NEW DELHI: The Indian government has asked Meta to review how its social media platforms recommend and rank content, raising concerns that misleading posts and visuals taken out of context could reach users on a disproportionate scale. The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology has advised the company to strengthen its safeguards against online material that could trigger public confusion, incite violence or disturb public order. The Meta advisory, dated October 10, 2026, focuses on how content is selected, displayed and repeatedly recommended to people using Facebook and Instagram. It calls for measures to prevent users from being exposed disproportionately to a single narrative or a narrow range of viewpoints. The government has also asked the company to pay closer attention to photographs, videos, graphics and statements related to ongoing public events. Such material can become misleading when the date, location, authenticity or surrounding circumstances are unclear. The advisory does not identify one particular incident as the reason for its issuance. 

Why Has the Government Asked Meta to Review Its Algorithms?

Social media platforms use automated systems to decide which posts, videos and other material appear in users' feeds. These systems may consider factors such as user interests, interactions and the relevance of content when selecting what to display. The government’s concern is that these mechanisms could give excessive visibility to potentially misleading material, particularly when the content relates to protests, emergency measures or other public-order situations. According to the ministry's advisory, certain material concerning ongoing public events was being prominently displayed and recommended through Meta-operated platforms. The content included videos, photographs, statements and static graphics relating to law-and-order developments. The ministry warned that such material, when circulated without adequate context or amplified disproportionately, could contribute to public uncertainty, fear and disturbances to social tranquillity. Ministry sources told the Press Trust of India that agencies had reported concerns about the way narratives were being promoted on Meta's platforms. According to these sources, the recommendation algorithms appeared to give greater visibility to certain types of content rather than presenting different narratives equally.

What Does the Meta Advisory Ask Facebook and Instagram to Do?

The Facebook and Instagram owner has been advised to take several steps aimed at improving the handling of content related to public events. The recommendations cover content identification, contextual information, algorithmic amplification and cooperation with authorised government agencies.

1. Review Content Recommendation Systems

Meta has been asked to examine its content recommendation systems and content-ranking mechanisms to reduce the disproportionate promotion of potentially misleading, manipulated or contextually incomplete material. The concern is not limited to whether a particular post remains available online. The ministry also wants the company to assess whether its systems repeatedly recommend such material to users, increasing its visibility beyond its original audience.

2. Provide Adequate Context for Public Events

The advisory calls for suitable contextual information to accompany photographs, videos, graphics and other content about ongoing public events, particularly when users may not be able to establish when or where the material was recorded. For example, an old video from a previous demonstration could be circulated as though it showed a current protest. Without the correct date and location, viewers might misunderstand the circumstances and draw inaccurate conclusions. The government has asked Meta to pay particular attention to such cases, including content that presents unrelated or selectively edited visuals as current events.

3. Identify Misleading Claims About Official Actions

The ministry has highlighted posts containing unverified or misleading claims about emergencies, restrictions, police action and other official measures. Information about these developments can influence public behaviour, especially when people are deciding whether to travel, attend a gathering or respond to an emergency announcement. The advisory asks Meta to strengthen the identification and review of such content, particularly when misleading claims are spreading rapidly through recommendation systems.

4. Strengthen Checks on Content That Could Incite Violence

Meta has also been asked to strengthen mechanisms for rapidly identifying, reviewing and escalating content that could contribute to widespread confusion, apprehension, violence or a disturbance of public order. The focus includes audiovisual material about law-and-order situations that is circulated without sufficient context, as well as content that may encourage violence or other unlawful activity. The advisory does not mean that every post discussing a protest, police action or political disagreement should automatically be treated as unlawful. The company must consider applicable law and the circumstances of the material when deciding what action is appropriate.

5. Avoid Excessive Promotion of a Limited Set of Narratives

The ministry has asked the company to ensure that recommendation systems do not expose users disproportionately to only one narrative or a limited selection of viewpoints. It has also encouraged the availability of a suitable diversity of relevant and credible information. This request raises a difficult practical question: how can a platform provide varied information without treating all claims as equally credible? A post supported by verifiable evidence is not necessarily equivalent to an unsubstantiated allegation. The advisory calls for greater diversity of relevant and credible information, but it does not publicly specify a detailed measurement system for determining whether a recommendation feed meets that expectation.

6. Cooperate With Law Enforcement and Government Agencies

The advisory asks Meta to cooperate promptly with law enforcement bodies and other authorised government agencies. This includes furnishing information or assistance when required under applicable law and within the timelines prescribed by the relevant rules. The ministry has told the company to take the necessary measures with immediate effect and inform it about the action taken. These six areas collectively cover both the content visible on the platforms and the technical systems that determine how widely particular posts are recommended.

