Mains Practice Questions

Introduction

The case presents an ethical dilemma where a senior officer in the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, instrumental in drafting a social media regulation policy, faces a personal crisis as his daughter becomes a victim of online bullying linked to his professional role.

• While he must protect his daughter’s emotional well-being and privacy, he also needs to uphold institutional integrity and respond to public criticism responsibly.

Body

(a) Identify and discuss the ethical issues involved in the case.

• Violation of Privacy and Dignity
  • The daughter’s identity and familial link to a policymaker have been weaponized for public ridicule.
  • This violates her right to privacy, dignity, and mental well-being, potentially contravening Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.
• Cyberbullying and Lack of Accountability
  • The incident highlights the growing menace of online bullying, particularly against vulnerable individuals, and the anonymity-fueled toxicity on social media platforms.
  • It raises questions about the effectiveness and fairness of the very policy the officer helped design.
• Institutional Integrity vs. Emotional Response
  • A public rebuttal may be seen as misusing official machinery for personal defense, violating civil service neutrality.
  • On the other hand, silence may signal insensitivity and embolden bullies.
• Precedent and Public Perception
  • A personal response could set a precedent where policy-makers begin to personalize governance, impacting long-term bureaucratic credibility.
  • However, failure to respond might appear as bureaucratic elitism or apathy, especially to citizens facing similar online harassment.

(b) What course of action would you take in this situation and why? Substantiate your answer using ethical principles.

Step 1: Attend to the Daughter’s Emotional and Psychological Needs

• Immediate priority will be to ensure her mental well-being. I would:
  • Spend quality time to reinforce emotional support and assure her of my unconditional backing.
  • Arrange for professional counseling through trusted and discrete channels either family or colleague.
• Ethical Principles: Compassion, care ethics, and empathy toward a vulnerable individual — in this case, my daughter.

Step 2: Respect Her Autonomy and Consent

• Since she has clearly expressed a desire for discretion, I would avoid any personal media statements or high-profile public responses that might worsen her situation.
• Ethical Principle: Respect for autonomy and individual dignity. Acting against her will may cause more harm than good, despite good intentions.

Step 3: Institutional Response Without Personalization

• Without referencing my daughter or personal life, I would initiate a neutral departmental review to assess if current social media policies adequately address issues like cyberbullying and targeted harassment.
  • If gaps are found, I would recommend amendments or strengthen grievance redressal mechanisms through institutional channels.
• Ethical Principles: Objectivity, professional responsibility, responsiveness to public interest.

Step 4: Engage the Educational Institution Privately

• I would request the college authorities to:
  • Sensitize students about online behavior, bullying, and mental health through workshops.
  • Monitor social media-related issues more proactively within the campus.
• Ethical Principles: Leadership, preventive ethics, and responsibility toward community welfare.

(c) What regulatory framework should be in place to ensure that social media remains a space for free expression while protecting individuals from online abuse, misinformation, and digital manipulation?

• Three-Tier Grievance Redressal Architecture
  • Inspired by the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, but made more effective and user-friendly:
    • Tier 1: Platform-Level Grievance Officer
      Mandatory for all platforms to appoint resident grievance officers with a 72-hour response time for abuse, harassment, misinformation, etc.
    • Tier 2: Self-Regulatory Body
      Independent industry-led bodies to oversee complaints and ensure platform compliance, similar to Broadcasting Content Complaints Councils.
    • Tier 3: Government Oversight Mechanism
      A Digital Communications Authority or nodal ministry body to handle unresolved complaints, enforce takedown orders, and issue advisory guidelines.
• Mandatory Online Safety Standards
  • Introduce a legal mandate requiring all social media platforms to implement minimum safety and ethical standards, including:
    • Verified Reporting Tools: Real-time reporting options for hate speech, deep fakes, cyberbullying — especially targeting minors or vulnerable groups.
    • Default Safety Settings for Youth: Auto-filter offensive content, private profile defaults for users under 18, and age-appropriate content moderation.
    • Geo-Tagging Transparency: Users should be informed if content targeting them is being promoted outside their region or country — combating foreign propaganda or misinformation.
• Algorithmic Transparency and Accountability
  • Algorithms amplify content — both positive and toxic. Therefore:
    • Auditable Transparency Reports: Platforms must publish periodic transparency reports, including takedown stats, trends in harmful content, and content moderation success rates.
    • Ethical AI Governance: Algorithms used for content recommendation or moderation must be made auditable by an independent authority (on the lines of GDPR in the EU).
    • Bias Detection Protocols: Platforms must detect and disclose algorithmic biases that may reinforce hate or amplify polarizing narratives.
• Digital Civility and Ethics Education
  • A proactive, preventive pillar of the framework:
    • Digital Ethics Curriculum in Schools & Colleges: Teach responsible online behavior, empathy, and fact-checking.
    • Public Awareness Campaigns: Promote national campaigns like “Think Before You Type” or “Responsible Netizenship”, similar to Swachh Bharat’s behavioral change approach.
    • Gamified Reporting Incentives: Reward ethical users who consistently report abuse or misinformation with badges, digital literacy tokens, or civic points.
• Psychological and Victim Support Mechanisms
  • Recognizing the mental health impact of online abuse:
    • Dedicated Helplines for victims of cyberbullying, especially adolescents and women.
    • Collaboration with Mental Health Startups & NGOs to provide anonymous counseling, trauma support, and peer groups.
    • Legal Aid Support for victims to access cybercrime units and file complaints without fear or stigma.
• Cross-Border Cooperation and Data Localization
  • To deal with global tech giants and cross-border trolling:
    • International Frameworks: Push for a South Asia Digital Safety Charter or participation in global digital ethics pacts.
    • Data Localization Laws: Ensure platforms store user data on Indian servers to aid investigation, without compromising privacy.

Conclusion

In navigating this dilemma, a balance must be struck between personal sensitivity and professional responsibility. Upholding institutional protocol while quietly addressing systemic gaps ensures long-term impact. Emotional intelligence, discretion, and ethical leadership are key. The incident should serve as a catalyst for strengthening digital safety frameworks for all citizens.