Why internet can't be edited

In just 24 hours, in the Facebook alumni group of St Stephen's College, Communications Minister Kapil Sibal's ratings crashed faster than that of US President Barack Obama or what former telecom minister A. Raja, now in judicial custody over second generation (2G) spectrum case, ever had.

So here's a five-point Internet 101 for the illustrious Sibal.

1. The Internet cannot be edited: Duh! In an early Dilbert strip, the boss demanded that Dilbert ‘download' the internet and fax it to him. A decade down, it's not so funny any more. The internet is not traditional media. India's 1975 Emergency and the media clampdown was possible because of the linear, broadcast nature of the old media. New media is distributed. No copy desk or censor board can ‘fix' it. There is no editor to arrest. And, most content is hosted outside India's jurisdiction.

2. User-generated content cannot be filtered: That would slow down the global internet to a crawl, with posts appearing after days — even assuming so many ‘editors' could be hired by, say, a Facebook or a Twitter.

Are phone operators responsible for ‘content' carried on their networks — or their CEOs arrested if someone made a terror threat over a phone call? No, the telco simply helps with the investigation. Yes, internet content has the permanence and public-impact potential that a phone call does not, but it also lends itself to self-regulation.

3. Peer review works: Wikipedia is the best example. Who could have imagined that a user-created encyclopedia could be so objective, and comprehensive? Yes, anyone can go in and edit anything. If you make an inappropriate change, someone will come in and correct it. And so it is on Facebook or Twitter. Abusive posts will be reported, blocked, and the individuals knocked out of the site.

4. Draconian controls are not necessary: In this age of global cooperation on terror, companies cooperate. A rational request from India to Google or Facebook to bring down offensive content will be heard, regardless of jurisdiction.

5. Yes, there are precedents for internet control, but such censorship is in countries India doesn't want to be — China, Pakistan or Myanmar.

Kapil Sibal knows all this, right? So why is this Harvard Law School and St. Stephen's college star now sounding so anachronistic in the internet age?