Starting today, we give ourselves the ability to reactively withhold content from users in a specific country, while keeping it available in the rest of the world."

Twitter's drastic move comes in the wake of recent U.S. government allegations against Internet sites like Google, Yahoo and Facebook, regarding the need to regulate and filter controversial user-generated content. Both Google and Facebook have made similar commitments.

Like us on Facebook

However, it must be seen if either of the three do follow through with those commitments.

Meanwhile, experts quoted in a report by The Times of India, where too social networking Web sites are coming under the scanner, suggest the lack of clarity in laws in countries like India means Twitter can only act reactively; the situation in Germany or France, for example, where laws about pro-Nazi propaganda are codified, they can act proactively.

Another post by Twitter speaks of a new feature that will allow the site's administrators to enable region-based selective content blocking, thereby allowing region-sensitive information to remain hidden from users in those areas. The post also cited the example of Germany and France: "Some countries differ so much from our ideas that we will not be able to exist there. Others restrict certain types of content, such as France or Germany, which ban pro-Nazi content."

There is also speculation that one reason for this decision could be Twitter's plans to re-enter the Chinese market, where the micro-blogging service has been banned since 2009. Incidentally, China boasts the largest number of Internet users in the world, at this moment.

The hope, for Twitter, must be the promise to block sensitive tweets (or those the Chinese government deems offensive) without affecting the global audience. Twitter has rarely resorted to such censorship practices. However, the company does not seem unwilling to shy away from that responsibility.

"...if and when we are required to withhold a tweet in a specific country, we will attempt to let the user know, and we will clearly mark when the content has been withheld," the company's statement said.

"The region-specific blocking was already being used on video hosting websites like Youtube and Hulu, where due to the wishes of copyright owners many videos are not available in India. Twitter is extending this technology to its tweets," said Pranesh Prakash at the Centre for Internet and Society in Bangalore, India.

"We have to take care of the sensibilities of our people. Cultural ethos is very important to us," Kapil Sibal, the Indian Telecom Minister, said last month, during his request to both Google and Facebook to filter offensive content.

The trend of social networking Web sites resisting censorship seems a thing of the past. Prakash recalls an incident in 2011, when the U.S. government sought detailed information about a Twitter user, only to be challenged, by the Internet company, in court.

Read the original published by International Business Times on 28 January 2012. Pranesh Prakash was quoted in it.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/twitter2019s-censorship-move-aimed-at-regaining-china

Twitter, Facebook take the lead in blogosphere as blog searches fall by half

praskrishna — 2011-12-07T15:43:11Z

Blogging is old hat. A prominent trend-tracking tool shows that blog searches around the globe have halved, while micro-blogging platforms Twitter and Facebook have grown, suggesting a seminal shift in online communication.

Google Insights, which tracks search terms on Google search engine worldwide, shows a 50% decline for blogs in 2010. On the other hand, micro-blogging sites Twitter and Facebook logged exponential rise in users.

While the number of blogs on the Internet, as tracked by BlogPulse, rose just 21% from 126 million in 2009 to 152 million in 2010, the Tweets on Twitter were up 160% over the same period, according to Internet monitoring website pingdom.com.

A comparative figure for Facebook was not available, but the social networking site showed a 74% rise in users during the period.

Celebrities such as Aamir Khan, Salman Khan, and even the more regular Ramgopal Verma haven't blogged for over six months now. Maverick politician Lalu Prasad hasn't updated his blog either.

"We live in an era of short attention, where Hindi movies have reduced to 90 minutes, emails are shorter, and the books we read are slimmer and faster to skim through," said Mahesh Murthy, founder of social media company Pinstorm Technologies. "The move from blogging to micro-blogging is just part of (this) larger trend. Even our clients are investing more in social media than in blogs," he said, adding blogging declined by 30% in India in 2010.

Blogging, which requires ideas to be bunched to make paragraphs, gained popularity in the early 2000s. But it now appears to have hit the skids, as micro-blogging platforms offer a quicker and easier way of sharing thoughts, either as a few sentences or even mere fragments.

Blogging is also getting more network-driven, as on shared networks like Twitter, Facebook or Google Plus, in contrast to independent blogs on independent domains.

"Blogs have definitely become less noticeable. At the same time, they have become more mainstream, that is, blogs run by newspapers, companies etc," said Pranesh Prakash, programme manager at Bangalore-based Center for Internet and Society. Personal blogging, too, has seen a dip, he added.

