But those are the "experts" from the West. They believe that censoring Trump was correct but a country who wants to save it's sovereignty is incorrect and should not happen. It goes against their narrative.
Champions of free expression wants to grant more power to Jack and his cohort than to the democratically elected Government because Governments are corrupt but Jack is not. How Ironic?
India's government is only nominally democratic and rapidly falling in freedom parameters looked at from any perspective. They are charging climate activists with sedition, holding protestors without charge for months, increase in extrajudicial killings and rapidly falling Human Development Indicators.
Their manifesto did not say that they'll regulate social media and try to limit internet freedoms. They were not elected for that. Can any future election be truly democratic if those in power get to issue content takedowns?
Yes, I want Jack Dorsey, CEO of Twitter, to have more control over Twitter than the government.
> the democratically elected Government
The democratically elected government was elected for a million different reasons, but their proficiency at managing social media networks was not one of them. And, you know, controlling every single social network is just a bit more dangerous than controlling one.
