Silencing Kashmir: The two faces of Facebook

Posted on at


Hamza Ali Abbasi seems to be building quite the resume when it comes to getting his Facebook posts deleted. In the latest such instance, the social media giant took down his post in which he praised separatist commander Burhan Wani killed by Indian forces in Indian-held Kashmir.

Anyone who follows him knows that Abbasi's views are often found controversial, but this time around, people are wondering how justified Facebook was in deleting his post?

While Facebook has been touting a policy that promotes freedom of speech, it doesn’t always end up putting its money where its mouth is.

Take a look: Facebook under fire over Kashmir killings gag

Accusations are running rife that Facebook might be “Indianised” since other than Abbasi it also censored posts by influential Kashmiri activists like Huma Dar, Khurram Parvez, Dr Dibyesh Anand, Dr Nitasha Koul and even American social activist Mary Scully, who reacted by saying that:

"Facebook is not exempt from the US Bill of Rights and cannot act like vigilantes for the Indian, Israeli, or US governments, taking out everything they don’t want known. Free speech is the essence of democracy and so is opposition to war, colonialism, and occupation."
One user lamented the censor saying: “it seems Mark Zuckerberg has taken over as the Thanedar (SHO) of some police station in Kashmir” after Facebook took down videos, pictures and posts over the existing situation in Indian-held Kashmir.

 



About the author

160