Twitter and Facebook, the popular social networking platforms that allow users to post comments via mobiles, have caught the attention of firms that manage the online visibility of organisations and individuals. These social media companies have almost stopped maintaining blogs for their clients.

"Companies, too, are planning their ad campaigns keeping social media in mind, forcing bloggers to switch to the micro format," said Deepak Gopalkrishnan, a blogger and cartoonist who works with social media marketing firm Windchimes Communications. Earlier, revenues for blogs came from Google's AdSense system. Today, say people in the social media, Facebook revenues have eclipsed AdSense's revenues for blogs.

Facebook has over 34 million users in India while Twitter has over 13 million.

"Humour bloggers such as Ramesh Srivats and Anand Ramakrishnan haven't updated their blogs for a year. But they are perpetually active on Twitter," Gopalkrishnan said.

This article by Ameya Chumbhale was originally published in the Economic Times on 17 November 2011. Pranesh Prakash has been quoted in this article. Read it here

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/twitter-facebook-lead-in-blogosphere

Twitter's India troubles show tough path ahead for digital platforms

Aditya Sharma — 2021-06-26T02:54:19Z

Twitter is in a standoff with Indian authorities over the government's new digital rules. Critics see the rules as an attempt to curb free speech, while others say more action is needed to hold tech giants accountable.

The blog by Aditya Sharma was published by DW on 21 June 2021. Torsha Sarkar was quoted.

Twitter holds a relatively low share of India's social media market. But, since 2017, the huge nation has emerged as Twitter's fastest-growing market, becoming critical to its global expansion plans.

In February, the Indian government introduced new guidelines to regulate digital content on rapidly growing social media platforms.

The so-called Intermediary Guidelines are aimed at regulating content on internet platforms such as Twitter and Facebook, making them more accountable to legal requests for the removal of posts and sharing information about the originators of messages.

Employees at these companies can be held criminally liable for not complying with the government's requests.

Large social media firms must also set up mechanisms to address grievances and appoint executives to liaise with law enforcement under the new rules, as well as appoint an India-based compliance officer who would be held criminally liable for the content on their platforms.

The Indian government says the rules empower "users who become victims of defamation, morphed images, sexual abuse," among other online crimes. It also said that the rules seek to tackle the problem of disinformation.

But critics fear that the rules could be used to target government opponents and make sure dissidents don't use the platforms.

Social media companies were expected to comply with the new rules by May 25.

Some Indian media reports have recently said that Twitter lost its status as an "intermediary" and the legal protection that came with it, due to its failure to comply with the new rules.

Failure to comply and serious implications

Apar Gupta, the executive director of the Internet Freedom Foundation, a New Delhi-based digital rights advocacy group, says failure to comply with the rules could threaten Twitter's India operations.

"Not complying with the rules would pose a real risk to Twitter's operational environment," he told DW.

"It will need to go to court to defend itself each time criminal prosecutions are launched against it," he added.

The first case against Twitter was filed last week, where it was charged with failing to stop the spread of a video on its platform that allegedly incited "hate and enmity" between two religious groups.

'Heavy censorship'

Gupta says adhering to all the government's demands would substantially change Twitter.

"Absolute compliance would mean heavy censorship of individual tweets, removal of the manipulated media tags, and blocking/suspension of accounts at the government's behest," he said.

Torsha Sarkar, policy officer at the Bengaluru-based Centre for Internet and Society, fears that Twitter might at times be compelled to overcomply with government demands, threatening user rights.

"This can be either by over-complying with flawed information requests, thereby selling out its users, or taking down content that offends the majoritarian sensibilities," she told DW.

Last week, three special rapporteurs appointed by a top UN human rights body expressed "serious concerns" that certain parts of the guidelines "may result in the limiting or infringement of a wide range of human rights."

They urged New Delhi to review the rules, adding that they did not conform to India's international human rights obligations and could threaten the digital rights of Indians.

Twitter's balancing act

It is not the first time that Twitter has been accused of giving in to government pressure to censor content on its platform.

At the height of the long-running farmer protests, Twitter blocked hundreds of tweets and accounts, including the handle of a prominent news magazine. It subsequently unblocked them following public outrage.

The US company stopped short of complying with demands to block the accounts of activists, politicians and journalists, arguing that such a move would "violate their fundamental right to free expression under Indian law."

