Summary:
landed a comprehensive bill, the Karnataka Misinformation and Fake News Bill, 2025, aimed to enforce stricter regulations on online misinformation and fake news. The draft, which was tabletop by本周, proposed criminalizing the spread of false statements, including misinformation, hate speech, and cyber malicious activities. Thebill defined misinformation as anything that could incite hatred, disrupt public order, influence elections, disrespect religious sentiments, and harm women. Fakes could include misrepresentation of individuals or the creation of disboarding snippets. Penalties were proposed for criminal offending individuals up to seven years in prison or Rs 10 lakh, plus fines.adiabatic, the bill would apply to social media platforms worldwide.
The regulatory authority, led by Karnatakacaptionary chairperson, would enforce the bill, with chairs including former Kannada and_file scientists, social media influencers, and an IAS officer. The Bill also proposed the creation of afake news regulatory authority, which could monitor user content and identify offenders. Despite its scope, legal experts raised concerns about over-removal measures to minimize liability, as smaller start-ups and media outlets may be particularly vulnerable to this risk.
The一千_plus online platforms, including XM, Meta, and Instagram, were considered to face over opaque and burdensome enforcement._virtual inconsistency in the definition of "disrespect" and weak enforcement practices might amplifyliced outcomes like hate crimes. Some predicted that the Bill’s expansive vocabulary and punitive measures would become a tool for political suppression rather than safety.
Drafters pointed out that the Bill moves beyond preventing misinformation, reflecting a broader critique of such current laws. Experts, however, criticized the Bill for being vague and overly aggressive, advocating for more professional governance._fn_exists a proposed legal framework to prevent widespread suppression while still safeguarding edited content was noted as a better path to free expressions. FN_xie, a digital rights organization, mentioned the Bill lacks sufficient checks and balances and risks moving towards censorship rather than alphanumeric regulation.
Despite MIN Brand challenges, policies dealing with misinformation must not benefit the established party. Experts called for moves beyond this law, advocating for stronger digital governance measures. Digital freedom advocates argued that limiting speech sites to "free" content could bind users unilaterally, potentially undermining their free expression expectations.
