Despite its low credibility, Wikipedia has, over the years, emerged as the go-to ready-reckoner for referenced information for the general public before an important meeting or a call. My Wikipedia page had existed since 2006, when my first book was published. After I formally joined the Bharatiya Janata Party in January 2014, the page carried ready information both about my literary as well as political journey.
In late March this year, my page, along with a couple of other pages, was struck off by Wikipedia after sustained and malafide efforts by one of the independent Wikipedia editors. I have with me screenshots of my page that existed on the day it was deleted.
It goes without saying that given my multiple professional roles, the information was fairly comprehensive. To delete this page in entirety is an act of malice. More than 12 books of mine, written over 16 years and published by India’s top publishers, were all accounted for.
In fact, even in the last year-and-a-half, I have had three new releases, all of which have been reviewed or written about independently. In addition, since 2018, I have been representing the BJP as a spokesperson on all key news channels. My articles and columns have appeared on all leading news portals. Can this vast wealth of information be cancelled abruptly based upon the whims and fancies of an agenda-driven editor? In which case, do intermediary sites have no accountability for wilful manipulation of content?
I have no idea why my profile has been tampered with, because there are no controversies attached with me. Yes, I did speak in favour of Kashmir Files around that time, like many others did. I have always been outspoken against Jihadi forces and Urban Naxals. But all of these videos have been around on social media for some time. However, what particularly shocked me was that editors who tried to retrieve my profile were shut out by Wikipedia. It reeked of a biased colonial mindset where an international organization felt it could throw its weight around with complete disregard for the laws of the land.
After the initial shock, I spoke to a couple of people in the know of Wikipedia’s malpractices. Soumyadipta, a fiery journalist, who has been gathering information against the malpractices of foreign social media giants, got in touch with me and shared similar incidents where Indian content had been wilfully manipulated.
I don’t know if it’s a coincidence, but almost everybody who had been at the receiving end of this obnoxious tampering of content, belonged to one political ideology and wore it rather unapologetically. When I say this, I can give numerous examples of authors way unknown and junior to me who enjoy lavish, untouched profiles. On the other hand, a celebrated author, scientist and political commentator, Anand Rangathan’s Wikipedia profile was maliciously deleted last year, just like mine.
After exchanging notes with my friend Vikram Sampath and based on his recommendation, I got in touch with the promising young lawyer Raghav Awasthi, who has been spearheading the legal campaign against the western media giants’ malpractices in the country. In fact, he has successfully fought Vikram Sampath’s case wherein the Delhi High Court was pleased to pass two separate injunction orders against Ms. Audrey Truschke and some other academics for circulating defamatory allegations of plagiarism unsupported by textual evidence in February 2022 (Civil Suit No 95).
A couple of lengthy interactions with Raghav and his partner Mukesh Sharma gave me a clearer perspective. I was now more convinced than before that Wikipedia needs to be taken to court.
There are two reasons why I finally decided to file a legal case against Wikipedia.
First of all, as a young politician, if I subscribe to PM Narendra Modi’s call to “eradicate the slave mentality in totality”, I would be committing a huge mistake if I allow international social media giants to violate Indian laws with impunity. Based on the research of my esteemed lawyers, I can safely conclude that the deletion of my profile violated the provisions of the Information Technology Act, 2000 and the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, as well as the relevant deletion guidelines of the Wikimedia foundation.
Last year, Twitter had been particularly recalcitrant in shrugging off its responsibilities under the Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Ethics Code, until it was made to fall in line. Wikipedia has so far managed to operate with impunity despite incidents of overt bias.
Secondly, from a more personal perspective, as someone who has straddled different professional journeys simultaneously, my Wikipedia page was an extremely important source of information for all potential stakeholders and collaborators. The sudden deletion of my profile is severely defamatory to my stature as it implies to Wikipedia users and potential business collaborators that my page contained unfounded statements about me. This has led to loss of personal equity, solely based upon the mischievous intent of an anonymous editor, which is unacceptable.
The hearing took place in the Saket District court on September 22, 2022, wherein the matter was argued on my behalf by Raghav Awasthi. The suit sought a mandatory injunction against Wikimedia foundation and Union of India, Electronics and Information Technology directing them to reinstate my Wikipedia profile as subsisting till March 29, 2022, along with all the sources cited therein.
Furthermore, I have claimed monetary compensation for the defamatory damages caused by the unethical, unlawful deletion, clearly explaining the reasons thereof.
In an unambiguous landmark ruling, the judge, Ms. Twinkle Wadhwa, issued summons to Wikimedia foundation. The next hearing is scheduled for December 15.
It remains to be seen how Wikimedia responds, but as far as we — my lawyers and I — are concerned, this is a fight against the Western deep state. Wikimedia’s recent malafide acts of omission and commission, whether it was my profile or any other, was agenda-driven. The objective of this fight is very clear — Wikipedia, like other intermediaries, has to respect Indian laws and conduct itself impartially as it influences perceptions, both personal and political.
The writer is an author and BJP spokesperson. Views expressed are personal.
Read all the Latest Opinion News and Breaking News here
Comments
0 comment