• Home
• /
• Opinion

Why blame WhatsApp for mob lynchings?

The messaging app cannot be blamed, Indian government should get its law and order act together.

Here's a thought experiment: someone circulates fake news about a child abduction gang being on the prowl via letters sent through the postal service. A number of people read these letters and get enraged. A mob (comprising some readers) then attacks and kills an innocent person in the belief that he is a member of the child abduction gang. Is the postman who delivered these letters and the Indian Postal Service to blame for the murder?
India's Ministry for Electronics and Information Technology sure seems to think so. It sent an aggressive missive to the popular messaging app, WhatsApp in that belief. The ministry claims to have conveyed "deep disapproval" about fake news being circulated via WhatsApp and advised "they have been advised that necessary remedial measures should be taken to prevent proliferation of these fake and at times motivated/sensational messages." The ministry's official warns that WhatsApp cannot "evade accountability and responsibility specially when good technological inventions are abused by some miscreants who resort to provocative messages which lead to spread of violence."
This is utter nonsense. As demonstrated by the hypothetical example about the postman, WhatsApp is merely an intermediary and it does not bear responsibility for mob lynchings caused by fake news messages. Simply put, the messenger is not responsible for the message. In addition, the messenger cannot be responsible for third parties reading a message and committing an illegal act - murder.
Like all content-neutral messengers, WhatsApp's function is to transmit messages with low or zero transaction costs. Its popularity is owed to its ease of use, ability to transmit instantaneously, and connect people across great distances at zero cost.
It is not WhatsApp's job to police society or to protect innocent people from thugs. That's the job of the police. And passing the buck for failing to do that most basic task expected of a government - protection of life and property - is just a massive failure of governance. The ministry cannot fob off its job to WhatsApp and other tech players.
These tech companies don't collect taxes - the government does. And in exchange for those taxes, the social contract formed by ordinary citizens with their rulers demands something of value in return. As part of the social contract, the government guarantees citizens some basic rights and promises to secure their life and liberty. That includes safety from physical attacks, security of one's property rights, and protection - from both government officials and third parties - against violations of person and property. Absent this basic bargain, a government ceases to meet its raison d'etre.
To be sure, instantaneous mass communication applications such as WhatsApp provide a vehicle for dangerous messages to go viral and cause harm. And tech solutions to detecting, preventing, and identifying fake news and its purveyors are necessary.
However, tech solutions alone will not stop mob killings. In fact, India has a track record for mob killings that is probably unmatched internationally - just consider the horrors of Partition or cycles of communal violence to illustrate two examples. Tens of thousands have died in those instances and there was no WhatsApp. What those instances did have in common with the current cycle of mob killings is a largely ineffective law and order machinery.
Unfortunately, the law and order system in India exists despite the police rather than because of it. While, no doubt, there are many honest policemen and women, the institution of the police in India has been rendered impotent due to factors including politicisation, grossly inadequate resourcing, and poor human skills/capability.
The ratio of police to 100,000 people in India is also low relative to other countries. A police constable has to merely pass the 12th grade to get the job. And a person with such low educational and intellectual attainment is supposed to fight crime in a digital age. These things must change.
Sadly, law and order has never been a political issue in India. Unlike the US, Australia, UK, and other countries, no politician campaigns on being tough on crooks. Or promising to expedite prosecution, impose harsh sentences, and lock up habitual criminals for life. This will only change if the citizenry demand that their rulers fulfil their part of the social contract. And invest in the law and order machinery so that basic safety and freedoms are protected.
A major problem is that policing is done at the state level and state politics is mired in pandering to vote-banks through wealth transfers to selected groups. Law and order is an afterthought.
The central government must harmonise state policing to achieve a much higher mean standard across the country. First, the police to population ratio has to be brought down to international benchmarks. Second, the entry qualifications for constables should be raised to graduation from an accredited university, and selection should be based on merit alone. Third, police training must be modernised with a massive emphasis on technology skills. Fourth, mandatory continuing education at all levels of the police force should prioritise maintenance of skills to tackle the increasing sophistication of criminal behaviour. Fifth, an elite federal police force of substantial size must be constituted to investigate and prosecute federal crimes. For example, the FBI in the US has over 35,000 staff and federal law enforcement is supported by agencies such as the Drug Enforcement Administration, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and the US Marshals Service. This could be a model for India. It is important to note that federal service should not just be about bodies - it should be elite in capability and skills by recruiting the best and brightest.
To conclude, politicians should not be allowed to evade responsibility for performing their basic duties by blaming companies that are merely providing a messaging service. If anything, the popularity of these products illustrates the failures of the government in providing for effective low-cost communication to meet the needs of modern society. It should not compound those failures by punishing the private sector. Instead, the government should stop blaming WhatsApp and focus on doing its job - guaranteeing a safe and law-abiding society for all.
Sandeep Gopalan is the pro vice-chancellor for academic innovation and law professor at Deakin University