According to local media reports, Twitter's Indian executives were reportedly threatened with fines and imprisonment if the accounts were not taken down.

Special police notify Twitter offices

Last month, the labeling of a tweet by a politician from the ruling BJP as "manipulated media" prompted a special unit of the Delhi police to visit Twitter's offices in the capital and neighboring Gurgaon. Police notified the offices about an investigation into the labeling of the post.

Twitter India's managing director, Manish Maheswari, was said to have been asked to appear before the police for questioning, according to media reports.

Some Twitter employees have refused to talk about the ongoing tensions for fear of government reprisals.

"Such kind of intimidation does not happen every day. (But) Everyone at Twitter India is terrified," people familiar with the matter told DW on the condition of anonymity.

Big Tech VS sovereign power?

Those calling for better regulation of tech giants say transnational social media companies like Twitter lack accountability, blaming them for the alleged inaction against online abuse and disinformation campaigns.

"The problem with these rules is that they centralize greater power toward the government without providing for the objective benefit of rights toward users," Gupta said.

"If Twitter were to comply with these rules, it would make a bad situation worse," he said.

Twitter is unlikely to ditch a major market such as India.

Sarkar from the Centre for Internet and Society said "It might be difficult to say how the powers of big tech are going to collide with sovereign nations, especially in light of flawed legal interventions around the world."

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/dw-june-21-2021-aditya-sharma-twitter-india-troubles-show-tough-path-ahead-for-digital-platforms

Twitter users hit back at government ban

praskrishna — 2012-08-25T02:51:18Z

The government faced an angry backlash from Twitter users on Thursday after ordering Internet service providers to block about 20 accounts that officials said had spread scare-mongering material that threatened national security.

Published in the Hindustan Times on August 24, 2012. Pranesh Prakash is quoted.

The backlash came as New Delhi turned up the heat on Twitter, threatening "appropriate and suitable action" if it failed to remove the accounts as soon as possible. Several Indian newspapers said this could mean a total ban on access to Twitter in India but government officials would not confirm to Reuters that such a drastic step was being considered.

Twitter, which does not have an office in India, declined to comment. There are about 16 million Twitter users in the South Asian country.

The government has found itself on the defensive this week over what critics see as a clumsy clampdown on social media websites - including Google (GOOG.O), YouTube and Facebook - that has raised questions about freedom of information in the world's largest democracy.

"Dear GOI (Government of India), Keep your Hands Off My Internet. Else face protest" tweeted one user, @Old_Monk60.

India blocked access to more than 300 Web pages after threatening mobile phone text messages and doctored website images fuelled rumours that Muslims, a large minority in the predominantly Hindu country, were planning revenge attacks for violence in Assam, where 80 people have been killed and 300,000 have been displaced since July.

Fearing for their lives, tens of thousands of migrants fled Mumbai, Bangalore and other cities last week. The exodus highlighted underlying tensions in a country with a history of ethnic and religious violence.

According to documents obtained by Reuters, the government has targeted Indian journalists, Britain's Daily Telegraph, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation and Al Jazeera television in its clampdown on Internet postings it says could inflame communal tensions.

The directives to Internet service providers listed dozens of YouTube, Facebook and Twitter pages. A random sampling of the YouTube postings revealed genuine news footage spliced together with fear-mongering propaganda.

In Washington, the State Department urged New Delhi to balance its security push with respect for basic rights including freedom of speech.

"As the Indian government seeks to preserve security we are urging them also to take into account the importance of freedom of expression in the online world," State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said.

Nuland said Washington stood ready to consult with US companies as they discuss the issue with the Indian government, although it was not now directly involved.

"The unique characteristics of the online environment need to be respected even as they work through whether there are things these companies can do to help calm the environment," she said.

Indian journalists targeted

The government says Google and Facebook have largely cooperated while Twitter has been much slower to respond.

"Every company, whether it's an entertainment company, or a construction company, or a social media company, has to operate within the laws of the given country," said Sachin Pilot, minister of state in the Ministry of Communications.

Twitter has been instructed to remove 28 pages containing "objectionable content," an interior ministry official said.

"If they do not remove the pages, the Indian government will take appropriate and suitable action," he added.

The government has ordered Internet service providers to block the Twitter accounts of veteran journalist Kanchan Gupta and television anchor Shiv Aroor. Some appeared to have begun complying with the order on Thursday as Twitter users reported difficulties in accessing their pages.