Read Also: Devendra Fadnavis Vows Action After Tiger Shroff Firing in Mumbai

Old Videos and Edited Images Are a Major Concern

One of the most significant parts of the advisory concerns visuals that may appear genuine but lack the context necessary to understand them correctly. Images and videos often spread rapidly during protests, public gatherings and incidents involving the police. A short clip may show only one moment in a longer sequence, while a photograph may have been taken in a different location or at an earlier date. When such material is shared with an inaccurate caption, viewers may interpret it as evidence of an event that did not happen as described. Selective editing can create similar problems. Removing the beginning or end of a video may change how a person's actions or a police response appear. An old photograph may also be presented as evidence of a current emergency. The government has therefore asked Meta to pay particular attention to content whose date, location, authenticity or circumstances are not readily apparent.

What Role Do the IT Act and IT Rules Play?

The advisory refers to the Information Technology Act, 2000, and the Information Technology Rules, 2021. These provide the legal framework relevant to online intermediaries and their responsibilities in India. The ministry has stated that Meta, as an intermediary, must exercise due diligence under the applicable framework. The rules include requirements relating to informing users about prohibited information and complying with relevant legal obligations. The government has specifically drawn attention to material that may cause public disorder or incite a cognisable offence relating to public order. Under the advisory, Meta is expected to ensure that its response remains consistent with the IT Act, the IT Rules 2021 and other applicable laws. The distinction between the advisory and the underlying legal framework is important. The document communicates the ministry's expectations and asks the company to take action, but the precise legal consequences of any particular decision depend on the relevant statutory provisions and circumstances.

Government Says Responsible Information Sharing Must Continue

The ministry has stated that the purpose of the advisory is to encourage responsible dissemination and recommendation of information while respecting lawful expression and legitimate public discourse. This qualification is significant because social media platforms serve as channels for news, political debate, public criticism and eyewitness reporting. During major events, users often rely on them to obtain information that may not yet be available through traditional news outlets. At the same time, unverified claims can spread quickly, particularly when a post contains dramatic footage or allegations that attract strong reactions. The challenge for platforms is to distinguish between material that is genuinely misleading or unlawful and content that represents legitimate disagreement, criticism or reporting. The government has asked Meta to improve its safeguards, but the advisory does not set out a complete public methodology for making these distinctions. Questions about how the recommendations will be measured and implemented therefore remain important.

Digital Rights Group Questions the Government's Move

The advisory has drawn criticism from digital rights advocate Apar Gupta, founder director of the Internet Freedom Foundation. Gupta argued that although the advisory is not legally binding, it amounts to a continuing censorship directive. He called on the ministry to withdraw it and asked Meta to publicly disclose every content takedown and every instance in which material was given reduced visibility under the advisory. His criticism centres on the language used in the document, including references to content presented without adequate context and periods of heightened sensitivity around public order. Gupta questioned whether these expressions were sufficiently connected to specific provisions of the IT Act or the IT Rules. His comments reflect a broader concern among digital rights advocates: if government requests lead platforms to remove posts or reduce their visibility, users should be able to understand the basis for those decisions.

Could the Advisory Affect Political News and Public Debate?

The advisory could have implications for how Meta handles content about protests, elections, public emergencies and other sensitive events. If implemented, changes to recommendation systems could influence which posts receive wider distribution and which are reviewed more closely. This may affect the visibility of eyewitness videos, political statements and other material shared during fast-moving developments. For the government, the stated objective is to reduce the spread and amplification of misleading content that could cause public confusion or threaten public order. For digital rights advocates, the concern is whether broad or unclear standards could discourage legitimate reporting and political expression if platforms respond too aggressively. Both issues are relevant to the practical implementation of the advisory. Reducing the reach of demonstrably misleading content can help users make better-informed decisions, but unclear standards may make it difficult to distinguish harmful material from lawful public debate.

Has the Government Linked the Advisory to Delhi Protests?

The advisory was issued amid protests in Delhi involving the Cockroach Janta Party and opposition groups. The demonstrations included demands for the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar over the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls. However, the advisory does not identify a specific protest or political incident as the reason for its issuance. The timing has prompted discussion about the relationship between online content, political demonstrations and public order. Nevertheless, the available information does not establish that the government issued the advisory specifically because of the Delhi protests.