India Internet Censorship: The moral watch dog

The UPA II government under the leadership of party head Sonia Gandhi and prime-minster Manmohan Singh, in what I would call as the most un-democratic thing done till date are trying to block and pre-screen internet content that defames the government. It is an outright violation of the spirit of democracy and a pseudo communist activity. The rationale given by our communication minster Mr. Kapil Sibal is protecting sensibilities of Indians. He said in an interview to BBC

"We have to take care of the sensibilities of our people, we have to protect their sensibilities. Our cultural ethos is very important to us" ~ Kapil Sibal

In a plain simple blunt way, I would like to ask Mr. Sibal and the government, what right it has to tell us "What is sensible"? If the government is so hungry about data from internet companies, why doesn't the government show a similar spirit in handling the list of black-money accounts by making it public. Our sensibilities tell us we deserve to know who the corrupt people in this country are? Why are they double faceted when it comes opening that list first. 

Facebook till now has seems to have danced to the tunes of the government but Google has taken a much sterner and an ethical stance. I guess that differences comes from the DNA of the two companies. Facebook isn't expected to do great stuff. Look at the way they handled the privacy issue. Google is a much more morally responsible company (Read Google Philosophy). My opinion may be biased, but the response to the issue by Google shows the high level of transparency and democracy it maintains. In it's transparency report, Google has stated

"We received requests from state and local law enforcement agencies to remove YouTube videos that displayed protests against social leaders or used offensive language in reference to religious leaders. We declined the majority of these requests and only locally restricted videos that appeared to violate local laws prohibiting speech that could incite enmity between communities. In addition, we received a request from a local law enforcement agency to remove 236 communities and profiles from orkut that were critical of a local politician. We did not comply with this request, since the content did not violate our Community Standards or local law."

They have also stated

"When content is legal and does not violate our policies, we will not remove it just because it is controversial, as we believe that people's differing views, so long as they are legal, should be respected and protected."

Removing objectionable pictures of Dr. Manmohan Singh, or Sonia Gandhi or some misplaced pigs does not change anything. In my opinion in the guise of "Protecting Sensibility", they are essentially protecting their own skin that has been bantered by social media recently on the Sharad Pawar slap issue or the Anna Hazare and Jan Lokpal movement. I also firmly believe, such attempts by any government should be nipped in the bud.