"It is a political decision, because of my criticism of the government," said Gupta, who was an official in the previous government led by the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party.

The government's actions triggered a storm of criticism from Twitter users, with the hashtags #Emergency2012 and #GOIBlocks among the top trending topics on Twitter in India on Thursday. Some compared the situation with the state of emergency imposed by the government in 1975, when some journalists were jailed.

The Centre for Internet and Society, which analysed the 300 banning orders, found that they contained "numerous mistakes and inconsistencies." Some of the banned websites belonged to people trying to debunk the rumours, for example, it said.

"This isn't about political censorship. This is about the government not knowing how to do online regulation properly," said CIS programme manager Pranesh Prakash.

Parliament last year passed a law that obliges Internet companies to remove a range of objectionable content when requested to do so, a move criticised at the time by rights groups and social media companies.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/www-hindustantimes-com-aug-24-2012-twitter-users-hit-back-at-govt-ban

Twitter users find several accounts suspended for unknown reasons

praskrishna — 2014-12-07T01:27:05Z

Twitter users woke up on Saturday to find several accounts suspended for unknown reasons, triggering conspiracy theories that only the accounts of right-wing supporters had been targeted.

The article by Vasudha Venugopal was published in the Economic Times on November 2, 2014. Pranesh Prakash gave his inputs.

While it was said to have resulted from a technical glitch that suspended random accounts, several tweeters said there was a pattern to the suspension because 'suspended users' were asked to change their behaviour to be able to continue using the micro-blogging site. But by afternoon it was clear that many accounts, irrespective of their posts, had been suspended for a few hours. All suspended accounts were restored by afternoon.

A message sent out to a tweeter whose account was suspended read, "Twitter has automated systems that find and remove multiple automated spam accounts in bulk.

Unfortunately, your account got caught in one of these spam groups by mistake." Twitter also apologised for the inconvenience but added, "It is possible your account posted an update that appeared to be spam, so please be careful what you tweet... You will need to change your behaviour to continue using Twitter. Repeat violations of the Twitter rules may result in the permanent suspension of your account."

This triggered outrage among the Twitteratti who called it internet policing. There was humour too, with a tweeter posting, "In the Twitter canteen you never get chicken wings in pairs because the right wing is blocked."

Twitter officials said there was no deliberate blocking of accounts and that the incident was an accident as part of spam cleaning process. Pranesh Prakash, policy director, Centre for Internet and Society, said though there have been instances of 'privatisation of censorship' in the recent past, this incident did not look like one such attempt. "It doesn't look deliberate especially because even accounts such as eBay India were suspended."

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/the-economic-times-vasudha-venugopal-november-2-2014-twitter-users-find-several-accounts-suspended-for-unknown-reasons

Twitter tweaks user policy a day after SC clampdown

Admin — 2018-01-03T02:00:02Z

This, when India is looking to crack down on global firms exporting customer data to servers.

The article by Alnoor Peermohamed and Raghu Krishnan was published in the Business Standard on September 8, 2017. Pranesh Prakash was quoted.

Microblogging platform Twitter on Thursday told its users in India that the data collected from them could be moved outside the country and were within the purview of using its service.

This comes as the government is considering making it mandatory for internet and mobile companies to store user data locally. Global internet giants such as Google, Facebook and Twitter aggressively use user data they gather for targeted advertising.

This is in the wake of the Supreme Court issuing notices to Twitter and Google on Wednesday seeking their legal views on a petition drawing the court’s attention to the lack of control over data-sharing with cross-border corporate entities in violation of a citizen’s right to privacy. The Bench also asked WhatsApp and Facebook to file sworn statements on whether they shared any data collected from users with third parties.

India provides the highest number of active daily users for Twitter, which told them on Thursday that its updated terms of service, effective October 2, allowed user data to be moved overseas and shared with affiliates. Twitter did not respond immediately to an email.

“If private data is located in servers outside India, it will be a violation of privacy,” said Pavan Duggal, cybersecurity expert and lawyer, adding, “India needs to quickly come up with privacy legislation. Data localisation is a distinct option that India should look at.”

Internet firms collect personal information, contacts and location, apart from activities users share. In India, it is also critical as most users access these platforms on their smartphones, which they also use to do financial transactions with banks and the government.

The government last month asked 21 smartphone handset makers, the majority of them Chinese, to declare whether the data they collected from users were hosted on servers outside India.

“The government can come up with rules under Section 83 of the Information Technology Act, mandating steps needed to protect data generated by computers in India. This should be a priority,” Duggal said.

Not all concur with data localisation. “One of the oft-quoted reasons for data localisation is security, but it doesn’t help improve security at all. The idea that the data taken out of the country somehow become insecure is wrong. It is very easy to copy the data in India as well. It’s not going to help reduce snooping in any way,” said Pranesh Prakash, policy director at the Centre for Internet and Society.

Instead he advocates India to frame laws similar to that of the European Union (EU), which mandates its laws apply to any data collected of an EU citizen.

“The question is not about whether your data is in India or not; it is about whether India’s laws are applicable to the data. This is the way laws in the EU work, by insisting on it wherever an EU citizen data is taken,” Prakash added.

“That’s what is most important when one is looking at security and privacy rather than where the data is stored. As long as they have a presence in the country, India should be able to take action against them if they’re breaking any Indian laws. With the internet, you can’t be sure of where the data is saved, and really, it shouldn’t matter,” Prakash said.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/business-standard-alnoor-peermohamed-and-raghu-krishnan-september-8-2017-twitter-tweaks-user-policy-a-day-after-sc-clampdown

Twitter reacts to the India's cryptocurrency drama

Rajarshi Mitra — 2019-07-30T00:25:58Z

An Inter-Ministerial Committee led by Subhash Chandra Garg, secretary, Department of Economic Affairs (DEA) has submitted a report which will recommend a ban on cryptocurrency in India to the finance ministry.

The blog post by Rajarshi Mitra was published by FX Street on July 26, 2019. Pranesh Prakash tweeted on this issue.

The IMC is, however, encouraging the use of blockchain technology and is agnostic about digital currencies backed by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI). Prominent members of the crypto community have sounded off on the situation in India.

Tim Draper - Founder of DFJ Venture Capital:

“People behaving badly! India's government banned Bitcoin, a currency providing great hope for prosperity in a country that desperately needs it. Shame on India leadership. Pathetic and corrupt. #India #bitcoin.”

Anthony Pompliano - Co-founder & Partner at Morgan Creek Digital:

“We need to pay attention to what is happening in India around cryptocurrency regulation. I’m willing to fly to meet with lawmakers and regulators if someone can get me a meeting. Who can help?”

Pranesh Prakash:

“India's proposed #cryptocurrency ban would cover non-crypto currencies too, if they go ahead with the current definition. For instance, Amazon gift cards will also get covered, and be banned.”

Ajeet Khurana - CEO Zebpay:

“I have talked to most of the cryptocurrency decision makers in the Indian establishment and know that they are brilliant people with the best interest of India at heart. I implore them to avoid denying India its rightful place in history.”

XRPcryptowolf:

“Indian panel thinks a #Cryptocurrency created by RBI could be a boon for india & that regulators should consider creating a sovereign #Cryptocurrency At the same time they proposed a ban & up to 10 years in prison for general use of #Crypto in India What a bunch of hypocrites‍♂️.”

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/fxstreet-rajarshi-mitra-july-26-2019-twitter-reacts-to-india-s-crypto-currency-drama

Twitter India Workshop

Admin — 2018-01-01T16:10:28Z

Manasa Rao attended a workshop organized by Twitter titled "The Network Effort". It was an effort by the Public Policy and Government team at Twitter to enable NGOs and non-profits to conduct successful Twitter campaigns and teach them best practices.

The handbook for the workshop is here.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/internet-governance/news/twitter-india-workshop

Twitter handles: How and why govt erred and what it can do to be smarter & more effective

praskrishna — 2012-09-07T09:22:47Z

Here's a weekend reading recommendation for the mandarins who run the Government of India: it's a freely downloadable, a 145-page long document called "After the Riots". It is a report by the Riot Communities and Victims Panel, set up by the British prime minister to study reasons for the cause, spread and the damage wreaked by the riots that occurred in towns and cities in England in early August 2011.

TV Mahalingam and Shantanu Nandan Sharma's article was published in the Economic Times on August 26, 2012. Sunil Abraham is quoted.

During the riots, many British politicians had blamed social media for the quick spreading of lawlessness. "Everyone watching these horrific actions will be struck by how they were organised via social media," British Prime Minister David Cameron had told the British parliament. Others called for social networking sites to be "switched off". That is perhaps why the word Twitter features four times in the report, Facebook twice, BBM once and the phrase 'social media' appears 39 times.

So, what did the report have to say about the role of social media in the riots that tore through England? "Although social media was used to mobilise rioters, it has also been acknowledged that a number of forces used social media extensively to engage with their communities and provide reassurance during the riots," reads the report.

The report also highlights that by using social media to provide and receive intelligence, social media "can become a crime fighting tool". It shot down the idea that social media be switched off during times of widespread and serious disorder. The panel also recommended that every neighbourhood policing team should acquire social media capability by the end of 2013.

Bangalore Falling

Bangalore's deputy commissioner of police Vincent S D'Souza has had a harrowing 10 days. He had been asking most of his friends to post his mobile number on all social media networks. D'Souza's message: if anyone from the Northeast feels insecure in any part of the city, contact him directly.

But by then, the damage was already done. In the three days beginning August 15, as many as 37,000 people belonging to India's Northeastern region fled the city after SMS threats spread like a wildfire among the closely-knit Northeastern communities living in the city.

"A lot of the damage happened through social media. The images of victims of Tibet earthquakes and Gujarat riots were morphed and passed on as those of Assam riots. We busted a module in Bangalore. Seized computers and mobiles have given us enough leads," says D'Souza, who is in charge of intelligence.

Nitin Pai, founder of Takshashila Institution, a think tank, believes that the current crisis unfolded in two phases. The first phase, says Pai, was the events (the riots and mobilised violence) that occurred in Assam before August 15. The second phase, starting August 15, was the flight of Northeastern people from various parts of India after rumours of attacks began to flow. "To be fair, what happened between August 15 and August 18 was unprecedented in India," says Pai.

"Perhaps, for the first time, the Indian government had legitimate reasons to censor speech," says Sunil Abraham, executive director of the Centre for Internet and Society in Bangalore, adding that even international human rights treaties like the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), of which India is a signatory, provide for restrictions in free speech for the protection of public order.

However, what most people who have closely followed the events of the last fortnight, will disagree with is the way in which the government has gone about playing censor. "The government got in too late and went about too bluntly," says Pai.

Subtle as a Sledgehammer

"Given that SMS-based mobilisation isn't new in India (stone-pelting incidents in Kashmir led to a ban on SMSes since 2010), the government has had almost 2-3 years to put in place the strategy and ability to counter the problem. The arrests of miscreants spreading rumours through SMSes should have happened sooner," says Pai.

On August 17, two days after the trains from Bangalore began to fill up, an advisory signed by the Indian Computer Emergency Response Team (ICERT) chief Gulshan Rai cautioned intermediaries that "publishing and hosting of hateful and inflammatory content is an offence" under Section 69A and 79-3(b) of Information Technology Act, 2000. The advisory, which lacked specific details such as the names of the offenders and details of such content, asked all intermediaries to disable inflammatory and hateful content hosted on their website on "a priority basis". ICERT falls under the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology.

"That essentially made intermediaries like ISPs the judges of what was inflammatory or hate speech and what wasn't," says Abraham. In the following days, more orders would come, this time from the Ministry of IT and Department of Telecommunications and they would worsen things even more. These orders were a lot more specific: they had URLs of websites, Twitter posts and Facebook pages that were ordered to be blocked.

However, like a Centre for Internet and Society posting revealed: the list wasn't compiled with enough care. Some items did not exist, others were not even web addresses and in some case, thanks to overzealous ISPs, whole websites were blocked instead of a page on the site. One webpage that actually busted doctored riot pictures was blocked.

What gave teeth to the rumours that the government was using the events of August 15 to go after its critics was its crackdown on Twitter accounts. First, the government asked for a list of accounts parodying the PMO's account to be blocked, on charges of impersonation (which Twitter eventually did on Friday).

On late Wednesday, several other people, including journalists, a tech entrepreneur, discovered that their accounts had been blocked by some ISPs. Even as speculation raged if this was the case of yet another trigger-happy ISP, the government maintained a stony silence, The Economic Times broke the story that it was a notification issued by Ministry of IT and Department of Telecommunications that resulted in these blocks. The blocked account holders meanwhile continued to tweet, thanks to the ISP-level blocks, making the whole affair shambolic.

Big, Bad Government?

For its part, heavyweights from the government like Sushil Kumar Shinde and Kapil Sibal have maintained that this was just an effort to censor hate speech and not free speech. That's a line many are increasingly finding tough to believe, especially what this government tried to do late last year. In December 2011, Sibal had called a meeting of social networking companies like Facebook, Twitter and Google and asked them to remove offensive content.

A New York Times report had said that Sibal had showed the companies a page that maligned Congress president Sonia Gandhi and told them that this was "unacceptable". After heavy criticism followed Sibal's call to "pre-screen" content, the government backed off. So, is this government's second attempt to muzzle voices that it doesn't want heard?

"Perhaps not. It's just government being itself: gauche, clumsy, big-brother like and swinging a club when it needs to be using a surgeon's knife," says a cyber security consultant who has worked with the government in the past. "But, it would be a good idea to keep track if any more blocks or bans come our way. That would be crucial," he adds.

As for the companies themselves, Facebook and Google have "co-operated" in removing the "objectionable pages", while Twitter, after taking its time, knocked off the PMO "impersonators".
Rules of Engagement

Social media is posing challenges and opportunities for governments and law enforcement agencies across the world. In the developed world, police departments like the New York Police Department (@nypd) or London's Metropolitan Police department (metpoliceuk) use Twitter to engage with citizens. They upload mugs and profiles of suspects, give advisories and ask for retweets of missing persons' pictures. It's a game Indian authorities have just begun to play.

"At best, cyber monitoring is a reactive intervention. So the strategy must be how best to live with social media and counter it [misinformation] from within," says GK Pillai, former Union home secretary. He suggests that the government must create a separate department to exclusively tackle issues arising out of social media and messages.

"If social media is used for any propaganda, the government should use the same platform to counter it. If one hate message appears, there should be a thousand to counter it. We can't ban social media the way China has done it. We have to live with it," he adds.

Social media is a challenge to existing legal frameworks like never before, even in countries where free speech is protected a lot more than ours. Last week, the New York Police Department went to court to get Twitter to reveal details of a person who had tweeted: "people had gonna die like Aurora" at a Broadway theatre. Initially, Twitter had refused to share details but eventually relented (after lots of criticism) and the matter was resolved 'without an arrest'.

Things get even more complex, say government officials, because Twitter is a US-based company and claims that it is beyond India's jurisdiction. "Social media and disputes associated with it are relatively new areas [for India]. The US is already engaged in court battles with social media sites. We are a bit slow on this matter," admits Mohan Parasaran, additional solicitor general of India.

Centre for Internet and Society's Abraham believes that the government needs to put in a process which is transparent when it comes to censoring hate speech. "Even in Saudi Arabia, when you go to a blocked site, reasons are given why the site is being blocked along with addresses of the offices where redressal can be sought," says Abraham.

For now, observers say the Indian government needs to learn to engage and communicate better on social media. "There is a lot of hyperbole out there because the Indian government doesn't communicate — what it does and how it does things — very well. There is a lot of second-hand information and as a result a lot of speculation," says Pai. "Basically, the government is trying to use industrial age policies [like blocking] to solve information age issues," he adds.

A first step, perhaps, is fine-tuning the guidelines for social media use for its departments published by the government last week. It will be a big challenge — a change of mindset — for the Indian government which is used more to monitoring and posturing than engaging.

When the law & social media worlds intersect, the results can be not so pleasant. Here are a few examples:

1) An anonymous tweet that people were going to "die like Aurora" at Broadway show had the New York police department worried. So, the police approached Twitter for details about the account, which Twitter turned down. After some criticism, Twitter shared the details. The matter was resolved "without an arrest".

2) In Early 2010, Paul Chambers was stranded at Robin Hood Airport, south Yorkshire, thanks to cancellation of flights due to heavy snowfall. "Crap! Robin Hood airport is closed. You've got a week and a bit to get your shit together otherwise I'm blowing the airport sky high," he tweeted. He was charged, asked to pay a fine and lost his job. However, two appeals later, Chambers conviction was overturned.

3) When footballer Fabrice Muamba collapsed on the field after suffering a heart attack, 21-year-old Liam Stacey posted a vile, racist remark on Twitter about Muamba. When others questioned him, Stacey was combative and a case was registered against him. Even though Stacey admitted that he was drunk and that he was sorry, a court sentenced him to a 56-day imprisonment.

For more details visit https://cis-india.org/news/economic-times-aug-26-2012-twitter-handles